3.3 TRANSPORTATION, TRAFFIC, AND
CIRCULATION
This section analyzes the potential impacts of the proposed project in relation to the surrounding
transportation system including roadways, freeways, bicycle/pedestrian facilities, and transit
facilities. This chapter identifies the significant impacts of the proposed project and recommends
mitigation measures to lessen their significance. Calculations and additional technical information
can be found in Appendix E of this Draft EIR.
The County received multiple transportation-related comments regarding the NOP. These
comments pertained to potential project effects on nearby intersections and subsequent traffic
safety. To the extent these comments related to the project’s potential effects on transportation,
they are evaluated in this chapter. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
submitted an NOP comment letter stating the Draft EIR should evaluate traffic impacts to I-80.
That comment is addressed in the Methodology and Assumptions discussion later in this section.
Comments received regarding the NOP are included in Appendix B of this Draft EIR.
This chapter relies on a variety of data sources and/or publicly available information to support
the technical analysis. This information includes, but is not limited to:
•
Data from the Placer County General Plan
•
Data from the Granite Bay Community Plan
•
Data forecasts from the City of Roseville General Plan
•
Data from the City of Roseville Traffic Count Tool
•
Data from the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) Regional Travel
Demand Model
•
Data forecasts from the Placer County Regional Transportation Plan
•
Traffic Information Study (TIS) by Wood Rodgers, Inc. (included as Appendix E of this
Draft EIR)
This study presents a comprehensive analysis of project impacts under existing and cumulative
conditions.
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-1
ESA / 140356
December 2015
3.3 Transportation, Traffic, and Circulation
Environmental Setting
This section describes the environmental setting, which is the baseline scenario upon which
project-specific impacts are evaluated. This section describes the existing condition of the
roadway, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit networks.
The community of Granite Bay is located in Placer County, approximately 22 miles northeast of
downtown Sacramento, between the City of Roseville and Folsom Lake. Regional traffic passes
through the area via I-80 in Roseville. SR 65 in Roseville provides access to SR 70 and Yuba City /
Marysville to the northwest. The proposed project site is located on the western edge of Granite Bay
in the unincorporated island of Placer County, adjacent to City of Roseville streets and land. The
project site is on the west side of Sierra College Boulevard, just north of Haskell Way.
Roadway Network
Roadways that currently provide primary traffic circulation within the immediate vicinity of the
project site are as follows:
Sierra College Boulevard is generally a four-lane major arterial/thoroughfare that extends
north-south from the Sacramento / Placer County border to the Lincoln Newcastle Highway
(SR 193) in Placer County, spanning multiple public jurisdictions. Sierra College Boulevard
forms a full-access interchange with I-80 in the City of Rocklin, and provides north-south
connectivity between the communities of Roseville, Rocklin, Granite Bay, Loomis, and
Lincoln. For the segment that runs through the project vicinity, Sierra College Boulevard is a
four-lane divided arterial roadway with a wide median and a posted speed limit of 45 miles
per hour. To the south, Sierra College Boulevard extends into Sacramento County as Hazel
Avenue, which extends southward to form a full-access interchange with US Route 50
(US 50) near the City of Rancho Cordova. The City of Roseville has jurisdiction over the
section of Sierra College Blvd adjacent to the project site.
Old Auburn Road is a two-lane minor arterial that begins at the intersection of Sylvan
Road and Auburn Boulevard in Citrus Heights and extends in a general northeast-southwest
direction until reaching East Roseville Parkway southwest of Granite Bay. Old Auburn
Road serves traffic in and around northern Citrus Heights, southeastern Roseville and
Granite Bay. The intersection of Old Auburn Road and Sierra College Boulevard is
approximately 1,000 feet (ft) south of the project site and is within the City of Roseville’s
jurisdiction.
East Roseville Parkway is generally a two to six-lane major arterial roadway that extends
southeast-northwest from the intersection of Roseville Parkway/Taylor Road in East
Roseville, to Barton Road in Granite Bay. East Roseville Parkway connects and serves traffic
in and around eastern Roseville and Granite Bay. East Roseville Parkway intersects Sierra
College Boulevard approximately 1,700 ft north of the project site in the City of Roseville.
Annabelle Avenue is a two-lane residential street in the City of Roseville and an
unincorporated island of the County that begins at Annabelle Court and extends east for
approximately half a mile until terminating at Sierra College Boulevard. Annabelle Avenue
is approximately 500 ft north of the project site and is within the County’s jurisdiction.
Adjacent land resides within the Placer County Granite Bay Community Plan Area. The
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-2
ESA / 140356
December 2015
3.3 Transportation, Traffic, and Circulation
two-way stop controlled intersection of Annabelle Avenue and Sierra College Boulevard,
however, is within the City of Roseville’s jurisdiction.
Haskell Way is a minor unstriped residential street that begins at Sierra College Boulevard,
extends west approximately 1,000 feet, and then dead ends. Haskell Way is within an
unincorporated island under County jurisdiction and is within the Placer County Granite
Bay Community Plan Area. The unsignalized intersection of Haskell Way with Sierra
College Boulevard is within the City of Roseville’s jurisdiction.
Truck Routes
The Department of Transportation (Caltrans) designates truck routes which are to be included in
the National Network for Service Transportation Assistance Act (STAA) designation. Sierra
College Boulevard is a designated STAA truck route. Sierra College Boulevard is also designated
a California Legal (CLEG) truck route. 1
Bicycle Network
Sierra College Boulevard and Old Auburn Road currently have Class II bike lanes on both sides
of the road within the project vicinity. Class II bike lanes are on-street bike lanes designated for
exclusive or semi-exclusive use for bicycles by striping, pavement legends, and signs. Crossflows
from vehicle and pedestrian traffic are permitted across Class II bike lanes most commonly for
intersections and access to roadside parking.
Pedestrian Network
Sierra College Boulevard, Old Auburn Road, and East Roseville Parkway currently have
sidewalks on the east and west side of the road within the project vicinity. Crosswalks exist at the
intersections of Sierra College Boulevard with Old Auburn Road, Annabelle Avenue, and East
Roseville Parkway.
Transit Network
Public transit service offered by Placer County through the study area is a Dial-A-Ride service
that brings residents to Roseville Transit transfer centers. Transit in the City of Roseville consists
of Local Fixed-Route Service, Dial-A-Ride, and Commuter Service. Per the City of Roseville
Existing Local Transit Routes map 2, the closest transit route to the project site is located at the
Sierra College Boulevard / Eureka Road intersection.
Regulatory Setting
This section provides a discussion of applicable federal, state, and local regulations pertaining to
transportation that may be applicable to the proposed project.
1
2
City of Roseville, 2011, Truck Routes Map. http://www.roseville.ca.us/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?blobid=2144.
Accessed April 7, 2015.
City of Roseville. 2013. General Plan, Fig III-4, Existing Local Transit Routes. http://roseville.ca.us/civicax/
filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=5357. Accessed April 3, 2015.
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-3
ESA / 140356
December 2015
3.3 Transportation, Traffic, and Circulation
Federal
There are no applicable federal regulations that apply to the proposed project.
State
There are no applicable state regulations that apply to the proposed project.
Local
Placer County General Plan
The Transportation and Circulation Element of the Placer County General Plan 3 outlines goals
and policies that coordinate the transportation and circulation system with planned land uses.
Table 3.3-1 presents a consistency analysis of the goals and policies from the Placer County
General Plan relevant to transportation, traffic, and circulation.
TABLE 3.3-1
PLACER COUNTY GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS –
TRANSPORTATION, TRAFFIC, & CIRCULATION
Consistency
Determination
General Plan Goals and Policies
Analysis
Goal 3.A: To Provide for the long-range planning and development of the County’s roadway system to ensure the safe
and efficient movement of people and goods.
3
3.A.1. The County shall plan, design, and regulate
roadways in accordance with the functional classification
system described in Part I of this Policy Document and
reflected in the Circulation Plan Diagram.
Consistent
The proposed project is consistent with
Policy 3.A.1 because its roadway
network is planned and designed in
accordance with County guidelines.
The project would not add traffic to
County roadways at levels that would
exceed acceptable levels.
3.A.2. Streets and roads shall be dedicated, widened, and
constructed according to the roadway design and access
standards generally defined in Section I of this Policy
Document and, more specifically in community plans,
specific plans, and the County’s Highway Deficiencies
Report (SCR 93). Exceptions to these standards may be
considered due to environmental, geographical, historical,
or other similar limiting factors. An exception may be
permitted only upon determination by the Public Works
Director that safe and adequate public access and
circulation are preserved.
