Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 11142006 - D.2 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS _ Contra FROM: DENNIS M. BARRY, AICPA= Costa ����.:�.-�: -, ,y COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR �,;: County DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2006 SUBJECT: HEARING ON SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS RELATING TO THE RELOCATION OF THE GALE RANCH MIDDLE SCHOOL SITE AND RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITHIN THE GALE RANCH DEVELOPMENT, DOUGHERTY VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN AREA (COUNTY FILES: SP#06-0001, GP#06-0003, DP#06-3050, DP#06-3051, DP#06-3052) (APPLICANT: SHAPELL HOMES) (DISTRICT III) SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION I. RECOMMENDATIONS A. OPEN the public hearing and take testimony on the Specific Plan Amendment to the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan relating to the relocation of the Gale Ranch Middle School site and residential units within the Gale Ranch development of Dougherty Valley (County File: SP#06-0001), and associated General Plan Amendment(County File: GP#06-0003)and Final Development Plan Amendments (County Files: DP#06-3050, DP#06-3051 and DP#06-3052). B. CLOSE the public hearing. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE (S): ACTION OF BOARD ON e C l 2t5G APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND V0,TE OF SUPERVISORS ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF UNANIMOUS(ABSENT_LIQ ) SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN YES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Contact: P. Roche, CDD-AP(925-335-1242) ATTESTED_ l COQ f✓ cc: CAO JOHN CULLEN, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF Clerk of the Board SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR County Counsel Public Works Department City of San Ramon BY. , DEPUTY San Ramon Valley Unified School District Town of Danville Shapell Homes Lennar Communities November 14, 2006 Board of Supervisors Hearing on Specific Plan Amendment, DVSP, Gale Ranch Middle School Relocation County Files: SP#06-0001, GP#06-0003, DP#06-3050,DP#06-3051, DP#06-3052 Page 2 RECOMMENDATIONS — continued C. APPROVE the ADDENDUM to the 1992 Environmental Impact Report (SCH#91053014) and the 1996 Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SCH#96013003)for the amendment to the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan relating to the Gale Ranch Middle School Relocation as adequate and in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act(a copy of the September 2006 Addendum, prepared by the Community Development Department, is included in the October 10, 2006 staff report and recommendation to the County Planning Commission, listed under Exhibit#3 to this Board Report). D. ACCEPT Resolution No. 25-2006 approved by the County Planning Commission on October 10, 2006 which recommends approval of the Specific Plan Amendment (County File: SP#06-0001) and the associated General Plan Amendment (County File: GP#06-0003) and Final Development Plan Amendments (County Files: DP#06-3050, DP#06-3051, and DP#06-3052) relating the relocation of the Gale Ranch Middle School site and re-planning of residential sites within the Gale Ranch development of the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan Area. See Exhibit #2 to this Board Report for a copy of County Planning Commission (CPC) Resolution No. 25- 2006. E. ADOPT Resolution No. 2006/681 to approve the Specific Plan Amendment(County File: SP#06-0001)which modifies the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan to reflect the relocation of the Gale Ranch Middle School site and re-planning of residential sites within the Gale Ranch portion of Dougherty Valley, as recommended bythe County Planning Commission on October 10, 2006 under CPC Resolution No. 25-2006, and to approve a General Plan Amendment(County File: GP#06-0003)that makes corresponding changes in the Land Use Element Map for Dougherty Valley based on the Specific Plan Amendment , and directs that the General Plan Amendment be included in the NEXT consolidated General Plan Amendment for 2006 as allowed by State Planning Law. A draft of Board Resolution No. 2006/681 is listed under Exhibit #1 to this report. F. APPROVE amendments to Final Development Plans for Gale Ranch Phases II, III, and IV (County Files: DP#06-3050, DP#06-3051, and DP#06-3052)with attached Conditions of Approval listed under Exhibit#4 to this report, to reflect the relocation of the Gale Ranch Middle School site and re-planning of residential sites within the Gale Ranch portion of Dougherty Valley, as recommended by the County Planning Commission on October 10, 2006 under CPC Resolution No. 25-2006. G. DIRECT the Community Development Department to file the Notice of Determination with the County Clerk and to pay the appropriate filing fees. November 14, 2006 Board of Supervisors Hearing on Specific Plan Amendment, DVSP, Gale Ranch Middle School Relocation County Files: SP#06-0001, GP#06-0003, DP#06-3050,DP#06-3051, DP#06-3052 Page 3 II. FISCAL IMPACT None. Staff time and materials for the amendment to the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan and associated applications related to the Gale Ranch Middle School relocation are funded through a fees paid by the applicant. III. BACKGROUND / REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION On June 13, 2006, the Board of Supervisors authorized the Community Development Department to initiate Specific Plan Amendment and General Plan Amendment studies for the purpose of relocating the Gale Ranch Middle School site from its current location at the intersection of North Gale Road and Lilac Road to a new location at the intersection of Bollinger Canyon Road and Monarch Road within the Gale Ranch development of the Dougherty Valley. These studies were initiated at the request of Shapell Homes and the San Ramon Valley Unified School District because of concerns from both parties about locating a future middle school campus near an existing elementary school, as identified and planned for in the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan. This middle school campus designed to accommodate approximately 900 students would be located adjacent to the Coyote Creek Elementary School. Since the Coyote Creek Elementary School opened for several years ago the surrounding residential neighborhood has been impacted by school-related traffic. Both Shapell Homes and the San Ramon Ramon Valley Unified School District are concerned that the addition of traffic generated by the middle school would only exacerbate already difficult school- related traffic conditions in the neighborhood. To address these concerns, they have evaluated alternative sites and identified a new, preferred location for the middle school site at the intersection of Bollinger Canyon Road and Monarch Road. Shapell Homes has subsequently submitted a proposal to amend the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan to relocate the middle school to the new site now preferred by the San Ramon Valley Unified School District. The Specific Plan amendment as proposed by Shapell Homes entails the following: 1) replace the existing middle school site at North Gale Road and Lilac Ridge Road with a 63 unit residential subdivision, based upon a new Single Family Residential — Medium Density (SM) designation; 2) relocate the middle school campus to a 15.76-acre site at the intersection of Bollinger Canyon Road and Monarch Road, and, re-designate this site to a combination of Public/Semi-Public(PS)and Park and Recreation (PR)reflecting the new use as a middle school campus with shared park uses; and, 3) relocate the displaced 381 apartment units from the new middle school site to a new site within Gale Ranch south of Leaf Springs Road already planned for multiple family residential development. The relocation and re-planning of residential sites would not result in a net increase or loss of residential units for Gale Ranch. In addition to the relocation of middle school site and re-planning of residential sites, the Specific Plan amendment proposal includes a minor figure correction depicting a typical street cross section to clarify the width for sidewalk and landscape strip to provide option for a 4-foot sidewalk and 6-foot landscape strip area in order to promote water conservation practices. November 14, 2006 Board of Supervisors Hearing on Specific Plan Amendment, DVSP, Gale Ranch Middle School Relocation County Files: SP#06-0001, GP#06-0003, DP#06-3050,DP#06-3051, DP#06-3052 Page 4 BACKGROUND / REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION — continued The proposed relocation of the middle school campus to a new site within Gale Ranch and the resultant re-planning of residential sites within Gale Ranch would require modifications to the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan, including several maps and other minor revisions to figures. Additionally, it requires amending the Final Development Plans for Gale Ranch Phases Il, III, and IV. To maintain consistency with the Contra Costa County General Plan the middle school relocation and re-planning of