Exhibit H - Police Station - TIA-2024.pdf

Beaumont Police Department Station

TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT

CITY OF BEAUMONT

PREPARED BY:

EXP U.S. Services Inc.

March 2024

This Traffic Impact Analysis Report has been prepared under the direction of the following registered civil engineer. The registered Civil Engineer attests to the technical information contained herein and the engineering data upon which recommendations, conclusions, and decisions are based.

Syed Raza, PE

Project Manager

EXP U.S. Services Inc.

DATE

Traffic Impact Analysis Report

Page | 3

Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. PROJECT OVERVIEW

1.2. ANALYSIS SCENARIOS

1.2.1. EXISTING (2023) CONDITIONS

1.2.2. OPENING YEAR (2025) CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS

1.3. STUDY AREA

2. METHODOLOGIES

2.1. INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS

2.1.1. SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS

2.1.2. UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS

2.2. INTERSECTION GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY REQUIREMENTS

2.2.1. SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS

2.2.2. UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS

3. EXISTING (2023) CONDITIONS

3.1. EXISTING CIRCULATION NETWORK

3.2. CITY OF BEAUMONT GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENTS

3.3. EXISTING (2023) TRAFFIC DATA

3.4. EXISTING (2023) CONDITIONS INTERSECTION OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS

4. OPENING YEAR (2025) TRAFFIC CONDITIONS

4.1. PROJECT TRIP GENERATION

4.2. PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION

4.3. BACKGROUND TRAFFIC

4.4. CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC

5. OPENING YEAR

5.1. OPENING YEAR (2025) WITHOUT PROJECT

5.2. OPENING YEAR (2025) WITH PROJECT

5.3. OPENING YEAR (2025) WITH PROJECT AND MOUNTAIN VIEW AVENUE EXTENSION

6. FINDINGS

7. RECOMMENDATIONS

Page | 4

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 - Location Map

Figure 2 - Site Layout

Figure 3 - Study Area

Figure 4 - Existing (2023) Lane Configuration

Figure 5 - City of Beaumont Road Classification

Figure 6 - City of Beaumont Bicycle and Pedestrian Priority Network

Figure 7 - Existing Traffic Data

Figure 8 - Trip Distribution

Figure 9 - Opening Year (2025) with Project

Figure 10 - Opening Year (2025) with Project and Mountain View Avenue Extension

Figure 11 - Cumulative Development Location Map

Figure 12 - Opening Year (2025) without Project

Figure 13 - Opening Year (2025) with Project

Figure 14 - Opening Year (2025) with Project and Mountain View Ave Extension

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 - LOS Criteria for Signalized Intersections

Table 2 - LOS Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections

Table 3 - Analysis Results for Existing (2023) Year

Table 4 - 95% Queue Length for Existing (2023) Year

Table 5 - ITE Trip Generation - Proposed Land Use

Table 6 - ITE Trip Generation Rate

Table 7 - Projects and Trips Generated

Table 8 - Analysis Results for Opening (2025) Year without Project

Table 9 - 95% Queue Length for Opening (2025) Year without Project

Table 10 - Analysis Results for Opening (2025) Year with Project

Table 11 - 95% Queue Length for Opening (2025) Year with Project

Page | 5

Table 12 - Analysis Results for Opening (2025) Year with Project, Mountain View Avenue Extension and Westerly Entrance Driveway

Table 13 - 95% Queue Length for Opening (2025) Year with Project, Mountain View Avenue Extension and Westerly Entrance Driveway

Table 14 - Summary of Level of Service

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A - APPROVED SCOPE

APPENDIX B - TRAFFIC COUNTS

APPENDIX C - SYNCHRO OUTPUT FOR EXISTING (2023) CONDITIONS

APPENDIX D - SYNCHRO OUTPUT FOR OPENING YEAR (2025) WITHOUT PROJECT

APPENDIX E - SYNCHRO OUTPUT FOR OPENING YEAR (2025) WITH PROJECT

APPENDIX F - SYNCHRO OUTPUT FOR OPENING YEAR (2025) WITH PROJECT AND MOUNTAIN VIEW

AVENUE EXTENSION

Page | 6

1. INTRODUCTION

The City of Beaumont (City) has retained the services of EXP US Services Inc. (EXP) to prepare a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Report for the City’s proposed new Police Department Station (Project) in the southwest corner of the intersection of Beaumont Avenue and Cougar Way. The Project site covers an area of 39.26 acres and includes Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 404-140-002, APN 404- 140-003, and APN 404-140-007. The TIA report presents the results of the traffic analysis performed in the Study Area. A location Map is shown in Figure 1.

This TIA is intended to evaluate the impact of the Project on the existing traffic network and identify any improvements that may be needed to mitigate the impacts. The TIA also provides an assessment of how the intersections within the Study Area will perform with and without the Project under existing and opening year conditions. This report follows the Western Riverside Council of Government (WRCOG) Recommended TIA Guidelines dated January 2020 and adopted by the City.

Figure 1 - Location Map

Page | 7

1.1. PROJECT OVERVIEW

The Project proposes to construct a new Police Department Station consisting of two buildings and parking lots as shown in Figure 2. The estimated area for buildings # 1 and #2 are 50,000 square feet and 8,000 square feet respectively. The total number of employees and volunteers estimated to occupy both buildings are 150 and 30 respectively.

Figure 2 - Site Layout

1.2. ANALYSIS SCENARIOS

For analysis purposes, it has been assumed that the construction of the Project and the proposed Mountain View Avenue Extension will be completed in 2025. The AM and PM peak hour analysis at the Study Area intersections was performed using the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology in Synchro software for the following scenarios:

• Existing 2023 Conditions

• Opening Year (2025) without Project

• Opening Year (2025) with Project and without Mountain View Avenue Extension

• Opening Year (2025) with Project and with Mountain View Avenue Extension

1.2.1. EXISTING (2023) CONDITIONS

The Existing (2023) conditions represent the baseline traffic conditions. The traffic count data used in the Beaumont Village TIA Report, dated September 27, 2023, has been utilized for this TIA as it

Page | 8 includes the Study Area The turning movement counts were collected during the AM peak period (7:00 AM – 9:00 AM) and PM peak period (4:00 PM – 6:00 PM) on a typical weekday (Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday) in January 2018. The growth rate was extracted from the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Annual Average Traffic Growth. The growth rates extracted from SCAG were used to derive the 2023 traffic volumes as agreed in the scope of work letter.