Consistent
The proposed project is consistent with
Policy 3.A.2 because it was designed
in accordance with County standards,
to ensure safe and adequate public
access and circulation.
3.A.3. The County shall require that roadway rights-ofway be wide enough to accommodate the travel lanes
needed to carry long-range forecasted traffic volumes
(beyond 2010), as well as any planned bikeways and
required drainage, utilities, landscaping, and suitable
separations. Minimum right-of-way criteria for each class
of roadway win the County are specified in Part I of this
Policy Document.
Consistent
The proposed project is consistent with
Policy 3.A.3 because it was designed
with sufficient right-of-way to
accommodate future traffic volumes on
Sierra College Boulevard.
Placer County. 2013. Placer County General Plan, Part 2. http://www.placer.ca.gov/departments/community
development/planning/documentlibrary/commplans/placer-county-gp.
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-4
ESA / 140356
December 2015
3.3 Transportation, Traffic, and Circulation
TABLE 3.3-1 (Continued)
PLACER COUNTY GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS –
TRANSPORTATION, TRAFFIC, & CIRCULATION
Consistency
Determination
General Plan Goals and Policies
Analysis
3.A.4. On arterial roadways and thoroughfares,
intersection spacing should be maximized. Driveway
encroachments along collector and arterial roadways shall
be minimized. Access control restrictions for each class of
roadway in the County are specified in Part I of this Policy
Document.
Consistent
The proposed project is consistent with
Policy 3.A.4 because it limits the
number of driveways encroachments
along Sierra College Boulevard to one,
which is not a full-movement
intersection and is the only nonemergency access to the project site.
3.A.6. The County shall require all new development to
provide off-street parking for the required number of
parking spaces, either on-site or in consolidated lots or
structures.
Consistent
The proposed project is consistent with
Policy 3.A.4 because it provides for
parking spaces at each residence,
including in-garage and driveway
parking, and parking along the streets
within the project site.
3.A.7. The County shall develop and manage its roadway
system to maintain the following minimum levels of service
(LOS), or as otherwise specified in a community or specific
plan).
Consistent
The proposed project is consistent with
Policy 3.A.7 because County roads
created or impacted by the project
would operate at LOS “C” or better.
This applies to County roadways and
intersections included in the project
scope.
a. LOS “C” on rural roadways, except within one-half mile
of state highways where the standard shall be LOS “D”.
b. LOS “C” on urban/suburban roadways except within
one-half mile of state highways where the standard
shall be LOS “D”.
c.
An LOS no worse than specified in the Placer County
Congestion Management Program (CMP) for the state
highway system.
Temporary slippage in LOS “C” may be acceptable at
specific locations until adequate funding has been collected
for the construction of programmed improvements.
The County may allow exceptions to the LOS standards
where it find that the improvements or other measures
required to achieve the LOS standards are unacceptable
based on established criteria. In allowing any exception to
the standards, the County shall consider the following
factors:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The number of hours per day that the intersection or
roadway segment would operate at conditions worse
than the standard.
The ability of the required improvement to significantly
reduce peak hour delay and improve traffic operations.
The right-of-way needs and the physical impacts on
surrounding properties.
The visual aesthetics of the required improvement and
its impact on community identity and character.
Environmental impacts including air quality and noise
impacts.
Construction and right-of-way acquisition costs.
The impacts on general safety.
The impacts on the required construction phasing and
traffic maintenance.
The impacts on quality of life as perceived by residents.
Consideration of other environmental, social, or
economic factors on which the County may base
findings to allow an exceedance of the standards.
Exceptions to the standards will only be allowed after all
feasible measures and options are explored, including
alternative forms of transportation.
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-5
ESA / 140356
December 2015
3.3 Transportation, Traffic, and Circulation
TABLE 3.3-1 (Continued)
PLACER COUNTY GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS –
TRANSPORTATION, TRAFFIC, & CIRCULATION
Consistency
Determination
General Plan Goals and Policies
Analysis
3.A.8. The County shall work with neighboring jurisdictions
to provide acceptable and compatible levels of service and
joint funding on the roadways that may occur on the
circulation network in the Cities and the unincorporated
area.
Consistent
The proposed project is consistent with
Policy 3.A.8 because project approval
requires consistency with City of
Roseville General Plan Policies for level
of service and traffic safety. The traffic
analysis includes impacts to City of
Roseville intersections within the scope
of the study area. As demonstrated
herein, the project complies with City of
Roseville policies for level of service at
intersections and roadways.
3.A.11. The County shall require an analysis of the effects
from traffic from all land development projects. Each such
project shall construct or fund improvements necessary to
mitigate the effects of traffic from the project consistent with
Policy 3.A.7. Such improvements may include a fair share
of improvements that provide benefits to others.
Consistent
The proposed project is consistent with
Policy 3.A.11, because the County
required an analysis of impacts from
traffic from the proposed action. Traffic
impacts are assessed in this section
along with proposed mitigation of
potential impacts.
3.A.14. Placer County shall participate with other
jurisdictions and Caltrans in the planning and programming
of improvements to the State Highway system, in
accordance with state and federal transportation planning
and programming procedures, so as to maintain acceptable
levels of service for Placer County residents on all State
Highways in the County. Placer County shall participate
with Caltrans and others to maintain adopted level of
service (LOS) standards as follows:
Consistent
The proposed project is consistent with
Policy 3.A.14, because the Placer
County Transportation Planning Agency
(PCTPA), in coordination with Placer
jurisdictions and Caltrans, works to
identify existing deficiencies and
necessary future improvements to the
regional roadway network including
Interstate 80 and Highway 65. The
South Placer Regional Transportation
Authority (SPRTA) implements a
transportation fee program to fund these
regionally significant projects that
address long term, cumulative impacts.
Improvements to Caltrans facilities
included within the SPRTA Fee Program
include: I-80 Auxiliary Lanes, Douglas/
I-80 Interchange Improvements,
Douglas/I-80 Ramps, Atlantic/I-80
Ramps, Highway 65/I-80 Interchange
Improvements, and the Highway 65
Widening.
a. For State Highways 49, 65, and 267 Placer County’s
participation shall be in proportion to traffic impacts from
its locally-generated traffic.
b. The funding of capacity-increasing projects on I-80 shall
utilize state and federal sources intended for the
improvement of the regional and interstate system such
as Flexible Congestion Relief (FCR). Placer County
and local development shall not be required to
participate financially in the upgrading of I-80 to provide
additional capacity for through traffic.
c.
Placer County assumes no responsibility for funding
roadway improvements to the street system within
other jurisdictions. Each local jurisdiction shall be
responsible for improvements necessary to sustain
adopted LOS standards within its jurisdiction limits.
Placer County may negotiate participation agreements
with other jurisdictions for transportation improvement
projects that provide mutual benefit.
The proposed project would be required
to pay SPRTA fees prior to building
permit issuance. The payment fees
would mitigate the project’s impacts to
the regional transportation system
including future improvements.
Goal 3.D: To provide a safe, comprehensive, and integrated system of facilities for non-motorized transportation.
3.D.5. The County shall continue to require developers to
finance and install pedestrian walkways, equestrian trails,
and multi-purpose paths in new development, as
appropriate
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-6
Consistent
The proposed project is consistent with
Policy 3.D.5 because all local
residential streets within the project site
would include sidewalks that provide
pedestrian access throughout the
project site, with connectivity to
pedestrian facilities along Sierra
College Boulevard. The proposed
improvements to Sierra College
Boulevard would be designed to
facilitate continued use of the existing
sidewalks and Class II bike lane
facilities.
ESA / 140356
December 2015
3.3 Transportation, Traffic, and Circulation
Granite Bay Community Plan
Table 3.3-2 presents a consistency analysis of the goals and policies form the Granite Bay
Community Plan 4 as they are relevant to the proposed project.
TABLE 3.3-2
GRANITE BAY COMMUNITY PLAN CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS –
TRANSPORTATION, TRAFFIC, & CIRCULATION
Community Plan Policies
Consistency
Determination
Analysis
General Community Policy 1.7.7: Fees will be
charged to new development to offset fiscal, functional
or environmental impacts to the community.
Consistent
The project is consistent with Policy 1.7.7
because the applicant would pay fees for
its “Fair Share” of infrastructure and
development requirements necessary to
provide service to the proposed project.
Goal 9.1.1. To provide a balanced system of roadways
that ensure safe and efficient movement of local and
through traffic, accommodate area growth, retain the
area’s rural and scenic qualities, and accommodate
pedestrian and cycle traffic.
Consistent
The proposed project would include
internal roadways suitable for providing
vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle access
through the site, and would neither
enhance nor detract from the area’s rural
and scenic qualities.