residential sites also requires corresponding modifications to the General Plan's Land Use Element Map covering the Dougherty Valley area. The proposed modifications to the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan, amended Final Development Plans for Gale Ranch Phases II, III, and IV, and the corresponding modifications to the Land Use Element Map in the General Plan are more fully described in the October 10, 2006 report to the County Planning Commission, which is attached as Exhibit# 3 to this report. An ADDENDUM to the 1992 Environmental Impact Report (SCH#91053014) for the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan and the 1996 Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SCH#96013003)was prepared by the Community Development Department to consider the environmental effects of the proposed amendment to the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan relating to the Gale Ranch Middle School relocation. The ADDENDUM concluded that the middle school relocation and re-planning of residential units would not result in significant environmental effects not previously considered, nor will it increase the severity of previously identified significant effects. A key concern considered in the ADDENDUM was the potential traffic impacts associated with the middle school relocation and the re-planning of residential units. Shapell Homes commissioned a traffic study prepared by Hexagon Transportation Consultants, which evaluated the traffic impacts of relocating the middle school to a new site and the re- planning residential sites within Gale Ranch. Dowling Associates then prepared a peer review of the Hexagon Transportation Consultants' study at the request of the Community Development Department. The results and recommendations from the respective traffic studies, specifically related to traffic operations near the new middle school site, were shared with staff from San Ramon and Danville (consistent with the Dougherty Valley Settlement Agreement) and the San Ramon Valley Unified School District. The traffic studies' recommendations relating to access and circulation for the new middle school site will be considered when school site layout and design is prepared by the San Ramon Valley Unified School District in consultation with the City of San Ramon, the County, and Shapell Homes. In accordance with Dougherty Valley Settlement Agreement,the proposed Specific Plan amendment relating to the middle school relocation and re-planning of residential units within Gale Ranch, and the results of traffic studies, were presented to the Dougherty Valley Oversight Committee (DVOC) on July 27, 2006 and September 18, 2006 for review and comment. DVOC unanimously recommended approval of the Specific Plan Amendment. November 14, 2006 Board of Supervisors Hearing on Specific Plan Amendment, DVSP, Gale Ranch Middle School Relocation County Files: SP#06-0001, GP#06-0003, DP#06-3050,DP#06-3051, DP#06-3052 Page 5 BACKGROUND / REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION - continued At public hearing conducted on October 10, 2006 the County Planning Commission considered the proposed amendment to the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan, and associated General Plan Amendment and Final Development Plan Amendments, relating to the relocation of the Gale Ranch Middle School site and re-planning of residential units within the Gale Ranch development. The County Planning Commission unanimously approved the Resolution No. 25-2006 which recommends approval of the Specific Plan Amendment and the corresponding General Plan Amendment. List of Attached Exhibits Exhibit#1: draft Board Resolution No. 2006/681 Exhibit#2: CPC Resolution No. 25-2006 Exhibit#3: Conditions of Approval for Amended Final Development Plans (County Files: DP#06-3050, DP#06-3051, and DP#06-3052) Exhibit#4: Staff Report and Recommendation to County Planning Commission, October 10, 2006 Exhibit#5: Public Hearing Notice and Notification List G:Wdv nce Plannirg\adv plan\DVSP111-14-06BODVSPAMENDMIDDLESCHOOL.doc EXHIBIT #1 Draft BOARD RESOLUTION NO. 2006/681 THE BOARD OFSUPERVISORS OFCONTRA COSTA COUNTY, STATE OFCALIFORNIA ADOPTED this resolution on November 14 2006 bythe following vote: AYES: I 64p� Aelwl~/ ';/L»e/- a-4' 6'm La NOES: k,�ox�­C_ ~� � \ ABSENT: ~~�� " ��~^~^`r~i:i e-r' 4BSTA|N: N^-'-"e, RESOLUTION NO.20O6/681 SUBJECT: Dougherty Valley Specific Plan } Specific Plan Amendment/General Plan Amendment } Relocation ofGale Ranch Middle School and Residential Units } County Files: 8P#U0-OOO1 andGP#0G-O003 } The Board ofSupervisors oyContra Costa County RESOLVES that: There is filed with the Board of Supervisors and its Clerk a copy of County Planning Commission Resolution No.25-2006 adopted on October 10,2006,by the Contra Costa County Planning Commission which discusses the Specific Plan amendment relating to the relocation of the middle school site and residential units within the Gale Ranch portion of Dougherty Valley, and recommends aoproval of a Specific Plan Amendment and a Genera!Plan Amendment(County Files: SP#06'0001 and GP#06'0003). On Tuesday, November 14,2006,the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on said Specific Plan Amendment and General Plan Amendment discussed by the Contra Costa County Planning Commission, Resolution No.25'2006. Notice of said hearing was duly given in the manner required by law. The Board ata hearing, called for testimony ofall persons interested inthis matter. On Tuesday, November 14, 2006,the Board APPROVED the Specific Plan Amendment(County File: S.P#06-0001)to relocate the middle school to a new site and residential units within the Gale Ranch portion of Dougherty Valley, and APPROVED the General Plan Amendment(County File: GP#06-0003),which makes corresponding changes to the Land Use Element Map covering the Dougherty Valley based on the aUovemon8onodSpecific Plan Amendment,and directed that this General Plan Amendment,beincluded in the next Consolidated General Plan Amendment for calendar year 2006 as allowed by State Planning Law. I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true andoontact:pnoche.Adv.planmo='COD(925-335-1242) correct copy manaction taken and entered nnthe cc: Community Development Department minutes ofthe Board ofSupervisors on the date .CAO shown, Clerk orthe Board County Counsel ATTESTED: City ofSan Ramon John Cullen, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator Depuly RESOLUTION NO.2 /681 EXHIBIT #2 CPC RESOLUTION NO. 25-2006 RESOLUTION NO. 25-2006 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE REQUESTED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT TO ALLOW REPLACEMENT OF MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL-LOW DENSITY (ML) WITH PUBLIC-SEMI PUBLIC (PS) AND PARKS AND RECREATION (PR) ALONG THE NORTH EASTERN PORTION OF GALE RANCH PHASE III. A SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT TO ALLOW MODIFICATION OF PUBLIC AND SEMI-PUBLIC (PS) AND PARKS AND RECREATION (PR) WITH SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL-MEDIUM DENSITY (SM) IN GALE II, AND ALLOW FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN MODIFICATIONS TO PHASES II, III, AND IV OF THE GALE RANCH DEVELOPMENT IN THE DOUGHERTY VALLEY, SAN RAMON AREA. COUNTY FILES #GP06-0003, #SP06- 0001, #SD06-9134, #SD06-9136, #MS06-002$, #DP06-3050, #DP06-3051, AND #DP06-3052. SHAPELL HOMES (APPLICANT & OWNER) WHEREAS, on June 27, 2006, Shapell Homes submitted eight applications, including General Plan and Specific Plan Amendments, Tentative Maps, and Final Development Plan Amendments to allow relocation of the Gale Ranch Middle School and residential units within the Phase II, Phase III, and Phases IV of the Gale Ranch development; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), in September, 2006, the County prepared an Addendum to the 1992 Dougherty Valley EIR and to the 1996 Dougherty Valley Supplemental ETR which is attached in the staff report; and WHEREAS, on October 10, 2006, the County Planning Commission conducted a properly noticed public hearing to provide the public and the decision makers with an opportunity to review, consider and comment on the Addendum and the Proposed Modifications; and WHEREAS, at the County Planning Commission hearing on October 10, 2006, the County Planning Commission determined that the Addendum was adequate for decision-making with respect to the Proposed Modifications; and WHEREAS, all interested parties were given an opportunity to participate in the public hearing by submittal of oral and written comments; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the County Planning Commission makes and adopts the following findings: A. The County Planning Commission received, reviewed and considered all information in the Addendum, the Dougherty Valley 1992 FEIR and 1996 SEIR before approving the Proposed Modifications that are the subject of this Resolution; 2 B. The Addendum, attached, has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the; County's Guidelines for Administering CEQA, and the Settlement Agreement; C. The Proposed Modifications, as reflected in the attached Conditions of Approval.and the related General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Amendments, Vesting Tentative Maps, Minor Subdivision, and Final Development Plans: #GP06-0003., #SP06-0001, #SD06-9134, #SD06-9136, #MS06-0028, #DP06-3050, #DP06-3051., AND #DP06-3052, do not require further environmental review for the reasons and findings set forth in the Addendum; D. The Addendum reflects the lead agency's independent judgment; E. These Findings incorporate by reference in their entirety the text of the Addendum, the 1992 Dougherty Valley Final EIR and the 1996 Dougherty Valley Supplemental EIR. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: that the County Planning Commission adopts the attached Conditions of Approval; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the reasons for this recommendation are as follows: A. CEQA Findings: The lead agency under CEQA shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if changes or additions to a project are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. Under Public; Resources Code § 21666 and CEQA Guidelines § 15162, a supplemental or subsequent EIR can be required only if: 1. Changes are made to the project that require important revisions of the; EIR because of the involvement of new significant environmental impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously_ identified significant environmental effects; or 2. Substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the project would be undertaken, which would require important revisions in the EIR due to the involvement of new significant impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant: environmental effects; or 3. New information of substantial importance to the project has become: available and: a. The information was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the EIR was certified as complete; and 3 b. The new information shows any of the following: (i) The project would have one or more significant effects not previously discussed in the EIR; (ii) Significant effects previously examined would be substantially more severe than shown in the EIR; (iii) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (iv) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those considered in the EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. The County has recently conducted environmental review of other projects within the same general area of the County, including projects in the Dougherty Valley. Based on such review, there is no new information of substantial importance to the Middle School and residential units relocation project since certification of the'1992 FEIR and 1996 SEIR that would indicate more significant impacts than were identified or reveals newly-feasible or considerably different mitigation than that considered previously. As discussed in greater detail below, the proposed modifications do not meet any of the other standards identified above that would require preparation of a supplemental or subsequent EIR. The Addendum therefore determines that no supplemental or subsequent EIR is required for any of the proposed modifications. B. Tentative Map Findings. (Reference Sections 94-2.806 of the County Code). 1. Required Finding: The County Planning Agency shall not approve a tentative map unless it shall find that the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the applicable general and specific plans required by law. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, as it is proposed for amendment. The project is also consistent with the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan as proposed for amendment. Based on the entire record and as summarized herein, the tentative map is consistent with the County General Plan, and Specific Plan as it is proposed for amendment. 4 2. Required Finding: The County Planning Agency shall not approve a tentative map unless it shall find that the proposed subdivision fulfills construction requirements. As required by the conditions of approval the tentative map shall fulfill all applicable; County imposed construction requirements. Based on the entire record and as summarized herein, the proposed subdivision fulfills construction requirements. C. P-1 District Findings 1. The applicant has indicated they intend to commence construction within two and one- half years of the effective date of final project approval. 2. The Gale Ranch, Phase II (up to 1948 units); Gale Ranch, Phase III (up to 1207 units); and Gale Ranch, Phase IV (up to 1459 units) as conditioned, are consistent with the County General Plan as proposed to be amended and also consistent with the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan as proposed to be amended. 3. The project will constitute a residential environment of sustained desirability and stability, and will be in harmony with the character of the nearby community. 4. In accord with the required findings of the Planned Unit District, the County finds that the development justifies exceptions from the normal application of the County Zoning Ordinance Code, including variations in parcel configuration and design to provide better conformity with the environmental features of the site. D. Growth Management Element Performance Standards Findings 1. Traffic: A traffic study was prepared by Hexagon on June 21, 2006. On September 22, 2006 a peer review of this traffic study was prepared by Dowling Associates. The traffic study concluded that there would be no significant traffic impacts associated with the project. There is no change in the number of units. 2. Water: Part of Phase II, where new 63 residential lots will be constructed will be served by the East Bay Municipal Utilities District. The remainder of the project area of Gale III and Gale IV will be served by the Dublin San Ramon Service District.' 3. Sanitary Sewer: The project will be served by the Central Contra Costa County Sanitary District. The applicant will be required to comply with the requirements of this District. 4. Fire Protection: The San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District will service the site. 5. Public Protection: This requirement has been fulfilled with the construction of Police stations within the Dougherty Valley. 5 6. Parks and Recreation: A park dedication fee has been fulfilled with the construction of parks and recreation areas. 7. Flood Control and Drainage: Compliance with Public Works Department drainage requirements is required. The site is located in the Flood Zone C of minimal flooding. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the Planning Commission finds and determines that this Resolution complies with CEQA and the County's Guidelines for Administering CEQA, and the County Community Development Department is directed to cause to be filed and posted a Notice of Determination with the appropriate agencies; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the Planning Commission adopts: Vesting Tentative Map #SD06-9134 (Phase I1), #MS06-0028 (Phase III), #SD06-9136 (Phase IV) and recommends the Board makes a motion to approve General Plan and Specific Plan Amendments, #GP06-0003 and #SP06-0001, and modifications to its Final Development Plan #DP06-3050 (Phase II), #DP06-3051 (Phase III), and #DP06-3052 (Phase IV). BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the recitals contained in this Resolution are true and correct and are an integral part of the Planning Commission's decision with respect to the requested entitlements. The decision of the County Planning Commission was given on Tuesday October 10, 2006, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Clark, Terrell, Battaglia, Gaddis and Wong NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Murray and Snyder ABSTAIN: None Don Snyder, Chair of the County Planning Commission County of Contra Co ta, State of California ATTEST: z kat-lcn Y DENNIS M. BARRY, Secretary County Planning Commission, County of Contra Costa, State of California EXHIBIT #3 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR AMENDED FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS (COUNTY FILES: DP#06-3050, DP#06-3051, AND DP#06-3052) FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR SUBDVISIONS #SD06-9134, #MS06- 0028, #SD06-9136, AND DEVELOPMENT PLANS #DP06-3050, #DP06-3051,tf-DP06-3052- SHAPELL HOMES (APPLICANT/OWNER) IN THE SAN RAMON AREA A. Tentative Map Findings. (Reference Sections 94-2.806 of the County Code). 1. Required Finding: The County Planning Agency shall not approve a tentative map unless it shall find that the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the applicable general and specific plans required by law. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, as it is proposed for amendment. The project is also consistent with the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan as proposed for amendment. Based on the entire record and as summarized herein, the tentative map is consistent with the County General Plan, and Specific Plan as it is proposed for amendment. 