1.2.2. OPENING YEAR (2025) CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS

The Opening Year (2025) cumulative traffic conditions analyzed the Study Area for various scenarios including with and without the project and Mountain View Avenue Extension. To account for background traffic growth, traffic associated with other known cumulative development projects in conjunction with an ambient growth factor from existing conditions were included for Opening Year cumulative traffic conditions. This list was compiled from information provided by the City and included in the Beaumont Village TIA Report.

1.3. STUDY AREA

The Study Area for the TIA is shown in Figure 3. The Scope of Work for the TIA is included in Appendix A which outlines the study area, trip generation, trip distribution, and analysis methodology and is part of the contract between EXP and the City.

Two access driveways are proposed for the Project along Beaumont Avenue. The northern driveway is proposed to be full access while the southern driveway will be “exit-only”. The City had also requested to analyze extending Mountain View Avenue from Cougar Way to Oak Valley Parkway on the west side of the Project with an additional full-access driveway to the Project site. The following 7 intersections are included in the Study Area. Only two of these intersections currently exist while the remaining five will be new intersections and are included in the analysis for opening year conditions.

1. Beaumont Avenue and Cougar Way

2. Beaumont Avenue and Northern Entrance Driveway (full access)

3. Beaumont Avenue and Southern Entrance Driveway (exit-only)

4. Beaumont Avenue and Oak Valley Parkway

5. Cougar Way and Mountain View Avenue Extension

6. Mountain View Avenue Extension and Western Entrance Driveway (full access)

7. Oak Valley Parkway and Mountain View Avenue Extension

Page | 9

Figure 3 - Study Area

2. METHODOLOGIES

The City utilizes WRCOG’s Recommended Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines adopted in January 2020.

This section describes the methodologies used to perform the traffic analyses summarized in this report. Traffic operations of roadway facilities are described using LOS criteria. LOS is a qualitative description of traffic flow that incorporates several factors such as speed, travel time, delay, and freedom to maneuver. Six levels are typically defined ranging from LOS A, representing completely free-flow conditions, to LOS F, representing a breakdown in flow resulting in stop-and-go conditions.

LOS E represents operations at or near capacity, an unstable level where vehicles are operating with the minimum spacing for maintaining uniform flow.

Page | 10

2.1. INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS

The HCM methodology expresses the LOS at an intersection in terms of delay time for the various intersection approaches. The HCM uses different approaches for signalized and unsignalized intersections. The peak hour traffic volumes have been adjusted using a peak hour factor (PHF) to reflect peak 15-minute volumes. Existing PHFs have been used for all analysis scenarios. Future intersections utilize a PHF of 0.95 or higher from the existing conditions in accordance with the WRCOG TIA Guidelines. No truck percentage was available in the traffic data, thus, a percentage of 2% of heavy vehicles was assumed for the existing and future conditions.

2.1.1. SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS

The City requires signalized intersection analysis based on the methodology described in the HCM.

Intersections LOS are based on an intersection’s average control delay including initial deceleration delay, queue move-up time, stopped delay, and final acceleration delay. For signalized intersections, LOS is directly related to the average control delay per vehicle and is correlated to a LOS designation as described in Table 1.

A saturation flow rate of 1900 has been utilized for all Study Area intersections located within the City.

The traffic modeling and signal timing optimization software package Synchro (Version 11) has been utilized to analyze signalized intersections.

Table 1 - LOS Criteria for Signalized Intersections

Description Average Control

Delay (Sec.), V/C ≤ 1.0

Level of Service, V/C ≤1.0 very low delay with favorable progression and/or short cycle length

0 - 10.00 A low delay with good progression and/or short cycle lengths 10.01 - 20.00 B average delays from fair progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures begin to appear

20.01 - 35.00 C longer delays due to a combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high V/C ratios. Many vehicles stop and individual cycle failures are noticeable

35.01 -- 55.00 D high delay due to poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high V/C ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences.

Limit of acceptable delay

55.01 - 80.00 E delays unacceptable to most drivers due to over-saturation, poor progression, or very long cycle lengths

80.01 and up F

Source: HCM (6th Edition)

2.1.2. UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS

The LOS for the unsignalized intersections rating is based on the weighted average control delay expressed in seconds per vehicle as shown in Table 2.

Page | 11

Table 2 - LOS Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections

Description

Average Control Delay Per Vehicle

(Seconds)

Level of Service, V/C≤ 1.0

Little or no delay 0 to 10.00 A

Short traffic delay 10.01 to 15.00 B

Average traffic delay 15.01 to 25.00 C

Long traffic delay 25.01 to 35.00 D

Very long traffic delay 35.01 to 50.00 E

Extreme traffic delay > 50.00 F

Source: HCM (6th Edition)

At two-way or side-street stop-controlled intersections, where the through and right-turn traffic from the major street do not need to stop, LOS is calculated for each controlled movement and for the left-turn movement from the major street. For approaches composed of a single lane on a stop-controlled approach, the delay is computed as the average of all movements in that lane. The worst delay and associated LOS for a controlled movement are utilized as representing the intersection delay and LOS level for two-way stop-controlled intersections. For all-way stop controlled intersections, LOS is computed for the intersection as a whole (weighted average delay).

2.2. INTERSECTION GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY REQUIREMENTS

The City follows the WRCOG’s recommended TIA Guidelines published in January 2020. The WRCOG recommends the local agency consider the following criteria for application in a traffic study to identify infrastructure improvements required to provide acceptable operations in accordance with the City’s General Plan.

2.2.1. SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS

As recommended by WRCOG and the City’s General Plan:

• If the generated traffic from the Project causes the intersections to degrade to a LOS E or F shall identify improvements to improve operations to LOS D or better.

• Any intersection that is operating at LOS E or F without the Project traffic where the Project increases delay by 5.0 or more seconds shall identify improvements to offset the increase in delay.