9.1.1.1: The County shall plan, design and regulate
roadways in accordance with the functional
classification system shown on the Circulation diagram
and the typical cross sections included in the
Community Plan.
Consistent
The proposed project is consistent with
Policy 9.1.1.1 because the analysis
contained in this section has been
conducted in consultation with County
agencies with jurisdictional authority over
implementation of this policy. Therefore,
roadway improvements and construction
are subject to county approval and would
be consistent with this policy.
9.1.1.2: The rights-of-way for roadways shall be wide
enough to accommodate appropriate road paving, trails,
paths, and bikeways, drainage, public utility services,
and substantial trees and shrubs.
Consistent
The proposed project is consistent with
Policy 9.1.1.2, because roadways have
been designed to be consistent with
County design guidelines and therefore
meet the requirements of this policy.
9.1.1.3: The level of service (LOS) on major roadways
(i.e., arterial and collector routes) and intersections shall
be at Level “C” or better during the A.M. and/or P.M.
peak hour. The exceptions to this are intersections
along Auburn-Folsom from Douglas Boulevard
southerly, and along Douglas Boulevard from AuburnFolsom Road westerly, where the LOS shall be LOS “E”
or better during the A.M. and/or P.M. peak hour.
Consistent
The proposed project is consistent with
Policy 9.1.1.3 because County roads
created or impacted by the project would
operate at LOS “C” or better. This applies
to County roadways and intersections
included in the project scope.
9.1.1.5: Land development projects shall be approved
only if LOS “C” (or the exception cited earlier) can be
achieved on roads and intersections after: a) traffic from
approved projects has been added to the system, and
b) improvements funded by the capital improvements
program (CIP) have been constructed. This will result in
temporary slippage of the LOS below the adopted
standards until adequate funding has been collected for
the construction of CIP improvements.
Consistent
4
Note: Portions of the project are planned
along and within Sierra College
Boulevard, which is within the City of
Roseville’s right-of-way, and subject to
City policies for level of service.
The proposed project is consistent with
Policy 9.1.1.5 because County roads
created or impacted by the project would
operate at LOS “C” or better. This applies
to County roadways and intersections
included in the project scope.
Note: Portions of the project are planned
along and within Sierra College
Boulevard, which is within the City of
Roseville’s right-of-way, and subject to
City policies for level of service.
Placer County. 2012. Granite Bay Community Plan. http://www.placer.ca.gov/~/media/cdr/Planning/CommPlans/
GBCP/Ch9.pdf.
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-7
ESA / 140356
December 2015
3.3 Transportation, Traffic, and Circulation
TABLE 3.3-2 (Continued)
GRANITE BAY COMMUNITY PLAN CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS –
TRANSPORTATION, TRAFFIC, & CIRCULATION
Community Plan Policies
Consistency
Determination
Analysis
Policy 9.1.1.13: Meandering paths, separated from the
roadway, shall be used in lieu of sidewalks in all
developments with a parcel size of 0.9 acres or more
and shall be encouraged in developments with parcel
sizes of 0.4 acres or more.
Inconsistent
The proposed project would include a
sidewalk on one side of the internal loop
and along each of the two cul-de-sacs
proposed. The project would include a
meandering sidewalk along Sierra College
Boulevard. However, the proposed project
proposes parcel sizes that are smaller
than what is identified in this policy.
9.1.1.22: No new driveways would be added to any
arterial roadway unless it is the only access available to
a parcel. An exception to this requirement may be
granted where there is a planned stop sign or traffic
signal on the arterial adjacent to the parcel.
Consistent
The proposed project is consistent with
Policy 9.1.1.22 because the project access
driveway that intersects Sierra College
Boulevard is the only non-emergency
access available for the project site.
9.1.1.23: A map creating new parcels should not be
approved if it creates parcels requiring access to a
major arterial roadway (see Table 9.7.1 of the Granite
Bay Community Plan).
Consistent
The proposed project is consistent with
Policy 9.1.1.23 because no project
parcels would be created that require
direct access to Sierra College Boulevard.
Instead project parcels would access the
internal network of roadways that would
access the project access driveway to
access Sierra College Boulevard.
9.1.1.28: To help preserve the rural character of Granite
Bay and promote interconnectivity between
neighborhoods, gated subdivisions shall only be allowed
under the following circumstances:
Consistent
The proposed project’s gated access is
consistent with Policy 9.1.1.28, because
the project site is directly accessed off a
major arterial roadway (Sierra College
Boulevard).
Consistent
The project is consistent with Policy
9.1.1.29 because it has incorporated
guidelines a through g of the policy into
project design and implementation.
a. Instances in which the entrance is located adjacent to
a substantial traffic generator (i.e. regional park,
church or school) that creates a parking issue within
the subdivision; or,
b. Instances in which the entrance to the subdivision is
contiguous to or accessed through a non-residential
land use such as a business/professional or
commercial use, and separating the uses with a gate
is the most practicable solution; or,
c.
Is directly accessed off a major arterial roadway (see
Table 9.7.1 of the Granite Bay Community Plan).
9.1.1.29: Even if the circumstances listed in Policy
[9.1.28] above are demonstrated, gates are only allowed
where a neighborhood is surrounded by existing
development making the thru road connections to
adjoining neighborhoods impractical to achieve.
Any gated entrance thus conditionally approved must
incorporate into its construction and design the following:
a. The private road and gate shall not preclude,
compromise or deny convenient and practical
(including any other non-motorized forms of
movement) access into a neighborhood that features
public amenities (i.e. public park) and/or places (i.e.
public open space or school); and,
b. Unrestricted pedestrian access shall be maintained
from dawn to dusk either through a public easement
or other mechanism; and,
c.
The private gated entrance design shall allow for
adequate paved turn-around and keypad/callbox
setback from the public right-of-way per the
Engineering and Surveying Department’s
recommended design detail; and,
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-8
ESA / 140356
December 2015
3.3 Transportation, Traffic, and Circulation
TABLE 3.3-2 (Continued)
GRANITE BAY COMMUNITY PLAN CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS –
TRANSPORTATION, TRAFFIC, & CIRCULATION
Community Plan Policies
Consistency
Determination
Analysis
d. The proposed gate and entrance features conform to
the landscaping, setback and design guidelines
outlined in the Community Design Section 4.2.6; and,
e. The road to be gated shall be privately maintained,
and any irrevocable offer of dedication to Placer
county and/or for a public road easement over the
private road easement is properly abandoned; and,
f.
The subdivision has a recorded maintenance
provision for the age and frontage and perimeter
landscape/improvements, i.e. a Homeowner’
Association or Road Maintenance Agreement; and,
g. Continuous 24-hour access is provided for all public
safety, utility service and public support providers
including egress for the public in evacuation situations.
City of Roseville General Plan (2025)
Due to the proposed project’s proximity and potential impact to City of Roseville facilities (e.g.
Sierra College Boulevard), the City of Roseville’s LOS and Bikeways/Trails standards were also
considered. The Circulation element of the City of Roseville General Plan 2025 5 includes the
following goals and policies that apply to the proposed project:
Level of Service
Goals 1:
Maintain an adequate level of transportation service for all of Roseville’s
residents and employees through a balanced transportation system, which
considers automobiles, transit, bicyclists, and pedestrians.
Policy
1
Maintain a level of service (LOS) “C” standard at a minimum of 70 percent of all
signalized intersections and roadway segments in the City during the p.m. peak
hours. Exceptions to the LOS “C” standard may be considered for intersections
where the City finds that the required improvements are unacceptable based on
established criteria identified in the implementation measures. In addition,
Pedestrian Districts may be exempted from the LOS standard.
Bikeways and Trails
Goals 2:
5
Establish and maintain a safe, comprehensive and integrated bikeway and
trail system that encourages the use of bikes and walking for commuting,
recreational and other trips.
City of Roseville. 2010. General Plan 2025. http://www.roseville.ca.us/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?blobid=4246
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-9
ESA / 140356
December 2015
3.3 Transportation, Traffic, and Circulation
Policy
1
Develop a comprehensive and safe system of recreational and commuter bicycle
routes and trails that provides connections between the City’s major employment
and housing areas and between its existing and planned bikeways.
According to the City of Roseville LOS Policy 1, 70 percent of signalized intersections must meet
the minimum threshold of LOS “C” for intersections to be compliant with the policy. As applied
to the intersection of Sierra College Boulevard and Old Auburn Road, the proposed project would
be in compliance with the policy if either the project impact on the intersection:
1.
Failed to alter the existing LOS designation for the intersection;
2.