2.. Required Finding: The County Planning Agency shall not approve a tentative map unless it shall find that the proposed subdivision fulfills construction requirements. As required by the conditions of approval the tentative mapshall fulfill all applicable County imposed construction requirements. Based on the entire record and as summarized herein, the proposed subdivision fulfills construction requirements. B. P-1 District Findings 1. The applicant has indicated they intend to commence construction within two and one- half years of the effective date of final project approval. 2. The Gale II project (up to 1948 units); Gale III (up to 1207 units); and Gale IV (up to 1459 units) as conditioned, are consistent with the County General Plan as proposed to be amended and also consistent with the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan as proposed to be amended. 3. The project will'constitute a residential environment of sustained desirability and stability, and will be in harmony with the character of the nearby community. 4. In accord with the required findings of the Planned Unit District, the County finds that the development justifies exceptions from the normal application of the County Zoning 1 Ordinance Code, including variations in parcel configuration and design to provide better conformity with the environmental features of the site. C. Growth Management Element Performance Standards Findinus 1. Traffic: A traffic study was prepared by Hexagon on June 21, 2006. On September 22, 2006 a peer review of this traffic study was prepared by Dowling Associates. . The traffic study concluded that there would be no significant traffic irnpacts associated with the project. There is no change in the number of units. 2. Water: Part of Phase II, where new 63 residential lots will be constructed will be served by the East Bay Municipal Utilities District. The remainder of the project area of Gale III and Gale IV will be served by the Dublin San Ramon Service District. 3. Sanitary Sewer: The project will be served by the Central Contra Costa County Sanitary District. The applicant will be required to comply with the requirements of this District. 4. Fire Protection: The San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District will service the site. 5. Public Protection: This requirement has been fulfilled with the construction of Police stations within the Dougherty Valley. 6. Parks and Recreation: A park dedication fee has been fulfilled with the construction of parks and recreation areas. 7. Flood Control and Drainage: Compliance with Public Works Department drainage requirements is required. The site is located in the Flood Zone C of minimal flooding. (Reference the Growth Management Element, Chapter 4, of the General Plan) 2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ALL OF THE APPLICABLE CONDITIONS OF THE ORIGINAL #SD95-7994 & DP95- 3086 (GALE II),#SD99-8306 & DP99-3006 (GALE III), AND SD04-8856 & DP04-3070 ARE IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT BELOW ARE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS SPECIFICALLY FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AREA GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: 1. This approval is based on application material submitted to the Community Development on June 27, 2006 and revised Tentative Maps and Final Development Plans dated October 4, 2006. Unless otherwise indicated, the following conditions shall be complied with prior to filing the Final Map. 2. The maximum number of units approved for this development is up to 1948 units(Gale II); up to 1207 units (Gale III); and up to 1459 units(Gale IV) and shall be generally as shown on the revised Final Development Plan #DP06-3050, #DP06-3051, #DP06-3052, and MS06- 0028. 3. The applicant shall provide a 300-foot radius notice to neighbors of Subdivision 9134 (Gale II) 30 days prior to construction activities. 4. The developer shall make an effort to work together with the County, with the City, and with the San Ramon Valley School District to identify alternative parking spaces for special events at the Middle School. Consideration shall be given to alternative modes of transportation, including but not limited, to walking and carpooling. 5. The applicant shall make an effort to request the Gale I Homeowners Association to incorporate the proposed 63 lots as part of their association. 6. Once the final plans of the Middle School are finalized, the applicant shall make an effort to work with the City and the school District to address all concerns related to stop signs and traffic signals as indicated in the City of San Ramon September 28, 2006 letter. 3 The following Conditions shall be implemented as part of the'project approval and included in the applicant's submittal of their annual Dougherty Valley Affordable Housing Program, DVAHP: 7. A minimum of 635 affordable rental units shall be designated for the Gale Ranch, Phase IV development. 8. In order to comply with timing requirements set forth in the DVAHP the , applicant shall provide a development program for Gale Ranch Phase III and Phase IV for review and approval of the Community. Development Department in ensure compliance with the Phasing requirements of the DVAHP, Section V-D. 9. In order to address impaction issues, the applicant shall develop a development program for Phase N for review and approval of the Community Development Department that will provide integration of affordable units into the Phase IV development to the maximum extent feasible. 10. Noise generating construction activities shall be limited from 7:30 am to 5:30 pm, Monday through Friday and shall be prohibited on weekends and on state and federal holidays listed below: New Year's Day (State and Federal) Birthday of Martin.Luther King, 3r.(State and Federal) Washington's Birthday/Presidents' Day (State and Federal) Lincoln's Birthday (State) Cesar Chavez Day (State) Memorial Day (State and Federal) Independence Day (State and Federal) Labor Day (State and Federal) Columbus Day(State and Federal) Veterans Day (State and Federal) Thanksgiving Day(State and Federal) Day after Thanksgiving (State) Christmas Day (State and Federal) For specific details on the actual day the state and federal holidays occur,please visit the following websites: Federal Holidays htt-p://vrw",.oT)m.gov/fedhol/2006.as-D California Holidays http://www.edd.ca.Liov/eddsthol.htm 4 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ADMINISTRATED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE COMPLIED WITH PRIOR TO FILING THE FINAL MAP. The following are supplemental conditions that are applicable only to SUB 9134 (Gale II) 11. The applicant shall submit a sound study to evaluate the need for a soundwall along lots 13- 31. The soundwall, if required, shall be bonded with the road improvements. Design of the soundwall shall be subject to the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. The applicant shall provide a perpetual funding mechanism for the maintenance of the soundwall. 12. The applicant shall relinquish abutter's rights along Lilac Ridge Road except for the two access locations shown on the tentative map. 13. The applicant shall submit a drainage report for sizing the water quality pond/bioretention facility prior to issuance of a grading permit, subject to review and approval of the Public Works Department. The final location and size of the facility may be changed based on the results of the study. The applicant shall submit improvement plans, landscape plans, and an operations and maintenance manual for review and approval prior to filing the final map. The facility shall be screened with buffer landscaping and enclosed with chain link safety fencing. 14. Prior to construction the applicant shall obtain a ministerial encroachment permit from the City of San Ramon only for work proposed within the Lilac Ridge Road right of way which is already accepted and maintained by the City of San Ramon. The following are supplemental conditions and apply only to MS 06-0028 (Gale III) 15. The applicant shall relinquish abutter's rights along Bollinger Canyon Road, Main Branch Road, and South Monarch Road, except for two access locations at the school and the two for the apartment complex. 16. The applicant shall submit a sound study to evaluate noise impacts to the apartments. Soundwalls, if required, shall be bonded with the road improvements. The design of the wall shall be reviewed and approved by the Zoning Administrator. The applicant shall provide a perpetual funding mechanism for the maintenance of the soundwall. 5 17. The applicant shall submit an operational analysis and a sketch plan for the horizontal alignment of Main Branch Road, including the intersection,with Bollinger Canyon Road, subject to the review and approval of the Public Works Department. 