2.2.2. UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS

An operational improvement would be required if the study determines that either section a) or both sections b) and c) occur:

a) The addition of project related traffic causes the intersection to degrade from an acceptable LOS D or better to LOS E or F, or

Page | 12

b) The project adds 5.0 seconds or more of delay to an intersection that is already projected to operate without project traffic at a LOS E or F, and

c) The intersection meets the peak hour traffic signal warrant after the addition of project traffic.

If the conditions above are satisfied, improvements should be identified that achieve the following:

• LOS D or better for case a) or to pre-project LOS and delay for case b).

3. EXISTING (2023) CONDITIONS

This section provides a summary of the existing circulation network, the City’s General Plan Circulation Network, and a review of existing peak hour intersection operations analysis.

3.1. EXISTING CIRCULATION NETWORK

The Study Area includes 2 existing intersections. Figure 4 illustrates the Study Area intersections and shows the existing intersection traffic control and the lane configuration.

Figure 4 - Existing (2023) Lane Configuration

3.2. CITY OF BEAUMONT GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENTS

The roadway classifications are identified on the City’s General Plan as shown in Figure 5. The study area consists of three main roadway segments. The City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Priority Network is

Page | 13 shown in Figure 6. This figure outlines roads that the City plans to add or maintain existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities.

The functional classifications of the main roads in the Study Area posted speed, and the existing bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure are further described below:

Beaumont Avenue is a two-lane undivided road, classified as an industrial collector, with a posted speed of 40 mph on the north side of 15th Street. The road widens to a four-lane road classified as Arterial Highway south of 15th Street. Sidewalks are present on both sides up to south of Cougar Way, and only on the west side, at north of Cougar Way. Class I and Class II bike lanes are provided partially along the road on the north side of Oak Valley Pkwy. Beaumont Avenue is identified as a Bicycle and Pedestrian Priority road in the entire Study Area.

Cougar Way is a two-lane undivided road, classified as a secondary street, with a posted speed of 25 mph in the Study Area. Sidewalks are provided on both sides of the road, east of Mountain View Middle School. Class I bike lanes are provided on the north side of the road west of Beaumont Avenue.

Oak Valley Parkway is a four-lane undivided road with a continuous two-way left-turn lane. This road is classified as an arterial highway, with a posted speed of 45 mph west of Beaumont Avenue and 35 mph east of Beaumont Avenue. Sidewalks and Class II bike lanes are provided on both sides of the road. This road provides a dedicated left turn lane at the intersection with Beaumont Avenue.

Page | 14

Figure 5 - City of Beaumont Road Classification

Page | 15

Figure 6 - City of Beaumont Bicycle and Pedestrian Priority Network

Page | 16

3.3. EXISTING (2023) TRAFFIC DATA

Traffic data used in the TIA was obtained from the Beaumont Village TIA which is currently under review by the City The intersection turning movement counts were collected during the morning peak period (7:00 AM – 9:00 AM) and afternoon peak period (4:00 PM – 6:00 PM) on a typical weekday (Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday) in January 2018. The 2023 base year traffic volumes at the intersections were estimated using the existing January 2018 counts and applying an annual growth rate obtained from SCAG The existing traffic counts are shown in Figure 7. A complete set of existing traffic data from Beaumont Village TIA is attached in Appendix B.

Figure 7 - Existing Traffic Data

3.4. EXISTING (2023) CONDITIONS INTERSECTION OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS

The existing conditions LOS are summarized in Table 3. As can be seen, both intersections were found to operate at an acceptable LOS C or better during peak hours. The intersection synchro analysis worksheets are included in Appendix C.

Table 3 - Analysis Results for Existing (2023) Year

Intersection Control Type AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Delay LOS Delay LOS

Beaumont Ave & Cougar Way Signalized 33.9 C 12.8 B

Beaumont Ave & Oak Valley Pkwy Signalized 34.6 C 20.2 C

Table 4 shows the 95% queue lengths for each turning movement. As can be seen, the existing storage length adequately accommodates the queue length except for eastbound left turn during

Page | 17 both peak hours and northbound left-turn movements during AM peak hour at Beaumont Avenue and Oak Valley Parkway intersection.

Table 4 - 95% Queue Length for Existing (2023) Year

Intersection Movement 95% Queue Length (ft) Storage Length

(ft) AM Peak PM Peak

EBL 122 13 240

EBR 51 0 190

WBL 97 104 260

Beaumont Ave & Cougar Way WBR 47 33 260

NBL 276 13 330

NBR 80 47 225

SBL 85 88 335

SBR 42 0 275

EBL 449 184 150

Beaumont Ave & Oak Valley Pkwy WBL 115 110 220

NBL 128 83 125

SBL 113 87 190

4. OPENING YEAR (2025) TRAFFIC CONDITIONS

The proposed Project consists of two buildings as shown previously. The estimated area for Buildings #1 and #2 are 50,000 and 8,000 square feet respectively. The total number of employees and volunteers anticipated in the two buildings are 150 and 30 respectively.

4.1. PROJECT TRIP GENERATION

Trip generation rate represents the number of trips to and from a specific proposed project. The trip generation rates used in the TIA are based on information included in the ITE Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition) for similar projects.

The ITE Trip Generation rates for various land uses were reviewed including other TIAs for a similar project to accurately estimate the number of trips generated by the Project. Since the ITE Trip Generation Manual does not provide a specific trip generation rate for a police station, government office building was used to estimate the total number of trips for the Project. This building type was the closest to a police station. The proposed Project will generate 194 trips during the morning peak hour and 95 trips during the afternoon peak hour as shown in Table 5.

Table 5 - ITE Trip Generation - Proposed Land Use

Land Use Units* AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

In Out Total In Out Total

Government Office Building (ITE # 730) 58* 145 49 194 24 71 95

*Multiply 1000 sq. ft. Gross Floor Area.

Page | 18

4.2. PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION

The trip distribution process assigns the total number of trips generated by the Project to various nodes in the network of the Study Area. The trip distribution pattern of passenger cars is heavily dependent on the location of the site, surrounding land use, and the proximity to the regional freeway system. To analyze the most conservative condition in the traffic analysis, no reduction in trips was made to the trip generation rates to account for trips made using public transportation, walking, or biking. For the opening (2025) year with the proposed Project, the trip distribution for the following two scenarios was analyzed:

• Opening Year (2025) with Project

• Opening Year (2025) with Project and Mountain View Avenue Extension

The trip distribution at the intersections within the Study Area is shown in Figure 8. The number of trips for the two scenarios are provided in Figures 9 and 10 respectively.