Improved on delay at the intersection; or
3.
Degraded the LOS designation for the intersection below LOS “C” but the overall
percentage of signalized intersections in the City of Roseville jurisdiction that performed at
or above LOS “C” remained above 70 percent with the inclusion of the proposed project.
The City of Roseville Bikeways and Trails Policy 1 would require that the Class II bike lanes
along Sierra College Boulevard be maintained by the design of the proposed project.
Analysis, Impacts, and Mitigation
Significance Criteria
The significance criteria for this analysis were developed by Placer County based on criteria
presented in Appendix G, “Environmental Checklist Form,” of the CEQA Guidelines. The
proposed project would result in a significant impact if it would result in:
•
An increase in traffic which may be substantial in relation to the existing and/or planned
future year traffic load and capacity of the roadway system (i.e., result in a substantial
increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or
congestion at intersections)
•
Exceeding, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by
the County General Plan and/or Community Plan for roads affected by project traffic
•
Increased impacts to vehicle safety due to roadway design features (i.e. sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)
•
Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses
•
Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site
•
Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists
•
Conflicts with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation
(i.e., bus turnouts, bicycle lanes, bicycle racks, public transit, pedestrian facilities, etc.) or
otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-10
ESA / 140356
December 2015
3.3 Transportation, Traffic, and Circulation
•
Change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks
Signalized Intersections
The City of Roseville uses LOS at signalized intersections to measure and set goals for the
performance of its roadway network. The City’s significance threshold, articulated in General
Plan Circulation Element Level of Service Policy 1, establishes a goal of 70 percent of the City’s
intersections operating at LOS “C” or better, with certain exceptions where it is infeasible to
achieve LOS “C”. Therefore, a proposed project would be determined to have a significant
impact on LOS if the addition of the proposed project to existing conditions at signalized
intersections would cause the following:
1.
Addition of the proposed project downgrades the existing LOS designation from at or
above LOS “C” to below LOS “C” or the intersection with an existing designation below
LOC “C” is further downgraded; and
2.
The downgrade in LOS designations at City signalized intersections, directly attributable to
delay from the proposed project, would decrease the percentage of City signalized
intersections performing at or above LOS “C” from 70 percent or greater to less than
70 percent; or
3.
If, under existing or cumulative base conditions, less than 70 percent of City signalized
intersections are performing at LOS C or better, and the addition of project traffic would
downgrade the LOS designations of additional intersections from LOS C or better to below
LOS C.
Unsignalized Intersections
The City of Roseville does not apply LOS policies to unsignalized intersections. Warrant analysis
was conducted for unsignalized intersections in the TIS to determine impact significance. Based
on California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA-MUTCD) Peak-Hour-Volumebased Warrant 3 criteria, 6 the proposed project would be determined to have a significant impact
at unsignalized intersections if the addition of the proposed project to existing conditions caused
the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant in the absence of a specific policy for LOS.
Issues Not Addressed Further in This Draft EIR
The proposed project was reviewed in an Initial Study in accordance with the significance criteria
developed by Placer County based on criteria presented in Appendix G, “Environmental Checklist
Form,” of the CEQA Guidelines. The Initial Study is attached to this Draft EIR as Appendix A. The
Initial Study was used to determine potential for impacts to transportation, traffic, and circulation,
as well as other environmental topics, resulting from project implementation. These criteria were
used to determine “no impact”, “less than significant impact”, “less than significant with mitigation
measures”, or potential significant impact”. This focused Draft EIR only addresses those criteria for
which the proposed project could cause potentially significant impacts. All other impacts were
6
California Department of Transportation, 2014. California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD); 2014 Edition. Available at: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/engineering/mutcd/ca_mutcd2014.htm.
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-11
ESA / 140356
December 2015
3.3 Transportation, Traffic, and Circulation
analyzed and determined to be less than significant in the Initial Study and will not be addressed
further in this Draft EIR. Those impacts are summarized below.
•
Increased impacts to vehicle safety due to roadway design features (i.e. sharp curves
or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment). As discussed
in Item XVI-3 of the Initial Study, the proposed project would be accessed from one
ingress/egress on Sierra College Boulevard and would be limited to right- and left-turn
ingress and right-turn egress only. The right turn ingress and right turn egress areas along
Sierra College Boulevard would include areas for deceleration and acceleration to allow for
safe entry and exit from the project site. Left turn ingress movement would be provided for
by a protected deceleration lane to be constructed within the median of Sierra College
Boulevard. Project impacts associated with vehicle safety would be less than significant
through the implementation of the following mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measure XVI-1: The improvement plans shall show the construction of
a left-turn ingress-only lane/pocket at the project entrance at Sierra College
Boulevard. Traffic striping shall be done by the developer’s contractor. The removal
of existing striping and other pavement markings shall be completed by the
developer’s contractor. The design shall conform to criteria specified in the latest
version of the Caltrans Highway Design Manual for a design speed of 55 miles per
hour (MPH), unless an alternative is approved by Placer County.
Mitigation Measure XVI-2: The improvement plans shall include a construction
signing plan, and a striping and signing plan and shall include all on- and off-site
traffic control devices.
Mitigation Measure XVI-3: MM XVI-3: Prior to issuance of any Building Permits,
the project applicant shall make payment of traffic impact fees that are in effect in
this area (Granite Bay), pursuant to applicable Ordinances and Resolutions. The
applicant is notified that the following traffic mitigation fee(s) shall be required and
shall be paid to Placer County DPW:
A)
County Wide Traffic Limitation Zone: Article 15.28.010, Placer County Code
B)
South Placer Regional Transportation Authority (SPRTA)
The current total combined estimated fee is $6,776 per single family residence. The
fees were calculated using the information supplied. If, either the use or the square
footage changes, then the fees will change. The actual fees paid will be those in effect
at the time the payment occurs.
Application of Mitigation Measure XVI-1, XVI-2, and XVI-3, from the Initial Study would
reduce project impacts to vehicle safety to less than significant; therefore, this impact will
not be analyzed further in this Draft EIR.
•
Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses. As discussed in Item XVI-4 of
the Initial Study, the proposed project would provide general access from the entrance and
exit along Sierra College Boulevard and emergency vehicle access via an additional
restricted access point along Eckerman Road. The gate providing access to Eckerman Road
would provide emergency access only and would not be utilized for daily access by
residents. No public access to or from the project site via Annabelle Avenue, Haskel Way,
or Eckerman Road is planned or proposed. Roadway configuration within the project site
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-12
ESA / 140356
December 2015
3.3 Transportation, Traffic, and Circulation
•
•
•
would provide adequate accessibility for emergency response. The South Placer Fire
Department has provided comments on the project and did not identify any improvement
requirements for Eckerman Road. 7 Due to adequate provision of access points for
emergency response vehicles and suitable road configuration and width, the impact of the
proposed project to emergency access would be less than significant, and it is not further
analyzed in this Draft EIR.
Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site. Parking capacity was evaluated in
Item XVI-5 of the Initial Study. As proposed, each dwelling unit would include two parking
spaces within the garage, and two additional parking spaces within the driveway, meeting
requirements of Placer County Zoning Code Section 176.54.060 (B)(5). On-street parking
would be permitted on at least one side of the main roadway loop, which would be adequate
to serve the park and additional residential uses. Because the proposed project would include
sufficient parking for residents and visitors, including park patrons, the proposed project
would not have a significant impact related to parking capacity on or off the project site and
no mitigation is required. This issue will not be further analyzed in this Draft EIR.
Conflicts with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative
transportation (i.e., bus turnouts, bicycle lanes, bicycle racks, public transit,
pedestrian facilities, etc.) or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such
facilities. The proposed project would maintain the existing sidewalk along Sierra College
Boulevard along the project site’s frontage. The provision of curb cuts along Sierra College
Boulevard to provide access to the project site would not remove or otherwise prohibit
pedestrian and bicycle movement along Sierra College Boulevard. Further, the proposed
project would include sidewalks along the interior of the proposed roadway network and
along one side of proposed cul-de-sacs. Marked sidewalks would ensure pedestrian
connections are maintained within the project site. Because the proposed project would not
interfere with pedestrian or bicycle movement, the impact would be less than significant
and it is not further analyzed in this Draft EIR.
Change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change
in location that results in substantial safety risks. As discussed in Item XVI-8 of the
Initial Study, the closest public airport or private airstrip is Pruett private airfield located
approximately 5.6 miles west of the project site. The project site is located beyond the
reach of potential impacts to the nearest airport and does not propose any tall structures that
would breach minimum height thresholds for intrusion into navigable airspace. Therefore,
the proposed project would have no impact on air traffic patterns and is not further
analyzed in this Draft EIR.
