MEMORANDUM Date: August 12, 2014 TG: 13329.01 To: From: Subject: Jeremy Krout EPD Solutions Inc. Rafik Albert EPD Solutions Inc. Rawad Hani Transpo Group AP North Lake Solar Project Traffic Scoping The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize the traffic generation characteristics associated with the proposed solar power plant project located at W Acacia Avenue in Hemet. This memo will provide the City with the traffic characteristics of the project to confirm our assumptions and make any further recommendations towards scoping for the traffic impact analysis (TIA). Project Description The proposed project is located to the southwest corner of W Acacia Ave and S Sanderson Ave in Hemet, see Figure 1. The existing site is predominantly vacant land with access provided via a driveway along W Acacia Avenue. The proposed project would redevelop the site to include a solar system that would generate 19 megawatts (MW) of electricity. Two access points would be provided: one leading into the substation from W Acacia Ave and a second access to the west along Acacia leading directly to the solar field. The project is anticipated to be completed by 2015. Operational Trip Generation Project generated traffic associated with operations and maintenance activities would be minimal. No permanent staff will be based at the project site. Cleaning of solar panels would occur occasionally and security personnel would visit the site periodically. As a conservative estimate, it was assumed that one light truck could visit the site daily for either cleaning or security purposes. Construction Trip Generation The majority of traffic generated by the proposed solar power plant would be temporary and occur during the construction period. The construction schedule for this project is estimated to be 120 working days. Construction traffic includes a mix of light and heavy vehicles corresponding to workers and construction trucks. Construction of the solar plant would occur in three consecutive phases being demolition, site preparation/grading and photovoltaic (PV) system installation. The Activity and Fleet Calculations as outlined in the Air Quality and GHG Impact Analysis Report (Giroux & Associates, July 2014) are presented in Table 1. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual does not provide data on construction traffic generation for solar power plants: therefore, construction trip generation estimates are based on the programmed activities and equipment fleet. The trip generation calculations for each of the construction phases are conservatively presented in Table 2. Typical construction work schedules are expected to be during daylight hours only, with the arrival of construction workers occurring before the morning peak commute period and departures before the evening peak period. Truck and delivery activity to and from the site would also occur predominantly outside the peak commute periods. Transpo Group 4340 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 110, Newport Beach, CA 92660 949-527-3593
Table 1. Phase Name and Duration Demolition (10 days) Site Prep and Grading (20 days) PV Installation (90 days) Construction Activity & Fleet & Crew 1 Concrete Saw 3 Excavators 2 Dozers 10 person worker crew 1 Dozer 2 Loader/Backhoes 2 Graders 45 person worker crew 95 flatbed truck deliveries 745 gravel dump trucks 3 Trenchers 3 Welders 3 Rough Terrain Forklifts 1 Generator Set 2 Loader/Backhoes 130 person worker crew 290 flatbed truck deliveries 90 concrete trucks Table 2. Estimated Construction Daily Trip Generation for 19 MW Solar Power Plant Phase 1 Demolition Duration /Trucks Total Trips One- 3 10 Days 10 10 1 20 20 Transport 2 6 6 12 2 Average Vehicle Trips per Day 24 Phase 2 Site Preparation Duration /Trucks Total Trips One- 45 45 1 90 90 Flat Bed Truck 20 Days 95 95 190 10 Gravel Dump 745 745 1490 75 Average Vehicle Trips per Day 175 Phase 2 PV System Installation Duration Quantity Total Trips One- 130 130 1 260 260 Flat Bed Truck 90 Days 290 290 580 7 Concrete Truck 90 90 180 2 Average Vehicle Trips per Day 269 Notes: 1. This is a conservative assumption assuming no carpooling for construction workers 2. Transport of assumes conservatively that one truck is needed for each of the equipment to be used. In Phases 2 and 3 this is incorporated under the number of flat bed trucks. 3. Obtained by dividing total one-way trips of each phase by the phase duration 2