Figure 8 - Trip Distribution

Page | 19

Figure 9 - Opening Year (2025) with Project

Figure 10 - Opening Year (2025) with Project and Mountain View Avenue Extension

Page | 20

4.3. BACKGROUND TRAFFIC

The SCAG models were used to calculate the ambient growth rate per year. The purpose of the ambient growth rate is to forecast background traffic volumes for the horizon years. The ambient growth rate was applied to the 2018 existing traffic volumes to account for area-wide growth not reflected by cumulative development projects. Two growth rates were calculated and applied to forecast opening year traffic volumes as shown below:

• A growth rate of 3.47% was applied to the 2018 turning movement counts to forecast traffic volumes for the year 2020.

• A growth rate of 2.74% was applied to the year 2020 traffic volumes to forecast existing (2023) and opening (2025) year traffic volumes.

The Ambient growth traffic volumes have been added to the peak hour traffic volumes on surrounding roadways, in addition to traffic generated by the development of future projects that have been approved but not yet built and/or for which development applications have been filed and are under consideration.

4.4. CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC

Other reasonably foreseeable development projects that are either approved or being processed concurrently in the Study Area are also included as part of a cumulative analysis scenario. A cumulative project list was developed for the purposes of this analysis in consultation with the City and by referencing the Beaumont Village TIA Report. Table 6 provides the trip generation rate for different land use during the AM and PM peak hours.

Table 6 - ITE Trip Generation Rate

No.

Land Use

Source1

Unit2

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Daily % In % Out Rate % In % Out Rate

1 General Light Industrial ITE 110 TSF 88% 12% 0.74 14% 86% 0.65 4.87

2 Manufacturing ITE 140 TSF 76% 24% 0.68 31% 69% 0.74 4.75

3 Warehousing ITE 150 TSF 77% 23% 0.17 28% 72% 0.18 1.71

4 Single-Family Detached Residential ITE 210 DU 26% 74% 0.70 63% 37% 0.94 9.43

5 Hotel ITE 310 RM 56% 44% 0.46 51% 49% 0.59 7.99

6 Golf Course ITE 430 AC 74% 26% 0.19 34% 66% 0.28 3.74

7 Elementary School ITE 520 TSF 55% 45% 6.97 45% 55% 1.37 19.52

8 High School ITE 530 TSF 71% 29% 3.38 54% 46% 0.97 14.07

9 Fire and Rescue Station ITE 575 TSF 71% 29% 0.48 29% 71% 0.48 3.61

10 General Office Building ITE 710 TSF 88% 12% 1.52 17% 83% 1.44 10.84

11 Office Park ITE 750 TSF 89% 11% 1.33 14% 86% 1.30 11.07

12 Shopping Plaza ITE 821 TSF 62% 38% 1.73 49% 51% 5.19 67.52

13 Fast-Food Restaurant With Drive-Through Window ITE 934 TSF 51% 49% 44.61 52% 48% 33.03 467.48

14 Coffee/Donut Shop With Drive-Through Window ITE 937 TSF 51% 49% 85.88 50% 50% 38.99 533.57

15 Gasoline/Service Station With Convenience Market ITE 945 VFP 50% 50% 16.06 50% 50% 18.42 265.12

16 Strip Retail Plaza (<40k) ITE 822 TSF 60% 40% 2.36 50% 50% 6.89 54.45

17 High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant ITE 932 TSF 55% 45% 9.57 61% 39% 9.05 107.20

Page | 21

Notes:

(1) ITE = Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition

(2) DU = Dwelling Units; TSF = Thousand Square Feet; VFP = Vehicle Fueling Positions; RM = Rooms; HE = Holes; BD = Beds; AC = Acres

Table 7 shows the list of projects that will add traffic to the network adjacent to the Study Area.

Each row provides a Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) number, project name, type of land use, quantity, unit, and number of trips during morning and afternoon peak hours. Figure 11 illustrates the cumulative development location map.

Page | 22

Table 7 - Projects and Trips Generated

TAZ

Proje ct3

Quantity

Daily In Out Total In Out Total

1 Sundance Specific Plan Single-Family Detached Residential 505 DU 92 262 354 299 176 475 4,762

Fairway Canyon SCPGA4 Single-Family Detached Residential

Commercial/Retail

1,750.000

707.410

DU

TSF

1,224

1,960

1,945

1,566

3,511

34,145

Four Seasons (Tract

No. 32260 & 33096) Single-Family Detached Residential 1,890 DU 344 979 1,323 1,119 658 1,777 17,823

Heartland (Olivewood) Single-Family Detached Residential

Commercial/Retail

942.200

1,612

1,802

1,686

3,488

43,756

5 Jack Rabbit Trail High-Cube Fulfillment Center Warehouse

General Light Industrial

Hotel

Indoor Go-Kart Facility Rock

Climbing Gym Facility

Miniature Golf

Trampoline Park

Bowling Alley Quality

Restaurant

High Turnover (Sit-Down)Restaurant

4,500.000

500.000

77.000

26.000

24.000

40.000

15.000

15.000

TSF

TSF

RM

TSF

TSF

HE

TSF

TSF

2,346

1,020

3,366

1,903

3,909

5,812

42,510

6 Sundance Corporate Center Office Park 130.000 TSF 154 19 173 24 145 169 1,439

7 Kirkwood Ranch Single-Family Detached Residential 403 DU 73 209 282 239 140 379 3,800

8 Potrero Creek Estates Single-Family Detached Residential 700 DU 127 363 490 415 243 658 6,601

9 Tract No. 32850 Single-Family Detached Residential 95 DU 17 50 67 56 33 89 896

10 Noble Creek Vistas Single-Family Detached Residential 648 DU 118 336 454 384 225 609 6,111

11 Beaumont Summit Station 11 High-Cube Short-Term Storage Building

General Warehouse

Hotel

Shopping Center

High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant

Fast Food with Drive Through

2,199.185

358.370

25.000

15.000

10.000

TSF

TSF

RM

TSF

13,152

12 Beaumont Shopping Center Commercial 46.100 TSF 27 16 43 55 61 116 1,680

13 Tournament Hills 3, TM 36307 Single-Family Detached Residential 279 DU 51 144 195 165 97 262 2,631

14 Prologis (Rolling Hills Ranch Industrial Phase 2)

General Light Industrial 2,850.000 TSF 1,856 253 2,109 259 1,594 1,853 13,880

15 8th and Highland Springs5 Super Convenience Market/Gas Station Fast Food with Drive Through