Methodology and Assumptions
Intersections
Study Area
A traffic study was prepared for the project and focused on potential impacts to local intersections.
The study area was based on vicinity to the project site and the potential for impacts resulting from
implementation of the proposed project. The traffic counts were conducted at the intersections of
Sierra College Boulevard with Old Auburn Road and with Annabelle Avenue, for all turningmovements including U-turns. Figure 3.3-1 shows existing traffic volumes and lane geometrics and
control at study intersections.
7
South Placer Fire District, 2015. Park at Granite Bay Comments on NOP; provided to Maywan Krach.
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-13
ESA / 140356
December 2015
1
2
Project Site
Old Auburn Rd
SOURCE: Wood Rodgers, 2015
3
The Park at Granite Bay . 140356
Figure 3.3-1
Existing Traffic Volumes and Lane Geometrics and Control
3.3 Transportation, Traffic, and Circulation
Caltrans submitted an NOP comment letter stating the Draft EIR should evaluate traffic impacts
to I-80. However, the locations requested for study in the Caltrans letter are located approximately
4 miles to the east of the proposed project and were therefore not included in the study area.
Furthermore, the Placer County Transportation Planning Agency (PCTPA), in coordination with
Placer jurisdictions and Caltrans, works to identify existing deficiencies and necessary future
improvements to the regional roadway network including I-80 and Highway 65. The South Placer
Regional Transportation Authority (SPRTA) implements a transportation fee program to fund these
regionally significant projects that address long term, cumulative impacts. Improvements to Caltrans
facilities included within the SPRTA Fee Program include: I-80 Capacity and Operational
Improvements, I-80 Auxiliary Lanes, Douglas/I-80 Interchange Improvements, Douglas/I-80 Ramps,
Atlantic/I-80 Ramps, Highway 65/I-80 Interchange Improvements, and the Highway 65 Widening.
As a standard condition, the project will be required to pay South Placer Regional Transportation
Authority (SPRTA) fees prior to Building Permit issuance. The payment of fees would mitigate
the project's impacts to the regional transportation system including future improvements to the
Douglas/I-80 interchange and mainline I-80 in the vicinity of the interchange. For these reasons,
the I-80 facilities requested for study in the Caltrans letter were not included in the study area.
Analysis Period
The transportation impact study evaluated weekday AM and PM peak hour traffic counts on
Tuesday, March 4, 2014 at the critical study intersections. The AM peak hour is defined as the
highest consecutive one hour of traffic flow counted between 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM, and the
PM peak hour is defined as the highest consecutive one hour of traffic flow counted between
4:00 PM and 6:00 PM.
Level of Service
In this analysis, LOS has been calculated for all intersection control types using methods
documented in the Transportation Research Board (TRB) Publication Highway Capacity Manual,
Fifth Edition. For signalized and all-way-stop-controlled (AWSC) intersections, the intersection
delays and LOS reported are the average values for the whole intersection. For two-way-stopcontrolled (TWSC) intersections, the “worst-case” movement delays and LOS are based on side
street traffic to determine the “worst-case” and do not incorporate through traffic on Sierra College
Boulevard into an average. Synchro 8 software was used to implement the HCM-2010 analysis
procedures for study intersections.
In order to determine whether “significance” should be associated with unsignalized intersection
operating conditions, a supplemental California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
(CA-MUTCD) traffic signal warrant analysis was also completed. The term “signal warrants” refers
to the list of established criteria used by Caltrans and other public agencies to quantitatively justify
or ascertain the need for installation of a traffic signal at an unsignalized intersection location. The
CA-MUTCD 2012 signal warrant criteria are based upon several factors including volume of
vehicular and pedestrian traffic, location of school areas, frequency and type of collisions, etc.
Based on posted 45 mph speed limit on Sierra College Boulevard, this TIS conservatively evaluated
CA-MUTCD 2012 based Peak-Hour-Volume-based Warrant 3 (Rural Areas) as a representative
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-15
ESA / 140356
December 2015
3.3 Transportation, Traffic, and Circulation
type of warrant analysis. CA-MUTCD 2010 indicates that “the satisfaction of a traffic signal
warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal.”
Table 3.3-3 displays the delay range associated with each LOS category for signalized and
unsignalized intersections.
TABLE 3.3-3
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS
Level of Service
Signalized Intersections
Unsignalized Intersections
A
0 – 10.0 secs/veh
0 – 10.0 secs/veh
B
10.1 – 20.0 secs/veh
10.1 – 15.0 secs/veh
C
20.1 – 35.0 secs/veh
15.1 – 25.0 secs/veh
D
35.1 – 55.0 secs/veh
25.1 – 35.0 secs/veh
E
55.1 – 80.0 secs/veh
35.1 – 50.0 secs/veh
F
> 80.0 secs/veh
> 50.0 secs/veh
NOTES: Control delay includes initial deceleration delay, queue move-up time, stopped delay, and
acceleration delay.
SOURCE: Transportation Research Board 8
Table 3.3-4 summarizes existing intersection operations under weekday AM and PM peak hour
traffic volumes and existing intersection lane geometrics and control (shown in Figure 3.3-1).
TABLE 3.3-4
"EXISTING" CONDITIONS: INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE
#
Study Intersection
Control
Type
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Delay
LOS
Delay
LOS
Wrnt Met?
1
Sierra College Blvd./Annabelle Ave.
TWSC
31.3
D
56.8
F
No
2
Sierra College Blvd / Project Access
(Does not currently exist)
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
3
Sierra College Blvd./Old Auburn Rd.
Signal
28.8
C
23.4
C
-
NOTES:
1 TWSC = Two-Way Stop Control, Bold = Exceeds target LOS.
2 For TWSC intersections, worst-case movement delays (in seconds/vehicle) are indicated. For signalized intersections, average
delays (in seconds/vehicle) are indicated.
3 Wrnt = California MUTCD 2010 based Peak-hour Volume Warrant #3 (Rural Areas).
SOURCE: Wood Rodgers, 2015 9
8
9
Transportation Research Board, 2000. Highway Capacity Manual.
Wood Rodgers. 2015 (May). The Park at Granite Bay Subdivision Transportation Impact Study for Placer County,
Final Report. Included as Appendix E of this Draft EIR.
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-16
ESA / 140356
December 2015
3.3 Transportation, Traffic, and Circulation
Existing Conditions
As shown in Table 3.3-4, the Sierra College Boulevard / Annabelle Avenue intersection currently
operates at LOS “D/F” under “Existing” AM/PM peak hour conditions. The high delays at this
intersection are caused by vehicles on the Annabelle Avenue side-street approach experiencing
long waiting times while attempting to find acceptable “gaps” to turn left (“worst-case”
movement) onto northbound Sierra College Boulevard. The Annabelle Avenue intersection does
not currently meet California MUTCD 2010 based peak hour signal warrant-3 (rural areas)
criteria. The Sierra College Boulevard / Old Auburn Road signalized intersection is currently
operating at LOS “C” under existing AM and PM peak period conditions.
Impacts and Mitigation Measures
This section describes the project-specific impacts of the proposed project. The significance of
each impact is identified, followed by the recommended mitigation measure(s), if necessary
and/or available. The residual significance (i.e., significance after mitigation) is then identified.
Supporting technical calculations are located in Appendix E of this Draft EIR.
Impact 3.3-1: The proposed project could cause an increase in traffic which may be
substantial in relation to the existing and/or planned future year traffic load and capacity of
the roadway system (i.e. result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle
trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections).
Trip Generation
The proposed project would generate additional trips by residents of the 56 housing units and users
of the 0.81-acre park upon completion of construction. The following trip generation rates from the
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) 10 were used to estimate project generated trips:
Single-Family Detached Housing – For the proposed 56 single-family dwelling units lots,
the “single-family detached housing” trip generation rate is used. ITE Trip Generation
describes Single-Family Detached Housing as: “…all single-family detached homes on
individual lots. A typical site surveyed is a suburban subdivision.”
County Park – For the proposed 0.81 acre neighborhood park, the “County Park” trip
generation rate is used. ITE Trip Generation describes County Park as: “...parks surveyed
vary widely as to location, type and number of facilities...”
Table 3.3-5 summarizes the trip generation rates used for the proposed project, and Table 3.3-6
summarizes the trip generation traffic volumes for the proposed project. This study conservatively
assumes no internal trip capture between the proposed residential units and 0.81 acre park.