18. The applicant shall prepare a detailed access and circulation plan for the middle school site that describes the roadway, bicycle, bus-stop, and pedestrian circulation in and around the school. The circulation plan shall provide mitigation measures to ensure safe and efficient ingress and egress for all modes of transportation to the school. The appropri-ate warrant analysis and/or operational analysis shall be provided for any traffic control devices recommended in the plan. The applicant may include recommendations in the plan to reduce parking demand for school events. The plan shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval. Once finalized, the applicant shall implement the mitigation plan prior'to the opening of the school. The following are supplemental conditions that are applicable only to SUB 9136 (Gale IV) 19. The applicant shall construct the village center trail as a public trail, a minimum of 8-feet in width, through Subdivision 9136, to connect Ivy Springs Road to the village center at Dougherty Station, on Bollinger Canyon Road. The public,trail shall be constructed a minimum of 10-feet in width through the neighborhood park. The trail and pedestrian bridge shall be a minimum of 12-feet in width across Main Branch Alamo CT-eek and shall provide a minimum of 2-feet of freeboard. The applicant shall dedicate to the County the right of way for each trail segment on the final map. 21. The applicant shall provide buffer landscaping to screen the existing water quality pond W5 along the main subdivision road. 22. The applicant shall dedicate a flood control access casement from Ivy Spn'n(,,Cs Road to the Main Branch Alamo Creek access road, located on'the east side of the subdivision boundary, and to the pedestrian bridge. 6 EXHIBIT #4 STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OCTOBER 10, 2006 Agenda Item # Community Development Contra Costa County COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, OCTOBER 10, 2006 I. INTRODUCTION SHAPELL HOMES (Applicant and Owner), County Files: General Plan Amendment #GP06-0003; Specific Plan Amendment #SP06-0001; Major Subdivisions #SD06-9034 and#SD06-9036; Minor Subdivision #MS06-00028; Final Development Plan Amendments #DP06-3050; #DP06-5051; and #DP0675052: Applicant requests approval of a General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Amendment, Major and Minor Subdivision and a Final Development Plan as follows (Areas A, B, C, and D are specific location of the project shown on the attached Exhibit C) for the primary purpose of relocating a middle school site . There is no net gain or loss of units. A. General Plan Amendment #GP06-0003: An amendment to the County General Plan (2005-2020) Land Use Element to allow relocation of Middle School originally approved for the Gale Ranch Phase II development (now in the City of San Ramon) to the Phase III development. The request includes the replacement of Multi-Family Residential-Low.Density (ML) land use designation with Public-Semi Public, (PS) and Parks and Recreation (PR) along the northern eastern portion of Gale Ranch Phase 1II, in order to accommodate the Middle School. (Shown as Area B). B. Specific Plan Amendment #SP06-0001: An amendment to the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan to allow modification of Public and Semi-Public (PS) and Parks and Recreation (PR) land use designations for the previous approved Middle School site to Single-Family Residential-Medium Density (SM). Also to modify the Multi- Family Residential-Low Density land use (ML) to Public and Semi-Public (PS), and Parks and Recreation (PR) for the relocation of the middle school site . Several Figures of the document would be revised in order to reflect the relocation of the Middle School and the,corresponding modifications to land use designations of the Gale Ranch development: Proposed changes are depicted in the Errata to the Dougherty Valley 2005 Specific Plan. (Shown as Exhibit D). C. Major Subdivision #SD06-9034 (Portion of Gale Ranch Phase Il: A Vesting Tentative Map to allow modification of SD95-7984 originally approved for 1885 units to allow an increase of 63 residential units to a total of 1948 units (Area A). D. Minor Subdivision #MS06-00028: (Portion of Gale Ranch Phase III): A Minor Subdivision to allow a parcel split where 381 apartment units were originally approved with SD99-8306 into two parcels to allow relocation of Middle School S-2 (Area B) and to allow location of 165 apartment units (Area C). There is a total. reduction in units from the original approved 1423 to 1207 units. E. Manor Subdivision #SD06-9036 (Portion of Gale Ranch Phase IV): A Vesting Tentative Map modification of #SD04-8856 originally approved for 1,306 units to allow an increase of 153 units and to a total of 1459 units. (Area D). F. Final Development Plan # DP06-3050 (Portion of Gale Ranch Phase II): This a final development plan modification to the approved #DP95-3086 to allow relocation of Middle School with 63 detached single family residential units. (Area A). G. Final Development Plan #DP06-3051 (Portion of Gale Ranch Phase III): This is a final development plan modification to the approved #DP99-3006 to reduce number of apartment units from 381 to 165 apartment units and allow location of Middle School. (Area B and Area C). H. Final Development Plan #DP06-3052 (Portion of Gale Ranch Phase IV): This is a final development plan modification to the approved #DP04-3070 approved for 1306 and allow decrease of detached single-family residential units (less 60 units) and increase of apartment units (plus 213 units). (Area D). The portion of the Gale Ranch, Phase II to be modified is located west of Dougherty Road, at the corner of Lilac Ridge Road and North Gale Ridge Road. The portion of Gale Ranch Phase III to be modified is located south of Bollinger Canyon between South Monarch Road and Main Branch Road. The portion of Gale Ranch Phase IV to be modified is located south of IvyLeaf Springs Road between South Monarch Road and Stoneleaf Road in the Dougherty Valley San Ramon area. (Zoning: P-1) (Zoning Atlas Page: W-16) (Census Tract 3551.03 ) (APNs for Phase Il: 222-240-008 and 222-240-009 and APN for Phase III and Phase IV: 222-270-001) II. RECOMMENDATION A. Find that the, Addendum to the 1992 EIR (SCH 491053014) and the 1996 SEIR (SCH #9603003) was presented to the County Planning Commission, and the Commission reviewed and considered the information contained in Addendum along the above mentioned EIRs prior to making a decision on the project and determine that the proposed action will result in new significant environmental impacts, nor will it substantially increase the severity of significant environmental effects previously identified with approved environmental documents; and B. Addendum reflects the County's independent judgment and analysis and was prepared consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State and County CEQA Guidelines and designated the Community Development Department as the custodian of the documents which constitute the record of the proceedings upon which the decision is based; and S-3 C. Adopt a motion to recommend that the Board of Supervisors approve the following: 1. An amendment to the General Plan (2005-2020) Land Use Element to allow relocation of Middle School originally approved for the Gale Ranch Phase II development which is now under jurisdiction of the City of San Ramon. The request also includes the replacement of Multi- Family Residential-Low Density (ML) land use designation with Public- Semi Public, (PS) and Parks and Recreation (PR) along the northern eastern portion of Gale Ranch Phase III, in order to accommodate the Middle School. (Shown as Area B). 2. An amendment to the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan to allow modification of Public and Semi-Public (PS) and Parks and Recreation (PR) land use of previous approved Middle School site to Single-Family Residential-Medium Density (SM). Also to allow modification of Multi- Family Residential-Low Density (ML) to Public and Semi-Public (PS), and Parks and Recreation (PR). Several figures in the document will have to be revised in order to reflect the relocation of the middle school and the corresponding modifications to land use designations of the Gale Ranch development. The proposed changes are. depicted in the Errata to the Dougherty Valley 2005 Specific Plan. (Shown as Area A and B). 3. An amendment to the Final Development Plans #DP06-3050, #DP06- 3051, and #DP06-3052 with the attached findings and conditions of approval. D. Approve the Vesting Tentative Maps (County File #'s SD06-9034 and SD06-9036) and Minor Subdivision (County File # MS06-0028), subject to the attached findings and conditions of approval. The approval of the vesting tentative maps and minor subdivision is subject to the Board's approval of the General Plan and Specific Plan amendments. E. Direct staff to file a Notice of Determination. III. GENERAL INFORMATION A. General Plan: The project site has three different areas. Area A currently has a land use designation of Public-Semi Public, (PS) and Parks and Recreation (PR) (now in. the City of San Ramon). Area B, C, and Area D, are all currently designated as Multi-Family Residential-Low Density (ML) and located within the unincorporated portion of Dougherty Valley. B. Zoning: All areas of the project have a zoning designation of Planned Unit Development, P-1. S-4 C. CEQA Status: In September of 2006, an Addendum to the 1992 EIR (SCH #91053014) and the 1996 SEIR (SCH #96013003) was prepared by the Community Development Department for this project. The proposed project modification is consistent with the previously approved environmental documents. Copies of the 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR, and Addendum were submitted to the Commissioners and additional copies are available at our