3.500

VFP

1,100

16 Beyond Beaumont6 Super Mart with Gas Station 16.000 VFP 85 85 170 81 81 162 1,401

17 Butterfield Specific Plan7 Single-Family Detached Residential

Commercial

Pass-By Trips: 0%/40%/AM+PM8

5,387 549.000

DU

TSF

2,791

3,771

3,190

1,396 -558

1,874

1,453 -582

5,064

2,849 -1,140

50,799

37,068 -1,140

Golf Course Elementary School

253.900 230.000

AC

TSF

1,603

4,490

Subtotal 2,487 3,885 6,372 4,194 2,965 7,159 92,167

18 Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan7 Hotel Industrial

4,995.000

RM

TSF

3,253

3,696

2,792

3,247

24,326

Subtotal 4,995.000 TSF 3,285 469 3,754 493 2,828 3,321 25,325

19 7-11 NWC Ramsey St. & Sunset Ave Gasoline Station w/ Convenience Market 10 VFP 80 81 161 92 92 184 2,651

Page | 23

Table 7 - Projects and Trips Generated – Continued

TAZ

Project3

Quantity

Daily In Out Total In Out Total

20 Nourish Commercial

Pass-By Trips: 0%/40%/AM+PM8

10.700 TSF 11

-11

-11

-22

-22

Subtotal 10.700 TSF 11 8 19 16 18 34 700

21 The Alley Barber & Hair Styling Commercial

Pass-By Trips: 0%/40%/AM+PM8

1.600 TSF 2

-2

-1

-3

-3

Subtotal 1.600 TSF 2 1 3 2 3 5 105

22 Oak Valley Village4 Commercial/Retail 490.000 TSF 286 175 461 591 641 1,232 12,209

23 Country-Club Village4 Congregate Care

Assisted Living

Senior Adult Housing-Attached

Senior Adult Housing-Detached

Medical/Dental Office Building

Specialty/General Retail

Specialty Retail

Hotel

Restaurant

30.000

22.500

3.200

3.000

DU

BD

DU

DU

TSF

TSF

TSF

RM

4,006

24 Summerwind Ranch at Oak Valley4 Single-Family Detached Residential

Commercial/Retail

663.200

1,151

1,245

1,128

2,373

23,245

25 Beaumont Landing4 Gasoline Station w/ Convenience Market

Fast Food with Drive Through

4.000

VFP

1,013

26 Potrero Logistics Center7 Industrial/High-Cube Logistic Warehouse 577.290 TSF 376 51 427 53 322 375 2,811

27 Legacy Highlands7 Single-Family Detached Residential 2,868 DU 522 1,486 2,008 1,698 998 2,696 27,045

28 High Sands9 General Office Building

Fast Food with Drive Through

6.400

2.480

1,140

29 McClure Machine Shop10 General Light Industrial 17.602 TSF 9 3 12 4 9 13 84

30 Orchard Logistic Center10 Warehouse General Office Building

590.000 20.000

TSF

TSF

1,009

Subtotal 610.000 TSF 104 26 130 35 100 135 1,226

31 Zendaja's10 Fast-Food with Drive-Through Window Pass-By Trips: 50%/55%/AM+PM8

2.336 TSF 53

-27

-25

-52

-22

-20

-42

1,092 -94

Subtotal 2.336 TSF 26 26 52 18 17 35 998

32 Starbucks on 4th Street 10 Coffee Shop with Drive-Through Window Pass-By Trips: 90%/98%/AM+PM8

2.200 TSF 96

-86

-84

-170

-42

-42

-84

1,174 -254

Subtotal 2.200 TSF 10 9 19 1 1 2 920

33 West Side Fire Station10 Fire and Rescue Station 10.760 TSF 4 1 5 1 4 5 39

34 Beaumont Village Retail Plaza & Commercial 39.801 TSF 176 155 331 175 160 335 4095

Note:

(1) ITE = Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, 2021; ### = Land Use Code

(2) DU = Dwelling Units; TSF = Thousand Square Feet; VFP = Vehicle Fueling Positions; RM = Rooms; HE = Holes; BD = Beds; AC = Acres

(3) Sources: Highland Springs & 8th Retail Traffic Impact Analysis (April 23, 2020), Urban Crossroads. Traffic Impact Study for N ew Gas Station NWC of Pennsylvania Ave and I- 10 WB Off Ramp (March 20, 2020), K2 Traffic Engineering, Inc. 655 Highland Springs Office-Commercial Project Traffic Impact Analysis (December 14, 2020), Ganddini Group Inc.

(4) Source: Beaumont Landing Traffic Impact Analysis (February 27, 2020), LSA

(5) Source: Highland Springs and 8th Retail Traffic Impact Analysis (April 23, 2020), Urban Crossroads

(6) Source: Sixth at Pennsylvania Beyond Food Mart Project Traffic Impact Analysis (July 29, 2020), Ganddini Group Inc

(7) Source: City of Beaumont Planning Public Documents January 2022

(8) ITE Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2021). Pass-By peak hour trips per handbook average Pass-By trip percentages. Daily Pass-By trip is the sum of the Pass-By peak hour trips when no daily rate is available.

(9) Source: 655 Highland Springs Office-Commercial Project Traffic Impact Analysis (March 12, 2021), Ganddini Group Inc.

(10) Source: City of Beaumont Planning Projects, November 2022. Development Plan.

(11) Source: Beaumont Summit Station Project Traffic Study (February 2022), Kimley Horn and Associates, Inc.

Page | 24

Figure 11 - Cumulative Development Location Map

Page | 25

5. OPENING YEAR

For the opening (2025) year conditions, the following three scenarios were analyzed:

• Opening Year (2025) without Project

• Opening Year (2025) with Project

• Opening Year (2025) with Project and Mountain View Avenue Extension

Detailed delay, LOS, and queueing analysis were performed for each of these scenarios to assess the performance of all intersections in the Study Area.