10 Institute of Transportation Engineers. 2010. Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition.
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-17
ESA / 140356
December 2015
3.3 Transportation, Traffic, and Circulation
TABLE 3.3-5
TRIP GENERATION RATES
Weekday AM Peak Hour
Rate/Unit
Weekday PM peak Hour
Rate/Unit
Total
In%
Out%
Total
In%
Out%
11.0
0.87
25%
75%
1.11
63%
37%
2.3
0.02
61%
39%
0.09
61%
39%
ITE
Code
Rate
Unit
Daily Trip
Rate/Unit
Single Family
Residential
210
Per DU
County Park
412
Per Acre
Land Category
NOTES: DU = Dwelling Unit
This tale utilizes formula based trip generation rates consistent with the ITE Publication Trip Generation (9th Edition)
SOURCE: Wood Rodgers, 20158
TABLE 3.3-6
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION VOLUMES
Weekday AM Peak Hour
Rate/Unit
Weekday PM peak Hour
Rate/Unit
Land Category
Quantity
Units
Daily Trips
Total
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Single Family
Residential
56
DU
616
49
12
37
62
39
23
County Park
0.81
Acres
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
618
49
12
37
62
39
23
Total Trip Generation
Volumes
NOTES: DU = Dwelling Unit
This table utilizes formula-based trip generation rates consistent with the ITE Publication Trip Generation (9th Edition)
SOURCE: Wood Rodgers, 20158
Estimated trips generated by residents are summarized in Table 3.3-5 and Table 3.3-6. The
completed project would generate an estimated 618 daily trips. Right-turn-only egress would
direct all daily trips originating from within the project site to the Sierra College / Old Auburn
Road intersection, which would potentially impact intersection delays and level of service.
Level of Service
In order to simulate “Existing plus Project” conditions the project-generated traffic volumes were
incrementally superimposed on top of “Existing” traffic volumes. Intersection operations were
quantified under “Existing plus Project” traffic volumes (shown in Figure 3.3-2) and existing
intersection lane geometrics and control (shown in Figure 3.3-1). The results are summarized in
Table 3.3-7.
Sierra College Boulevard / Annabelle Avenue
The unsignalized Sierra College / Annabelle Avenue intersection is not subject to the above
significance criteria related to City of Roseville General Plan policies for two reasons. First, the
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-18
ESA / 140356
December 2015
1
2
Project Site
Old Auburn Rd
SOURCE: Wood Rodgers, 2015
3
The Park at Granite Bay . 140356
Figure 3.3-2
Existing Plus Project Traffic Volumes
3.3 Transportation, Traffic, and Circulation
TABLE 3.3-7
INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE COMPARISON
AM Peak Hour
#
1
2
Study
Intersection
Sierra College
Blvd./Annabelle
Ave.
Sierra College
Blvd./Project
Access
Control
Type
TWSC
TWSC
(Does not
currently exist)
3
Sierra College
Blvd./Old Auburn
Rd.
Signal
Conditions
PM Peak Hour
Delay
LOS
Peak
Approach
vph
Delay
LOS
Peak
Approach
vph
Existing
31.3
D
17
56.8
F
33
Existing +
Project
31.5
D
17
59.1
F
33
Project Only
0.2
No
change
2.3
No
change
Existing
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Existing +
Project
15.3
C
37
19.2
C
39
Project Only
n/a
n/a
37
n/a
n/a
39
Existing
28.8
C
23.4
C
Existing +
Project
29.8
C
23.9
C
Project Only
1.0
No
change
0.5
No
change
NOTES:
1 TWSC = Two-Way Stop Control.
2 For TWSC intersections, worst-case movement delays (in seconds/vehicle) are indicated. For signalized intersections, average delays
(in seconds/vehicle) are indicated.
SOURCE: Wood Rodgers, 2015
City’s General Plan LOS policy pertains only to signalized intersections. Second, the City
regularly monitors and reviews data at key unsignalized intersections including the subject
intersection to determine if improvements (e.g., signalization, stop signs, turn restrictions) are
warranted, and then prioritizes those improvements through its CIP or other funding mechanisms.
Accordingly, operations are presented at the unsignalized Sierra College/Annabelle Avenue
intersection for information purposes only.
As shown in Table 3.3-7, the Sierra College Boulevard / Annabelle Avenue two-way stop
controlled (TWSC) intersection currently operates at LOS “D/F” during the AM/PM peak hours
under Existing conditions. The Annabelle Avenue intersection is projected to continue operating
at LOS “D/F” during the AM/PM peak hours, under “Existing plus Project” conditions. The
proposed project is estimated to increase average intersection delay by less than one (1) second
during the AM peak hour and by approximately three (3) seconds during the PM peak hour.
Sierra College Boulevard / Project Driveway
As discussed for the Sierra College / Annabelle Avenue intersection, the Sierra College Boulevard /
Project Access Driveway unsignalized intersection is not subject to City of Roseville significance
criteria. LOS operations for the intersection are presented for information purposes only.
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-20
ESA / 140356
December 2015
3.3 Transportation, Traffic, and Circulation
The segment of Sierra College Boulevard fronting the project site is within the City of Roseville
11
jurisdiction. Based on the City of Roseville design standards, the proposed project driveway would
meet the criteria for a right-turn deceleration lane (see Table 3.3-7). Therefore, a 220-foot
southbound right-turn deceleration lane and a 220-foot southbound right-turn acceleration lane are
proposed at the Project Access Driveway (along southbound Sierra College Boulevard) for project
opening day conditions. This would alleviate congestion that would form on Sierra College
Boulevard due to traffic making a southbound right turn into the project site during the peak hours.
The Sierra College Boulevard and Project Access Driveway intersection is projected to operate at
LOS “C/C” during the AM and PM peak hours under “Existing plus Project” conditions. AM and
PM peak hour delays would be approximately 15.3 seconds and 19.2 seconds respectively.
Sierra College Boulevard / Old Auburn Road
The Sierra College Boulevard / Old Auburn Road signalized intersection operates at LOS “C/C”
during the AM/PM peak hours under “Existing” conditions. The intersection is projected to
continue operating at LOS “C/C” during the AM/PM peak hours under “Existing plus Project”
conditions as well. The proposed project is estimated to increase average intersection delay by up
to 1.0 seconds during the AM and 0.5 seconds during the PM peak hours. Since this intersection
is projected to continue operating at LOS C/C project impacts to this intersection would be less
than significant.
Signal Warrant Analysis
The intersections of Sierra College Boulevard/Annabelle Avenue and Sierra College Boulevard/
Project Access Driveway are included in the LOS discussion but the City of Roseville LOS policy
focuses on signalized intersections as an indicator of roadway network performance. Therefore,
CA-MUTCD 2012 based peak hour signal warrant-3 (rural areas) criteria was analyzed in the traffic
study to determine whether the project would have a significant impact on nearby unsignalized
intersections. Based on existing and proposed conditions for Sierra College Boulevard, the warrant
3 peak hour threshold for satisfying the warrant is a minimum of 75 approach vehicles per hour (vph)
(travel in a single direction) for the minor street, for intersections where the major street (Sierra
College Boulevard) is two or more lanes and exceeds 1,300 approach vph and the minor street is one
lane (Annabelle Avenue and the proposed Project Driveway). Therefore, project impacts on the
Sierra College Boulevard/Annabelle Avenue or Sierra College Boulevard/Project Access Driveway
intersections would be considered significant if the approach vph (the highest of either approach) for
the side streets exceeded 75 approach vph during AM peak hour or PM peak hour conditions.
Sierra College Boulevard / Annabelle Avenue
Annabelle Avenue at Sierra College Boulevard generates the same approach vehicles per hour
(vph) under “Existing” and “Existing Plus Project” conditions, generating 17 eastbound vph and
13 westbound vph under AM peak hour conditions and 21 eastbound vph and 33 westbound vph
under PM peak hour conditions (see Figure 3.3-2 and Table 3.3-7). The highest approach vph (33
11 City of Roseville. 2013. Design Standards, Section 5 Site Access. http://www.roseville.ca.us/civicax/filebank/
blobdload.aspx?blobid=2386
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-21
ESA / 140356
December 2015
3.3 Transportation, Traffic, and Circulation
westbound vph during PM peak hour) does not exceed the 75 approach vph minimum for
satisfaction of the signal warrant, therefore a traffic signal is not warranted and project impacts to
this intersection are considered less than significant.
Sierra College Boulevard / Project Driveway
The Project Access Driveway at Sierra College Boulevard is projected to generate 37 eastbound
vph (exiting the project site) and 12 westbound vph (entering the project site) under AM peak
hour conditions and 23 eastbound vph and 39 westbound vph under PM peak hour conditions (see
Figure 3.3-2 and Table 3.3-7). The highest approach vph (39 westbound vph during PM peak
hour) does not exceed the 75 approach vph minimum for satisfaction of the signal warrant,
therefore a traffic signal is not warranted and project impacts to this intersection are considered
less than significant.