offices. IV. SITE /AREA DESCRIPTION Area A (Gale II) is located along the west side of Dougherty Road and between Lilac Road and North Gale Ridge Road. Area A includes Parcel A and Parcel B. Parcel A is located immediately north of Parcel B, and it is an open space area to be donated to the Geological Hazard Abatement District, GHAD, approximately 22.3 acres. Parcel B is the location of the previously approved Middle School and approximately 15 acres in size. Area B and C are located south of Bollinger Canyon Road between Main Branch Road and South Monarch Road in the Gale Ranch Phase III development. Area B is approximately 15 acres in size and it is the location of the new proposed Middle School site. Area C is location of the previously approved 381 apartment units within Gale Ranch Phase III. Areas B and C has a total of 21 acres. Area D is located immediately south of Phase III and south of Ivyleaf Springs Road, in the Gale Ranch Phase IV development. Area D has a total of 34 acres. V. BACKGROUND The Dougherty Valley Specific Plan envisioned a middle school located on a 15-acre site near'trails, transit and parks at the intersection of North Gale Ranch Road and Lilac Ridge Road within the Gale Ranch Phase II site. Construction of the middle school is scheduled to commence in the spring of 2007 and the school is scheduled to open for the 2008 school year. In September 2005, the School District requested that Shapell Homes consider relocating the middle school because traffic generated by the already. operating Coyote Creek Elementary school significantly impacted traffic in the neighborhood. Additional traffic that would be generated by the proposed middle school would make traffic conditions worse at that location. To accommodate the School District's request, Shapell Homes has proposed relocation of the middle school to an alternative 15-acre site near trails, transit and parks at the intersection of Bollinger Canyon Road and Monarch Road within the Gale Ranch Phase III area. In June 2006, the County Board of Supervisors authorized a General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Amendment studies relating to the relocation of the S-5 Gale Ranch Middle School within the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan Area. Specifically, the amendment proposal involves replacing the existing middle school site at the intersection of North Gale Ranch Road and Lilac Ridge Road with single family residences, relocating the middle school to a new site at the intersection of Bollinger Canyon Road and Monarch Road now designated for multi-family residences; and relocating the multi-family residences to a new location in the southerly portion of Gale Ranch near a roadway called Ivy Springs Road. This proposal would not result in a net increase or loss of residential units. VI. PROPOSED PROJECT A. Proposed General Plan Changes: An amendment to the Contra Costa County General Plan (2005-2020) Land Use Element Map relating to the relocation of Middle School originally approved for -the Gale Ranch Phase II development (now in the City of San Ramon) to the Gale III Phase. The request includes the replacement of Multi-Family Residential Low Density(ML) use designation with Public-Semi Public, (PS) and Parks and Recreation (PR) along the northern eastern portion of Gale Ranch Phase III, in order to accommodate the Middle School. (Shown as Area B). B. Proposed Dougherty Valley Specific Plan A Specific Plan amendment will be required to modify the existing PS, Public and Semi-Public designation to SM, Single-Family Medium-Density in order to reflect the proposed 63 housing units. Accordingly, the new location of the Middle School, previously designated as ML, Multi-Family- Low Density to PS, Public and Semi-Public to reflect the new location of the middle school. The ML, Multi-Family Residential-Low Density range is 7.3-11.9 dwelling units per net acre. The relocation of units within Phases II, III, and IV will still be consistent with the range of the ML, Multi-Family Residential-Low Density as designated in the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan. In order to reflect modification of land use designations within areas A and B, corresponding modifications would also be needed for the following figures in the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan: Figure 4-1, Land Use; Figure 5-1, Housing Densities; Figure, Figure 7-1, Open Space and Conservation; Figure 8-1, Community Facilities; Figure 9-1, Water Distribution System; Figure 9-2, Reclaimed Water System; Figure 9-3, Wastewater System; and Figure 10-4, Park and Trail Concept. There is also a request to revise a street section as depicted on Street-Major (Double Loaded) street section of Figure 6-7 of the 2005 Specific Plan (previously identified as Figure 1 IA of the 1996 Specific Plan). The section of the 2005 document includes a 5-foot side walk, and 5-foot landscaping strip on both sides of the road. In the 1996 document this section showed 5-foot sidewalk and 5-foot landscaping on one side of the road and an additional option for a 4 S-6 foot sidewalk, and 6-foot landscaping strip. Maintaining this option as originally included in the 1996 Specific Plan provides flexibility for a larger size of landscaping which can offer more water efficiency conservation practices. This optional 4-foot sidewalk and 6-foot landscaping strip option was inadvertently modified in the 2005 Specific Plan update. The proposed street section revision is included in the Errata to the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan as Exhibit D. C. Proposed Vesting Tentative Maps, Minor Subdivision, ,and Related Final Development Plan Amendments: The 1996 Dougherty Valley Specific Plan, and the approved Vesting Tentative Map for phase III (now designated the proposed middle school site, area B as shown on the Exhibit C) for the construction of 216 apartment units, each of which will be displaced by the relocated middle school. To compensate for the displacement of housing at the proposed school site, the previously approved school site area (area A as shown on Exhibit A) will be designated for the construction of 63 single-family units. Within Gale Ranch Phase IV, originally, 110 single-family units and 458 apartment units were planned immediately south of Ivy Leaf Springs Road. The proposed 63 singe-family units to be located on area A are originally relocated out of 100 single-family units of Phase IV. Three single-family units .will be transferred from the existing 458 apartment units (458 apartments minus 3 single- family units equals 455 apartment units) of Phase IV. Phase IV (area D as shown on Exhibit A) will be designated for the construction of a total 671. apartment units (455 + 216 units from previous Phase III) and 50 single-family homes. The construction of single-family units on.the original school site (Gale II) and the reconfiguration of units within Gale III and Gale IV will not result in an increase or loss of residential units. Development Currently After # of Units Area Planned Relocation Changed A Middle School 63 Single Family + 63 Units Gale II Medium Density 381 Apartments 900 - Student B Middle'School - 216 Units Gale III 165 Apartments C Single Family Gale III High Density D 110 Singe-Family 671 Apartments + 153 Units Gale IV 458 Apartments 50 Single Family Medium and High Density Total 949 Units 949 Units 0 Middle School Middle School S-7 VII. AGENCY COMMENTS No Comments were received from the Town of Danville. Copies of all of the Agency comments are attached to this report. A. San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District: A letter dated July 31, 2006, includes standard fire district requirements, such as approved addresses shall be visible and legible and requirements of plans for review and approval by the district. B. Dublin San Ramon Services District: A letter dated July 25, 2006 includes standard requirements of the district, such as plans shall be reviewed for approval, water mains must provide sufficient capacity, and improvements plans should include recycled water. C. East Bay Municipal Utility District: A letter dated July 26, 2006, states that in order to provide water for the new 63 residential homes within the previous middle school area, the District would have to amend the Dougherty Valley Settlement Agreement. New fees and additional charges would apply for the new 63 residences. D. Contra Costa County Sheriff Office, Administration and Community Services: A letter dated July 24, 2006 states that the Sheriff has no comments on this application. E. City of San Ramon: A letter from the City of San Ramon, dated September 28, 2006, has a list of concerns. The comments include general comments and specific comments regarding the traffic studies. Most of the general comments are concerns that are typically handled as part of the preparation of each final map improvement plan, and as part of the design review that takes place before the City's Architectural Review Board. Most of the general concerns are not typically included as part of conditions of approval. Staff has provided a response to each individual.concern. General Comments: 1. The City has expressed concerns regarding noise and truck traffic and is