5.1. OPENING YEAR (2025) WITHOUT PROJECT

This scenario includes existing traffic volumes plus ambient growth plus traffic from pending and approved but not yet constructed known development projects in the Study Area.

For this scenario, there are no changes to the existing lane configuration or traffic control at the intersections. The opening year (2025) forecasted traffic volume without the Project during AM and PM are presented in Figure 12.

Figure 12 - Opening Year (2025) without Project

The intersections were analyzed to evaluate the performance during the opening year without the Project. Overall intersection delay and LOS are summarized in Table 8. The analysis indicated that the LOS at Beaumont Avenue and Oak Valley Parkway deteriorates from C to E during the AM

Page | 26 peak hour and from C to D during the PM peak hour while the intersection of Beaumont Avenue and Cougar Way will operate at acceptable LOS during both peak hours. The intersection synchro analysis worksheets are included in Appendix D.

Table 8 - Analysis Results for Opening (2025) Year without Project

Intersection Control Type AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Delay LOS Delay LOS

Beaumont Ave & Cougar Way Signalized 39.7 D 14.6 B

Beaumont Ave & Oak Valley Pkwy Signalized 65.6 E 43.2 D

The 95% queue lengths in Table 9 show that the queue length for eastbound and northbound left-turn movements at Beaumont Avenue and Oak Valley Parkway intersection extend beyond the available storage length during both peak hours and during AM peak hour for southbound left-turns.

Table 9 - 95% Queue Length for Opening (2025) Year without Project

Intersection Movement 95% Queue Length (ft) Storage Length

(ft) AM Peak PM Peak

EBL 138 13 240

EBR 54 0 190

WBL 117 122 260

WBR 58 34 260

Beaumont Ave & Cougar Way NBL 296 13 330

NBR 48 68 225

SBL 136 94 335

SBR 42 0 275

EBL 509 381 150

Beaumont Ave & Oak Valley Pkwy WBL 152 191 220

NBL 318 313 125

SBL 207 185 190

5.2. OPENING YEAR (2025) WITH PROJECT

This scenario included the trips generated from the Project plus forecasted traffic volume for the opening year. The AM and PM peak hour volumes are shown in Figure 13.

Page | 27

Figure 13 - Opening Year (2025) with Project

The intersections were analyzed to evaluate the performance during the opening year with the Project. Two driveway access points were added on Beaumont Avenue for trips to and from the Project. Overall intersection delay and LOS are summarized in Table 10.

The results in Table 10 indicate that, except for Beaumont Avenue and Oak Valley Parkway which operated at LOS E during AM peak, the rest of the intersections performed well with LOS D or better.

The intersection synchro analysis worksheets are included in Appendix E.

Table 10 - Analysis Results for Opening (2025) Year with Project

Intersection Control Type AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Delay LOS Delay LOS

Beaumont Ave & Cougar Way Signalized 40.8 D 14.8 B

Beaumont Ave & Northern Entrance Unsignalized* 25.3 D 17.9 C

Beaumont Ave & Southern Entrance Unsignalized* 17.7 C 14.9 B

Beaumont Ave & Oak Valley Pkwy Signalized 76.2 E 45.8 D

*Note: For Two Way Stop Controlled intersections, the worst side approach delay and LOS were reported.

The 95% queue lengths in Table 11 show that a few turning movements at the Beaumont Avenue and Oak Valley Parkway intersection have an extended queue length beyond the available storage length. These movements are eastbound northbound and southbound left-turns during both peak hours.

Page | 28

Table 11 - 95% Queue Length for Opening (2025) Year with Project

Intersection Movement 95% Queue Length (ft) Storage Length

(ft) AM Peak PM Peak

EBL 138 13 240

EBR 54 0 190

WBL 123 122 260

Beaumont Ave & Cougar Way WBR 59 34 260

NBL 296 13 330

NBR 48 70 225

SBL 136 94 335

SBR 42 0 275

Beaumont Ave & Northern Entrance NBL 18 3 100

EBL 552 389 150

Beaumont Ave & Oak Valley Pkwy WBL 165 191 220

NBL 320 313 125

SBL 241 202 190

By adding the number of trips from the Project, the intersection of Beaumont Avenue and Oak Valley Parkway will fail during the AM peak hour with an LOS F for opening year conditions.

Adding a dedicated right-turn lane to the westbound approach at this intersection will improve the overall LOS from F to E and the intersection delay will be reduced from 76.2 seconds to 62.4 seconds per vehicle. Although it does not improve the LOS to D or better, it still reduces the intersection delay by more than 5.0 seconds and meets the second criteria for the WRCOG’s Signalized Intersection Requirement on page 19 which states “Any signalized study intersection that is operating at LOS E or F without project and increases delay by 5.0 or more seconds with project shall identify improvements to offset the increase in delay.”. This alternative will be applicable only if the Mountain View Avenue Extension is not part of the project.

5.3. OPENING YEAR (2025) WITH PROJECT AND MOUNTAIN VIEW AVENUE

EXTENSION

This scenario evaluated the LOS in the Study Area with Mountain View Avenue extended from Cougar Way to Oak Valley Parkway and a full access driveway to the Project at the West Entrance.

The new street and driveway helped redistribute the trips generated by the Project to the three driveways and to the intersections in the Study Area. The trips generated by the Project plus forecasted traffic volume are shown in Figure 14.

Page | 29

Figure 14 - Opening Year (2025) with Project and Mountain View Ave Extension

Synchro models were developed with the proposed improvements in the Study Area. The results for the opening year with Project and Mountain View Avenue Extension and addition of a Westerly Entrance Driveway are shown in Table 12. Detailed model outputs are provided in Appendix F.

The results in Table 12 indicate that all the intersections will operate at LOS D or better during both peak hours. In addition, all the three proposed driveways were found to operate at LOS C or better during both peak hours.