Weaving Analysis
There would be some weaving patterns from vehicles exiting the project site and crossing travel
lanes as they approach the left-turn/U-turn lane at Old Auburn Road, approximately 1,200 feet
south, and southbound through vehicles on Sierra College Boulevard. The traffic study prepared
for the proposed project evaluated the weaving movement for project traffic traveling from the
project driveway south on Sierra College Boulevard to the left-turn lane at Old Auburn Road. 12
Analysis performed for the roadway segment of Sierra College Boulevard between the proposed
Project Driveway and Old Auburn Road determined that the roadway segment would operate at
AM/PM peak hour LOS “B” based on the speed of weaving/merging traffic under “Cumulative
Plus Project” (worst case scenario) conditions. Therefore, the distance between the project
driveway and Old Auburn Road would be sufficient to allow safe weaving movements. Further,
the impact to the segment of Sierra College Boulevard from weaving movement originating from
the project site would not alter the existing LOS designation. Therefore, potential impacts to the
roadway segment of Sierra College Boulevard to the south of the project site from weaving
movement would be considered less than significant.
Construction
Construction of the proposed median break and acceleration and deceleration lanes along Sierra
College Boulevard adjacent to the project site would require temporary lane closures that would
be anticipated to last approximately one month. Construction activity and the safety buffer would
require closure of the inside northbound and inside southbound lanes for a short-term period of
several weeks. Further, construction along the eastern perimeter of the project site would likely
require lane closure or lane slowing in the southbound curbside lane of Sierra College Boulevard.
At least one lane of Sierra College Boulevard in each direction would remain open to traffic
during construction. Lane closures would result in an increased volume-to-capacity ratio on
Sierra College Boulevard in both directions, to be concentrated during AM and PM peak hours.
12 Wood Rodgers, 2015 (September). The Park at Granite Bay Subdivision Transportation Impact Study for Placer
County Final Report. Included as Appendix E of this Draft EIR.
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-22
ESA / 140356
December 2015
3.3 Transportation, Traffic, and Circulation
Construction access to the site would be provided via Sierra College Boulevard. An onsite
construction trailer and parking area would be designated in accordance with County standards.
Construction activities would lead to increased trip generation along Sierra College Boulevard in
proximity to the project site from construction personnel and equipment.
Lane closures and additional trips generated by construction of the proposed project would
degrade the existing traffic load and capacity of the roadway system and degrade roadway
conditions below acceptable levels, however such impacts would be temporary in nature. These
project impacts to roadway users on Sierra College Boulevard and adjacent communities would
be potentially significant.
Mitigation Measure
3.3-1(a): The project applicant shall prepare and submit a formal traffic control plan (TCP)
(including signage) that is consistent with the California Manual of Traffic Control Devices
(CMUTCD) to the City of Roseville Public Works Inspector or Engineer for approval, prior
to commencement of project roadway lane closures on Sierra College Boulevard. The
formal TCP will be prepared and submitted according to Section 12 of the City of Roseville
Construction Standards for construction area traffic control devices. The project applicant
will maintain a copy of the “accepted” TCP at the project site for the duration of the TCP
implementation period. 13
3.3-1(b): During roadway and roadside construction, at least one dedicated lane shall
remain open for traffic traveling in both directions on Sierra College Boulevard.14
Impact Significance after Mitigation: The proposed project would make improvements to the
existing roadside and median that would require lane closures to provide for worker safety. While
temporary, lane closures for construction activity in the roadway would cause congestion and
delays that could not be avoided through detours or traffic direction. Impacts from lane closures
would be temporary and would be managed through the implementation of Mitigation
Measures 3.3-1(a) and 3.3-1(b). Implementation of a Traffic Control Plan and maintaining open
lanes for traffic in each direction would minimize the temporary impacts from project
construction to a less than significant level.
__________________________
13 City of Roseville, 2010. City of Roseville Construction Standards; Section 12, Construction Area Traffic Control
Devices. Pg. 1 of 3. Available at: http://www.roseville.ca.us/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?blobid=14963.
Accessed: September 2, 2015.
14 City of Roseville, 2010. City of Roseville Construction Standards; Section 12, Construction Area Traffic Control
Devices. Pg. 3 of 3. Available at: http://www.roseville.ca.us/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?blobid=14963.
Accessed: September 2, 2015.
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-23
ESA / 140356
December 2015
3.3 Transportation, Traffic, and Circulation
Impact 3.3-2: Implementation of the proposed project could worsen conditions at
intersections along Sierra College Boulevard near the project site below minimum LOS
standards.
Sierra College Boulevard / Annabelle Avenue and Sierra College Boulevard/Project Access
Driveway
As discussed for Impact 3.3-1, the City of Roseville’s LOS policy is limited to performance
standards for signalized intersections. The Impact 3.3-1 discussion addresses signal warrant
analysis for the unsignalized intersections of Sierra College Boulevard/Annabelle Avenue and
Sierra College Boulevard/Project Access Driveway.
Sierra College Boulevard / Old Auburn Road
As discussed for Impact 3.3-1, the Sierra College Boulevard/Old Auburn Road signalized
intersection operates at LOS “C/C” during the AM/PM peak hours under “Existing” and “Existing
plus Project” conditions. The proposed project is estimated to increase average intersection delay by
up to 1.0 seconds during the AM and 0.5 seconds during the PM peak hours. The LOS designation
for the Sierra College Boulevard/Old Auburn Road signalized intersection would not be changed by
the addition of the proposed project and would continue to operate at acceptable levels under
“Existing plus Project” conditions, therefore project impacts to LOS for intersections near the
project site are considered less than significant.
Mitigation Measure
None required.
__________________________
Cumulative Impacts
This section identifies the proposed project’s potential cumulatively considerable effects to
transportation and traffic conditions when viewed in connection with the effects of other current
and probably future projects. Study facilities’ traffic counts/volumes and future-year volume
forecasts were reviewed and obtained from a variety of public sources including the Granite Bay
Community Plan, the City of Roseville Traffic Count Tool, and the Sacramento Area Council of
Governments (SACOG) Regional Travel Demand Model. The City of Roseville General Plan and
the Placer County Regional Transportation Plan documents were also reviewed for long-range
traffic volume growth projection on study area transportation facilities. The cumulative base
scenario also includes projects that are currently under construction including Rockwood (Maher)
and Greyhawk II. The Rockwood project would construct seven single-family residences on a
7.3-acre parcel, approximately 0.4 miles south of the project site on Sierra College Boulevard.
The Greyhawk II project would construct 21 single-family residential homes on 10.3 acres,
approximately 0.9 miles north of the project site. While existing annual average daily traffic
(AADT) volumes on the four-lane segment of Sierra College Boulevard through the study area
have historically ranged between 24,000-38,000 vehicles per day (1998 through 2012), a review
of the abovementioned documents revealed that projected future-year forecasts on the same
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-24
ESA / 140356
December 2015
3.3 Transportation, Traffic, and Circulation
segments could increase substantially to range between 54,000 and 68,000 vehicles per day
between years 2035 and year 2045.
Impact 3.3-3: The proposed project could cause a cumulative increase in traffic which may
be substantial in relation to the planned future year traffic load and capacity of the
roadway system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips,
the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections).
There are multiple methodologies for modeling “Cumulative Base” conditions for proposed
projects. A commonly used methodology for developing “Cumulative Base” models is the
compilation of a list of anticipated projects to project conditions at a future point in time. An
alternative methodology, which was employed for this study, quantifies growth rate based on
available long-term planning forecasts. The approximate growth rate is then calculated forward
into the future to create a model for conditions at a proposed future date. Consistent with these
available future-year growth forecasts and review of historical growth trends, for purposes of this
Draft EIR, it is projected that traffic on Sierra College Boulevard segment through the project
area would increase by approximately 2.5 percent per year over the next twenty years. Traffic
volumes for a “Cumulative Base” (year 2035) condition were developed by applying the
projected 2.5 percent growth per year to existing (2014) traffic volumes, or approximately
68 percent growth over the next 21 years. Note that the “Cumulative Base” roadway network
assumes that Sierra College Boulevard will be widened to its planned ultimate cross-section of a
six-lane major arterial, as described in the City of Roseville 2025 General Plan15.
Figure 3.3-3 illustrates the “Cumulative Base” traffic volumes and geometrics and control that
assume that the project site itself will remain undeveloped while the study area vicinity
development occurs as planned/anticipated through year 2035.