Table 2 estimates that the daily construction traffic would range from about 24 vehicles per day (vpd) for Phase 1 to about 175 vpd for Phase 2 and about 269 vpd for Phase 3 assuming traffic is evenly spread over the working days of each phase. These are conservative assumptions assuming no carpooling of construction workers (that is all workers arrive in their individual vehicles). If only half of the workers arrive and depart pre-commute periods in the morning and evening then the site generated traffic occurring in the peak periods is about 10 trips, 45 trips, and 130 trips for the phases 1, 2, and 3 respectively. Next Steps The Riverside County Traffic Impact Analysis Preparation Guide states that any use which can demonstrate, based on the most recent edition of the Trip Generation Report published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) or other approved trip generation data, trip generation of less than 100 vehicle trips during the peak hours will be exempted from submitting a Traffic Impact Study. The guidelines also state that these exemptions apply in most cases and the reviewing agency reserves the right to require a traffic impact analysis for any development regardless of size and/or type. During the operational phase the proposed solar power plant would generate very few trips during the weekday peak periods under typical operations (assumed about a trip per day). Therefore, it is typically unlikely that a Traffic Impact Study would be required for the project. Construction of the solar power plant would occur over an approximately 120 day period and would generate at most about 130 peak trips during the 90-day PV system installation period. The vast majority of these peak-hour trips during construction are a result of construction worker commutes. Measures such as encouraging worker carpooling and establishing work hours that cause commutes to be outside of peak hours could substantially reduce the number of peak-hour trips. 3
MEMORANDUM Date: October 3, 2014 TG: 13329.00 To: From: cc: Subject: Rafik Albert, E P D Solutions, Inc. Meghan Macias, T.E., Transpo Group General Plan Roadway Network Alternatives Analysis, City of Hemet At your request, Transpo has completed an analysis of the City of Hemet General Plan buildout traffic conditions to evaluate the effects of changes in the roadway network due to right-of-way constraints, and to accommodate the proposed solar project located southeast of the Sanderson Ave/Acacia Ave intersection. Four scenarios have been analyzed in this memo: 1. Circulation network as proposed in the current General Plan; 2. Removal of Cawston Ave south of Whittier Ave (as proposed by the City due to right-ofway constraints from the Hemet-Ryan airport); 3. Removal of Whittier Avenue between Cawston Ave and Sanderson Ave; and 4. Removal of Cawston Avenue between Acacia Ave and Whittier Ave. This analysis is based on the forecast average daily trips (ADT) in the General Plan buildout scenario. Traffic volumes have been taken from the traffic model plots prepared for the General Plan Circulation Element Update Transportation study. The traffic volumes were manually redistributed to the surrounding roadway network to account for the closure of roadways. The resulting volume to capacity (v/c) ratio of each roadway segment was then evaluated. The City of Hemet General Plan Circulation Element does not include roadway capacities for the various roadway types in the city; therefore adopted roadway capacities from the County of Riverside Circulation element were used. It should be noted that scenarios 1 through 4 build on one another. For example, Scenario 3 is evaluated in the context that Cawston Ave south of Whittier Ave has been removed. Table 1 (attached) shows the roadway capacity analysis. As shown in the table, with the currently adopted General Plan, there are seven roadway segments that will exceed the City s adopted roadway capacity threshold in the General Plan buildout condition. When Cawston Ave south of Whittier Ave is removed to accommodate right-of-way constraints from the airport, the same seven roadway segments would exceed the roadway capacity threshold. Similarly, when Whittier Avenue between Cawston Ave and Sanderson Ave is removed from the network, the same seven roadway segments as scenarios 1 and 2 would exceed the roadway capacity threshold. When Cawston Avenue between Acacia Ave and Whittier Ave is removed, three additional roadway segments would exceed the City s capacity threshold. I trust that this information will be useful for your planning purposes. If I can answer any questions about this information, please contact me at (949) 527-3590. 4340 Von Karman Ave., Suite 110, Newport Beach, CA 92660 949.527.3593
Table 1: Changes in Traffic and to Capacity (V/C) Ratio with Proposed Circulation System Changes Circulation Network as Proposed in Current General Plan (GP) Roadway Segment Classification Lanes LOS C Capacity 1 GP Buildout ADT v/c Cawston Ave Florida Ave to Acacia Ave Secondary 4U 20,700 28,000 1.35 Yes - 28,000 1.35 Yes - 28,000 1.35 Yes - 28,000 1.35 Yes Acacia Ave to Whittier Ave Secondary 4U 20,700 24,000 1.16 Yes - 24,000 1.16 Yes - 24,000 1.16 Yes (24,000) - 0.00 No Whittier Ave to Wentworth Dr Secondary 4U 20,700 5,000 0.24 No (5,000) - 0.00 No - - 0.00 No - - 0.00 No Wentworth Dr to Stetson Ave Secondary 4U 20,700 8,000 0.39 No - 8,000 0.39 No 4,000 12,000 0.58 No 2,000 14,000 0.68 No Sanderson Ave Florida Ave to Acacia Ave 2 Major 6D 53,900 33,000 0.61 No - 33,000 0.61 No - 33,000 0.61 No - 33,000 0.61 No Acacia Ave to Whittier Ave Major 4D 27,300 36,000 1.32 Yes - 36,000 1.32 Yes 4,000 40,000 1.47 Yes 11,000 51,000 1.87 Yes Whittier Ave to Wentworth Dr Major 4D 27,300 40,000 1.47 Yes 3,000 43,000 1.58 Yes 4,000 47,000 1.72 Yes 4,000 51,000 1.87 Yes Wentworth Dr to Stetson Ave Major 4D 27,300 37,000 1.36 Yes - 37,000 1.36 Yes - 37,000 1.36 Yes 2,000 39,000 1.43 Yes Florida Ave Warren Rd to Myers St Arterial 6D 43,100 76,000 1.76 Yes - 76,000 1.76 Yes 4,000 80,000 1.86 Yes 13,000 93,000 2.16 Yes Myers Street to Cawston Ave Arterial 6D 43,100 55,000 1.28 Yes - 55,000 1.28 Yes 4,000 59,000 1.37 Yes 13,000 72,000 1.67 Yes Cawston Ave to Sanderson Ave 2 Major 6D 53,900 43,000 0.80 No - 43,000 0.80 No - 43,000 0.80 No - 43,000 0.80 No Acacia Ave Cawston Ave to Sanderson Ave Secondary 4U 20,700 9,000 0.43 No - 9,000 0.43 No 4,000 13,000 0.63 No 11,000 24,000 1.16 Yes Whittier Ave Warren Rd to Cawson Ave Secondary 4U 20,700 15,000 0.72 No 2,000 17,000 0.82 No (8,000) 9,000 0.43 No - 9,000 0.43 No Cawston Ave to Sanderson Ave Secondary 4U 20,700 8,000 0.39 No 3,000 11,000 0.53 No (11,000) - 0.00 No - - 0.00 No Wentworth Drive Cawston Ave to Sanderson Ave Collector 2U 10,400 3,000 0.29 No 3,000 6,000 0.58 No 4,000 10,000 0.96 No 2,000 12,000 1.15 Yes Stetson Ave Warren Rd to Railroad Tracks Arterial 6D 43,100 32,000 0.74 No 2,000 34,000 0.79 No 4,000 38,000 0.88 No 2,000 40,000 0.93 No Railroad Tracks to Cawston Ave Arterial 6D 43,100 36,000 0.84 No 2,000 38,000 0.88 No 4,000 42,000 0.97 No 2,000 44,000 1.02 Yes Cawston Ave to Sanderson Ave Arterial 6D 43,100 33,000 0.77 No - 33,000 0.77 No - 33,000 0.77 No 2,000 35,000 0.81 No Traffic volumes taken from City of Hemet General Plan Circulation Element Update Transportation Study, Urban Crossroads, March 2011. 1 The City's General Plan does not define roadway capacities. Roadway capacities from the County of Riverside General Plan Circulation Element are used in this analysis. 2 The City's General Plan indicates that a LOS below "D" is acceptable on this roadway segment and therefore it is analyzed using the LOS E capacity. Removal of Cawston Ave south of Whittier Ave (as proposed by City) Removal of Whittier Ave between Cawston Ave and Sanderson Ave Removal of Cawston Ave between Acacia Ave and Whittier Ave