Table 12 - Analysis Results for Opening (2025) Year with Project, Mountain View Avenue Extension and Westerly Entrance Driveway

Intersection Control Type AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Delay LOS Delay LOS

Beaumont Ave & Cougar Way Signalized 50.4 D 20.6 C

Beaumont Ave & Northern Entrance Unsignalized* 20.2 C 17.3 C

Beaumont Ave & Southern Entrance Unsignalized* 15.0 C 13.8 B

Beaumont Ave & Oak Valley Pkwy Signalized 49.3 D 38.4 D

Cougar Way & Mountain View Ave Extension Unsignalized* 9.0 A 7.2 A

Mountain View Ave Extension & Westerly Entrance Unsignalized* 10.8 B 9.3 A

Oak Valley Pkwy & Mountain View Ave Extension Unsignalized* 19.3 C 13.0 B

*Note: For Two Way Stop Controlled intersections, the worst side movement’s delay and LOS were reported.

The 95% queue lengths for this scenario are shown in Table 13. At Beaumont Avenue and Cougar Way, the queue length at eastbound left-turn movement during the AM peak hour will extend beyond the existing storage length. In addition, a few turning movements at Beaumont Avenue and Oak Valley Parkway intersection have queue length longer than the available storage length.

Page | 30

These movements are eastbound, northbound, and southbound left-turn movements during both peak hours.

Table 13 - 95% Queue Length for Opening (2025) Year with Project, Mountain View Avenue Extension and Westerly Entrance Driveway

Intersection Movement 95% Queue Length (ft) Storage Length

(ft) AM Peak PM Peak

EBL 311 45 240

EBR 55 0 190

WBL 206 145 260

Beaumont Ave & Cougar Way WBR 88 12 260

NBL 222 9 330

NBR 62 35 225

SBL 166 122 335

SBR 48 0 275

Beaumont Ave & Northern Entrance NBL 10 3 100

EBL 324 309 150

Beaumont Ave & Oak Valley Pkwy WBL 167 209 220

NBL 291 308 125

SBL 192 215 190

Oak Valley Pkwy & Mountain View Ave Extension

EBL 33 10 100

SBLR 50 15 100

Page | 31

6. FINDINGS

An in-depth analysis was performed to assess the impact of the proposed Project. The analysis focused on identifying the impact at the intersections including proposed driveways for the Project in the Study Area. The analysis was performed using Synchro to estimate LOS, delay, and 95% queue length at each intersection.

The following are the findings of the Study:

For Existing (2023) conditions:

• Both intersections in the Study Area performed well with acceptable LOS C or better.

• The existing storage length was found to be sufficient to accommodate the queue length for most movements except for the eastbound left turn during both peak hours and the northbound left turn during AM peak hour at Beaumont Avenue and Oak Valley Parkway.

For the Opening year (2025) without the Project:

• All the intersections in the Study Area performed well with acceptable LOS D or better except for Beaumont Avenue and Oak Valley Pkwy intersection which operated at LOS E during the AM peak hour.

• The existing storage length was found to be adequate to accommodate the queue length for most movements except for the eastbound and northbound left turn during both peak hours, and the southbound left turn during AM peak hour at Beaumont Avenue and Oak Valley Parkway.

For the Opening year (2025) with Project

• All intersections performed well with LOS D or better except for Beaumont Avenue and Oak Valley Parkway which fails with LOS F during AM peak hour. Both proposed driveways on Beaumont Avenue operated well with an LOS C during AM and PM peak hours. Adding a dedicated right-turn lane to the westbound approach at this intersection will improve the overall LOS from F to E and intersection delay will be reduced from 76.2 seconds to 62.4 seconds per vehicle.

• The storage length accommodates the queue length for most movements except for the eastbound, northbound, and southbound left turn movements during both peak hours.

For the Opening year (2025) with Project, Mountain Avenue Extension and Westerly Entrance Driveway:

• Both signalized intersections were found to operate at LOS D or better during both peak hours. All three proposed driveways operated well with an LOS C or better during both peak hours.

Page | 32

• The storage length accommodated the queue length for most movements except for the eastbound, northbound, and southbound left turn during both peak hours at Beaumont Avenue and Oak Valley Parkway.

Table 14 below summarizes the intersection LOS for all the scenarios analyzed in this TIA:

Table 14 - Summary of Level of Service

Intersection

2023 2025

Exist. No Build Build with

Project Build with Mountain View Ave Extension

AM PEAK

Beaumont Ave & Cougar Way C D D D

Beaumont Ave & Oak Valley Pkwy C E E D

Beaumont Ave & Northern Entrance - - D C

Beaumont Ave & Southern Entrance - - C C

Cougar Way & Mountain View Ave Extension - - - A

Mountain View Ave Ext and Western Entrance - - - B

Oak Valley Pkwy & Mountain Ave Extension - - - C

PM PEAK

Beaumont Ave & Cougar Way B B B C

Beaumont Ave & Oak Valley Pkwy C D D D

Beaumont Ave & Northern Entrance - - C C

Beaumont Ave & Southern Entrance - - B B

Cougar Way & Mountain View Ave Extension - - - A

Mountain View Ave Ext and Westerly Entrance - - - A

Oak Valley Pkwy & Mountain View Ave Extension - - - B

As can be seen in Table 14, extending Mountain View Avenue from Cougar Way to Oak Valley Parkway will help re-distribute and balance traffic flows in the Study Area and improve LOS at all three proposed driveways for the Project. It will also improve LOS at Beaumont Avenue and Oak Valley Parkway intersection during morning peak hour.

7. RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the analysis performed in the TIA, it is recommended that the following improvements be considered:

1. Proceed with the Project as proposed with the two driveways on Beaumont Avenue.

2. Restripe Beaumont Avenue to provide 100 feet right and left turn lane along Beaumont Avenue at Northern entrance.

3. Since Beaumont Avenue is a heavily traveled facility, the City may consider extending Mountain View Avenue from Cougar Way to Oak Valley Parkway in the future. This will reduce demand on Beaumont Avenue and help improve the LOS at the busy intersection of Beaumont Avenue and Oak Valley Parkway. The new street will also attract some of the

Page | 33 trips from the Project, middle school, and other future developments in the area and help reduce traffic congestion at other intersections.

4. As part of Mountain View Avenue Extension, the City may consider adding a second full access westerly entrance driveway to provide better traffic circulation within the Project site and provide access to a lower traffic volume street. It will also help redistribute and balance traffic volumes entering/exiting the Project.