Table 3.3-8 summarizes intersection operations under “Cumulative Base” AM and PM peak hour
conditions and “Cumulative Base” intersection lane geometrics and control.
TABLE 3.3-8
"CUMULATIVE BASE" CONDITIONS: INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE
#
Study Intersection
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Control
Type
Delay
LOS
Delay
LOS
Wrnt
Met?
1
Sierra College Blvd./Annabelle Ave.
TWSC
>80
F
>80
F
No
2
Sierra College Blvd./Project Access
Driveway (Does not currently exist)
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
3
Sierra College Blvd./Old Auburn Rd.
Signal
60.5
E
44.2
D
-
NOTES:
1 TWSC = Two-Way Stop Control, Bold = Exceeds target LOS.
2 For TWSC intersections, worst-case movement delays (in seconds/vehicle) are indicated. For signalized intersections, average
delays (in seconds/vehicle) are indicated.
3 Wrnt = California MUTCD 2012 based Peak-hour Volume Warrant #3 (Rural Areas).
SOURCE: Wood Rodgers, 20158
15 City of Roseville, 2010. General Plan 2025 Circulation Element. P III-15, III-29.
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-25
ESA / 140356
December 2015
1
2
Project Site
Old Auburn Rd
SOURCE: Wood Rodgers, 2015
3
The Park at Granite Bay . 140356
Figure 3.3-3
Cumulative Base Traffic Volumes and Lane Geometrics and Control
3.3 Transportation, Traffic, and Circulation
As shown in Table 3.3-6, the Sierra College Boulevard / Annabelle Avenue unsignalized
intersection is projected to operate at LOS “F” under “Cumulative Base” AM and PM peak hour
conditions. The Sierra College Boulevard / Old Auburn Road signalized intersection is projected
to operate at LOS “E/D” under “Cumulative Base” AM /PM peak hour conditions.
Cumulative Plus Project Conditions
In order to simulate “Cumulative plus Project” conditions traffic volumes, the project-generated
traffic volumes were incrementally superimposed on top of “Cumulative Base” traffic volumes.
Intersection operations were quantified under “Cumulative plus Project” traffic volumes (shown
in Figure 3.3-4 for all access alternatives) and cumulative intersection lane geometrics and
control. The results are summarized in Table 3.3-9.
TABLE 3.3-9
"CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT" CONDITIONS: INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE
#
Study
Intersection
1
Sierra College
Blvd./Annabelle
Ave.
2
Control
Type
Sierra College
Blvd./Project
Access
TWSC
TWSC
(Does not
currently exist)
3
Sierra College
Blvd./Old Auburn
Rd.
Signal
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Delay
LOS
Peak
Approach
vph
Delay
LOS
Peak
Approach
vph
Base
>80
F
29
>80
F
55
Base +
Project
>80
F
29
>80
F
55
Project Only
n/a
No
change
0
No
change
0
Base
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Base +
Project
49.2
E
37
>80
F
39
Project Only
49.2
n/a
37
>80
n/a
39
Base
60.5
E
44.2
D
n/a
Base +
Project
65.8
E
49.4
D
n/a
Project Only
5.3
No
change
5.2
No
change
Cumulative
Conditions
NOTES:
1 For Project Only delays for the Sierra College Blvd./Annabelle Ave. intersection, the traffic model software employed in the traffic study
did not return specific data on delays over 80 seconds.
2 TWSC = Two-Way Stop Control, Bold = Exceeds target LOS.
3 For TWSC intersections, worst-case movement delays (in seconds/vehicle) are indicated. For signalized intersections, average delays
(in seconds/vehicle) are indicated.
4 For TWSC intersections, vph = vehicles per hour, Peak Approach vph = the highest of either approach during peak hours.
SOURCE: Wood Rodgers, 2015
Sierra College Boulevard / Annabelle Avenue
As shown in Table 3.3-9, “Cumulative Base” conditions show projected delays over 80 seconds
(LOS “F”) for AM and PM peak hours for the Sierra College Boulevard/Annabelle Avenue
intersection. “Cumulative plus Project” conditions would add additional delay at the intersection
that would remain greater than 80 seconds per vehicle (LOS “F”, worst case movement) for AM
and PM peak hours.
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-27
ESA / 140356
December 2015
1
2
Project Site
Old Auburn Rd
SOURCE: Wood Rodgers, 2015
3
The Park at Granite Bay . 140356
Figure 3.3-4
Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Volumes
3.3 Transportation, Traffic, and Circulation
As discussed in Impact 3.3-2, City of Roseville’s methodology for determining LOS is not
applicable to this intersection, so CA-MUTCD 2012 based peak hour signal warrant-3 analysis
has been applied. Under “Cumulative Plus Project” conditions, Annabelle Avenue at Sierra
College Boulevard is projected to generate 29 eastbound vph and 22 westbound vph under
AM peak hour conditions and 35 eastbound vph and 55 westbound vph under PM peak hour
conditions (see Figure 3.3-2). The highest approach vph (55 westbound vph during PM peak
hour) does not exceed the 75 approach vph minimum for satisfaction of the signal warrant-3
criteria and the project impact is considered less than cumulatively considerable.
Sierra College Boulevard / Project Access Driveway
The Sierra College Boulevard/Project Access Driveway unsignalized intersection is not present in
“Cumulative Base” projections and would be projected to operate with an AM peak hour delay of
49.2 seconds (LOS “E”) and a PM peak hour delay exceeding 80 seconds (LOS “F”) (see
Table 3.3-9).
As discussed for Impact 3.3-2, the maximum approach vph generated by the proposed project
would be 39 westbound vph under PM peak hour conditions, which would fail to exceed the
75 approach vph threshold to satisfy the signal warrant. Therefore, the project impacts to
cumulative base conditions at this intersection are less than cumulatively considerable.
Sierra College Boulevard / Old Auburn Road
As shown in Table 3.3-7, the Sierra College Boulevard/Old Auburn Road intersection would
operate at LOS “E/D” under AM/PM peak hour “Cumulative plus Project” conditions, which falls
below the goal of LOS “C” for signalized intersections within the City of Roseville. The City of
Roseville requires that at least 70 percent of signalized intersections within its jurisdiction operate
at LOS “C” or better. The City of Roseville 2025 General Plan projects that more than 80 percent
of signalized intersections within the City of Roseville will operate at LOS “C” or better through
the 2025 planning horizon however the cumulative scenario for this section evaluates a 2035
planning horizon, therefore the City of Roseville’s 2025 General Plan cannot be used.
The Sierra College Boulevard/Old Auburn Road intersection would operate at LOS “E/D” under
“Existing plus Project” conditions, with delay conditions expected to be 65.8 Seconds during AM
peak hour and 49.4 seconds during PM peak hour. The intersection is also projected to operate at
LOS “E/D” for AM/PM peak hour “Cumulative Base Conditions”, with AM peak hour delay of
60.5 seconds and PM peak hour delay of 44.2 seconds. The LOS designation would not be
changed by the proposed project relative to “Cumulative Base” conditions. Therefore, addition of
the proposed project to cumulative base conditions would not alter the LOS designation for the
signalized intersection and the project is anticipated to have a less than cumulatively
considerable impact at this intersection.
Weaving Patterns
As discussed for Impact 3.3-1, weaving patterns from vehicles exiting the project site and moving
across lanes to the left-turn/U-turn lane at Old Auburn Road were assessed for “Cumulative Base
Plus Project” conditions and found not to substantially impact LOS for that segment of Sierra
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-29
ESA / 140356
December 2015
3.3 Transportation, Traffic, and Circulation
College Boulevard. The distance between the project driveway and Old Auburn Road would be
sufficient to allow safe weaving movements. Therefore, addition of the proposed project to
cumulative base conditions would not alter the LOS designation for this roadway segment and the
project is anticipated to have a less than cumulatively considerable impact on this segment of
Sierra College Boulevard.
Mitigation Measure
None required.
__________________________
Impact 3.3-4: Implementation of the proposed project could worsen cumulative conditions at
intersections along Sierra College Boulevard near the project site below minimum LOS
standards for signalized intersections or meet signal warrant requirements for unsignalized
intersections.
Sierra College Boulevard / Old Auburn Road
As discussed in Impact 3.3-3, The LOS designations would not be changed by addition of the
proposed project to “Cumulative Base” conditions for the intersection of Sierra College Boulevard
and Old Auburn Road, therefore, the proposed project would have a less than cumulatively
considerable impact on this intersection.
Mitigation Measure
None required.
The Park at Granite Bay
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.3-30
ESA / 140356
December 2015