requesting noise generating activities be limited from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday, and that transporting of heavy equipment be limited from 9:00 am to 4:00 pm. Staff Response: Historically, the limitation of noise generating construction activities for the entire Gale Ranch development have been 7:30 am to 5:30 pm, Monday through Friday. Staff has determined that because the hours of construction have been historically from 7:30 am to S-8 5:30 pm through out the Gale Ranch development and because the County does not find a strong basis to have different construction hours for the proposed project area, staff is recommending that no changes be made to the noise generating construction hours. In addition, staff has determined that if different hours are imposed for the proposed project area only, it would be difficult and impractical for the County to monitor the two different hours of operation when this is in effect one large development/construction area. As already conditioned for the Gale Ranch development, transporting of heavy equipment are limited from the hours of 9:00 am to 4:00 pm. 2. Notify the surrounding neighbors within 300-foot radius of Subdivision 9134. Staff Response: The typical condition of notification requires that.notice be provided one week prior to commencement of activities. Staff has added a condition (See Condition No. 3) which states that the applicant will provide notice to neighbors of Subdivision 9134 (Gale lI) 30 days prior to construction activities. 3. and 4. Add condition that encroachment permit is required for areas of the development that are now part of the City's jurisdiction. Staff Response: This requirement is not typically included as part of. a condition of approval. The Advisory note section of the Condition of Approval will indicate that the applicant will need to comply with all the requirements of the City of San Ramon, including any required permit. 5. City is concerned that proposed 212 parking spaces for the Middle School are not enough for special events such as parent/teacher night. Staff Response: Staff is recommending that the County, the City, School District, and developer work together to identify alternative parking spaces for special events. The County also suggests that consideration be given to alternative modes of transportation, including but not limited, to walking and car pooling. See Condition No. 4. 6. Park Plans for Middle School will need to be reviewed by the City's Park Commission prior to construction. Staff Response: All parks within the Gale Ranch development have been reviewed by the City's Park Commission, either concurrently with the County or prior to County's review. 7. Plans for Subdivision 9134 to be reviewed by the City's Architectural Review Board. S-9 Staff Response: In accordance to the Memorandum of Understanding between the City of San Ramon, and the County, each housing product of the Gale Ranch development has been reviewed by the San Ramon Architectural review Board. 8. A condition should be added to include the 63 proposed homes in Subdivision 9134 as part of Gale I Homeowners Association. Staff Response: The proposed 63 homes are part of Gale II, however, geographically near the boundary of Gale I development. Because neither the County nor the applicant has the legal authority to make this decision, staff has added a condition (See Condition No. 5) that will require the applicant to make an effort to request the Gale I Homeowners Association to incorporate the proposed 63 lots as part of their association. 9. Some of the City's new standard design details now contain concrete rock finish on water fountains and recycling containers. Staff Response: The City will have an opportunity to comment on design issues as they are presented before their Architectural Design Review Board. 10. All signalized intersections should incorporate the City's logo atop the nearest mast arm pole of the Signal Cabinet and not in the Service Pedestal. Staff Response: No new signals are proposed as part of the proposed project. All signals have been already installed. Staff does not recommend imposing new conditions on signals that have been already reviewed and approved and not part of this project. 11. Raised paved markers should be places on major arterials. Staff Response: This is a request that will be addressed and incorporated as part of the improvement plans of each final map. 12. Smaller standard painted arrows should be used along all turn pockets. Staff Response: Consideration will be given to smaller painted arrows as long as they meet County and Caltrans standards. S-10 Comments Regarding the Traffic Study The City has indicated that it does not agree that an all-way stop design is warranted at the school driveway/South Monarch Road intersection and that it is the City's understanding that the split phasing of the traffic signal could be looked again when the school layout is confirmed. Staff Response: The applicant has indicated that both of the concerns of the City's will be analyzed by the City; County, applicant, and School District once the final plans of the school are available. See Condition No. 6. VIII. DVOC The proposed Middle School and related residential units relocation was presented before the Dougherty Valley Oversight Committee (DVOC) on July 29, 2006 meeting. At that time the Traffic Study prepared for this project was not available. A special meeting of DVOC was held on September 18, 2006 at which time the traffic study results were presented. At the September 18`h meeting, DVOC voted unanimously to recommend approval of the Traffic Study as recommended by Dowling Associates, the County's peer reviewer of the Hexagon Traffic Study. IX. STAFF ANALYSIS /DISCUSSION As previously discussed, relocation of the middle school will require changes to four development areas in the Gale Ranch project. Exhibit "C" schematically shows the locations of the affected development areas labeled as "A," "B," "C" and "D." The middle school relocation will not change the developed acreage of the development areas. As the Modified Land Use Summary Table below shows, the middle school relocation will change the planned use and/or the number and type of residential units constructed in the above-mentioned development areas. The relocation will affect two Gale Ranch housing types:. apartments and single-family units. These home types are located in neighborhoods with apartments nearest to and in the Village Center as originally contemplated by the 1992 EIR and the 1996 SEIR. With the middle school relocation, apartments will remain nearest to and in the Village Center. No additional land that is not currently designated for development by the 1992 EIR and the 1996 SEIR will be developed as a result of the middle school relocation. Area "A," the original school site:, will be designated for the construction of 63 single family units on lots sized consistent with existing single family unit lots located adjacent to the Original School Site. These 63 single family units will be relocated from Area "D" for the purpose of assuring that no net gain or loss of residential units occurs as a result of the middle school relocation. The middle school will be relocated to Area "B," the new school site, which is a 15 acre portion of the 21acre parcel created by the Gale Ranch Phase III Vesting Tentative Map. This 21 acre parcel was originally designated for the construction of a total of 381 S-11 apartments. The remaining 6 acres of this development area is depicted as Area "C" and will be developed with 165 apartment units as originally planned. Area "D" is currently designated for multiple family low density use and plarmed for the construction of 110 single-family units and 458 apartment units. From this area, 63 single family units will be relocated to Area "A." The 216 apartment units displaced by the relocation of the middle school to Area "B" will be relocated to Area "D" adding to the 458 apartment units currently planned for Area "D" resulting in a total of 671 apartments. The remainder of Area "D" will be designated for the construction of 50 single family homes. The apartments are three-stories in height and will be constructed closest to the Village Center as previously planned. The complex will include one covered garage space for each unit, and there is a shared recreation center for the apartment dwellers. The proposed General Plan and Specific Plan amendments will not conflict with the density of the previous land use designations. The Tentative Maps and Final Development Plan Amendments will keep the character of the Dougherty Valley as originally approved and reviewed in the 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR documents_ X. TRAFFIC STUDY A. June 21, 2006 Traffic Study Hexagon Transportation Consultants prepared a traffic analysis for the middle school relocation (Hexagon Report) by under contract with Shapell Homes a copy of which is attached. The purposes of the Hexagon Report were: 1. To evaluate the middle school relocation plan for compliance with the traffic level of service standards of the Contra Costa Transportation Improvement and Growth Management Program (Measure Q. The traffic study followed, and adhered to the guidelines set forth in CCTA's Technical Procedures Manual. 