5. Add protected left-turn phase for east/west movement at the intersection of Beaumont Avenue and Cougar Way. This will help mitigate the additional left-turning traffic anticipated at the intersection if Mountain View Avenue is extended from Cougar Way to Oak Valley Parkway and a new driveway added for the Project.

APPENDIX A

APPROVED SCOPE

451 East Vanderbilt Way, Suite 375, San Bernardino, CA 92408 Tel: 909-751-3250, Web: www.exp.com

TIA SCOPE OF WORK

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The City of Beaumont (City) is proposing a new Police Department Station (PD Station) in the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Beaumont Avenue and Cougar Way. Two access points on Beaumont Avenue are proposed for the PD Station, one full access and one for Exit only. The City has also requested to study providing access to the PD Station from the west from a new North-South (N/S) Collector Road across from Mountain View Avenue. The conceptual plan of the proposed PD station is shown in Exhibit 1 and the alignment of the proposed new N/S Collector Road from Oak Valley Road to Mountain View Avenue can be seen in Exhibit 2.

STUDY AREA

The following intersections will be included in the TIA. Exhibit 2 depicts the Study Area analysis intersections.

1. Beaumont Avenue and the New PD Station Northern Entrance (Full Access)

2. Beaumont Avenue and the New PD Station Southern Access (Exit Only)

3. West PD Access Road and the New N/S Collector Road from Oak Valley Parkway to Mountain

View Middle School

4. Beaumont Avenue and Cougar Way

5. Beaumont Avenue and Oak Valley Parkway

6. Oak Valley Parkway and the New N/S Collector Road from Oak Valley Parkway to Mountain

View Middle School

7. Cougar Way and New N/S Collector from Oak Valley Parkway to Mountain View Avenue

ANALYSIS SCENARIOS

Assuming the completion of both constructions for the new PD Station project and the N/S Collector Road project is expected in 2025, the AM and PM peak hour operations at each of the study area intersections will be assessed based on the HCM methodology in Synchro software for the following analysis scenarios:

Existing 2023 Conditions Opening Year (2025) without Project Conditions Opening Year (2025) with Project Conditions without the new N/S Collector Road Opening Year (2025) with Project Conditions with the new N/S Collector Road

TRIP GENERATION

Because the land-use for Police Station/Department is currently not included in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2023), the generated trips by the new PD station will be estimated with one of the following methodologies. The methodology to be used in the TIA will be finalized based on the data availability and a discussion with the City.

Use trip generation data for Police Stations/Departments from some individual studies in the US.

Use the number of employees of the new PD station and use certain rates and in/out split % for the AM and PM peak hours.

Use a similar land-use such as fire station or general office in the trip generation manual based on the square footage of the new PD station.

TRIP DISTRIBUTION

The project trip distribution patterns of vehicle trips have been developed from a recent completed TIA in the vicinity. The trip distribution patterns will be based on the existing and planned land uses and roadway infrastructure in the area. The trip distribution is illustrated in Exhibit 3.

LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) CRITERIA

Since the City has established LOS D as the minimum level of service for all roadways/intersections within the City (Policy 10 of the General Plan Circulation Element), any intersection operating at LOS E or F will be considered deficient for the purposes of this analysis.

DEFICIENCY CRITERIA

In order to determine whether the addition of project traffic at a study intersection result in a deficiency, the following thresholds of significance will be utilized:

A significant project-related deficiency occurs at a study intersection if the addition of project-generated trips reduces the peak hour level of service of the study intersection to change from acceptable level of service (LOS A, B, C or D) to an unacceptable level of service (LOS E or F).

A significant cumulative deficiency occurs at a study that is anticipated to operate at a deficient LOS without the Project (LOS E or F).

TRAFFIC COUNTS

EXP proposes utilizing the traffic count data collected for the Beaumont Village TIA, which project is to be located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Beaumont Avenue and Oak Valley Parkway.

Based on the description in the TIA, the intersection turning movement counts were collected at the study intersections during the AM peak period (7:00 AM – 9:00 AM) and PM peak period (4:00 PM – 6:00 PM) on a typical weekday (Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday) in January 2018 Due to the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions, the pre-pandemic 2022/2023 base traffic volumes at the study intersections were estimated using the historic January 2018 counts based on an annual growth rate per SCAG Annual Average Traffic Growth. The 3.47% annual growth rate is SCAG’s Annual Average Traffic Growth per forecast period 2018-2020. The 2.74% annual growth rate is SCAG’s Annual Average Traffic Growth per forecast period 2020-2035. For deriving the existing 2023 baseline conditions, the annual growth rate of 3.47% was used from 2018 to 2020 for a total growth of 7.06% for 2 years, and then the annual growth rate of 2.74% was used from 2020 to 2023 for an additional growth of 8.45% for 3 years, which turned out as an overall 5-year growth of 16.10% from 2018 to 2023.

FORECASTING METHODOLOGY

To account for ambient growth, the Opening Year 2025 will be forecasted with a 2.74% annual growth for 2 years (total growth = 5.56%) over the 2023 base volumes. The 2.74% annual growth rate is SCAG’s Annual Average Traffic Growth per forecast period 2020-2035.

CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS

Exhibit 4 shows a list of other cumulative developments. The cumulative development information was obtained from the cumulative development list from the TIA for Beaumont Village project, which is proposed within the Study Area of this TIA. Trip forecasts for other development projects within the project study area shall be determined based on the ITE Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2023) and will be added to existing roadway volumes for the applicable analysis scenarios. It is requested that the City confirm the list in Exhibit 4 or provide an updated list of cumulative development projects for inclusion in the TIA.

DIVERTED TRAFFIC ONTO THE NEW N/S COLLECTOR ROAD

In the analysis scenario 4 with the New N/S Collector Road, the traffic in and out to/from the new PD station will utilize the proposed new access point on the collector road from the project site. The traffic distribution for the project site will be redistributed as utilizing the New N/S Collector Road and the new access point along with it in that scenario. Since the New Collector Road is proposed across from Mountain View Avenue, it is expected that the traffic to/from the school will utilize the new collector road.

Approximately 50% of the school traffic is expected to be diverted onto the new collector road.