2. To evaluate the middle school relocation plan for its consistency with the traffic and transportation policies of the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan. 3. To analyze the traffic level-of-service and internal circulation effects of the proposed development at "local" intersections in the immediate vicinity of the affected development areas. The Hexagon Report Study is based on an enrollment assumption of 900 students, and analyzes the estimated trip generation of the school and the required pick-up and drop-off areas. The trip generation rates and vehicle estimates for the middle school at the New School Site are determined to be as follows: S-12 Trip Generation Estimates for Gale Ranch Middle School AM Peak Hour School PM Peak Hour Peak-Hr. Pear-Hr. Land Use Size Rate In Out Total Rate In Out Total Proposed Use Middle School 900 students 0.97 478 391 869 0.50 210 237 447 The table shows an estimate of 900 AM peak hour trips, with 478 inbound and 391 outbound (vehicles dropping off students) and reflects the likelihood that some students will carpool, walk or bicycle to school, some are absent and some will arrive later in the day. The difference in inbound trips, 87 trips (478 — 391 = 87), represents primarily staff arriving at the school. At the end of the school day, the trip estimates show 210 inbound vehicle trips, to pick up students, and 237 outbound trips. AM peak hour trips exceed afternoon trips as more students walk home, carpool or stay after school and leave at a later time, as do staff. A total of approximately 1,022 feet of drop-off space will be required to accommodate the drop-off activities. The study assumes two lanes will be used for drop-off and pick- up along the school access driveway, which will run though the New School Site from the existing Main Branch Road to South Monarch Road as depicted on Figure 2 of the Relocation Traffic Study attached as Exhibit B. This will provide the necessary 1,022 feet of drop-off area. A third lane will be constructed on the access driveway so that vehicles . can bypass the drop-off/pick-up area and can access the parking lot. During the after- school pick-up time, fewer trips will occur but each pick-up takes longer than a drop-off. To avoid excess conflicts along South Monarch and Main Branch roads, the school access driveway will be one-way (entering at Main Branch Road an exiting at South Monarch Road). To facilitate entry into the school access driveway, a right turn lane will be provided on southbound Main Branch Road and a left turn pocket provided on vehicles entering from northbound Main Branch Road. Intersection Level of Service The CCTA LOS method was used to compute the level of service for all of the signalized intersections. This method is described in the Contra Costa Transportation Authority's "Technical Procedures"; and identifies the critical conflicting movements at an intersection and.computes the ratio of volume to capacity for each conflicting critical movement during the peak hour. The critical movement volume/capacity ratios are summed to obtain the intersection volume/capacity ratio: The level of service is then keyed to the computed intersection volume/capacity ratio. The levels of service at signalized intersections were also evaluated using the Year 2000 edition of the Highway Capacity Manual. This method calculates the level of service based on the weighted average vehicular delay during the peak hour. S-13 Unsignalized intersections were analyzed using the methodology described in the Year 2000 edition of the Highway Capacity Manual. This method computes the delay for each movement at an unsignalized intersection and reports the level of service for each movement according to the delay during the peak hour. All intersections are projected to operate at acceptable levels of service for the middle school relocation. The analysis shows that the changes in traffic volumes resulting for the land use proposed for each development area would not have a significant impact on the traffic operations at the Dougherty Valley intersections. During discussion of the Hexagon Report County staff was interested in providing more detailed information on potential impacts from the project to the intersection of Camino Tassajara/Crow Canyon Road in Danville, which was a critical intersection in the Dougherty Valley Settlement Agreement. Hexagon reviewed the plots of the traffic forecasts and found the following: The proposed changes in land use types for the areas identified as development sites A through D are not expected to cause significant changes in traffic volumes on the roadway system outside the Dougherty Valley area. Although the magnitude and directional orientation of school traffic and residential traffic differs, the projected changes in traffic volumes outside the Dougherty Valley would be minimal. Traffic volumes on Dougherty Road, north of Gale' Ridge Road are projected to decrease slightly with the new plan because the 63 residential units on site A would generate fewer trips on Dougherty Road compared to the traffic volumes the middle school would generate. The first two plots in Appendix B of the Hexagon Report show the AM peak-hour travel patterns for the middle school and for the 63-single family units, respectively. These plots show that the residential units would add six vehicles (three in each direction) to Dougherty Road, north of Gale Ridge Road, which is more than off-set by the 61 vehicles (57 southbound and 4 northbound - these volumes are not depicted on the plot) that the middle school would add to this roadway segment. Therefore, relocating the middle school would slightly reduce traffic volumes on the roadways north of Dougherty Valley. Relocating the middle school would not significantly affect the traffic operations at the intersection of Camino Tassajara Road and Crow Canyon Road. B. September 22, 2006 Peer Review and Traffic Safety/Circulation Report As requested by the County Community Development Department, Dowling Associates prepared a peer review of the Hexagon June 21, 2006 Report, and a traffic safety/circulation report (Dowling Repori). The report consists of peer review of the traffic impact analysis conducted by Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. for the Gale Ranch Middle School relocation (Hexagon Report). The second part included traffic safety and circulation evaluation of the Final Development Plan, Vesting tentative Map, General Plan, and Specific Plan Amendment for Gale ranch Phases, I1, III, and IV. S-14 The peer review analysis in the Dowling Report determined that the Hexagon Report adequately discloses the impacts of the proposed relocation of school and shift in planning residential units. As described earlier in this section ,the Hexagon Report was based on earlier land use information prepared by the applicant that has since been corrected. The peer review analysis in the Dowling Report found that, based on the baseline Levels of Service at the study intersections, it did not appear that further refinements of the study area's trip generation and trip distribution would result in any new significant impacts. . The peer review analysis in'the Dowling Report agreed with the following recommendations of the Hexagon Report to accommodate or minimize queuing: • prohibit parking on the southbound curbside lanes adjacent to the school on Main Branch Road, and that it be restriped as a right-turn only lane into the school's driveway; • provide a southbound right turn lane and'northbound left turn lane from Main Branch Road into the school driveway, with traffic flow on the access road restricted to the southwest direction (i.e. one-way); and • configure the entrance to the school driveway to allow concurrent northbound left turns and southbound right turns. The peer review analysis of the Dowling Report recommended modification (in italics) to the following recommendations from the Hexagon Report to accommodate or minimize queuing: • Install a four-way stop, or use a crossing guard at the school driveway exit on South Monarch to facilitate student crossings on the south side of this intersection. Crossing- guard activity in the south crosswalk would also create gaps in traffic necessary for traffic exiting the school driveway. • The School District should provide three lanes on the school driveway internal to the school site, with the right lane used for passenger drop-off/pick and the center lane and left lane be used as through lanes. In addition the School District should allow use off` the 190-space school parking lot for passenger drop-off/pick-up. The peer review analysis of the Dowling Report reiterated the need identified in the Hexagon Report for the School District to provide active traffic control by school personnel during student arrival and departure times. School personnel should direct the lead vehicles to pull all the way forward in the curbside drop-off lane to maximize the efficiency of this lane. The traffic safety and circulation section of the Dowling Report evaluated the existing access problem of the Coyote Elementary,School. The existingaccess problem is caused primarily by a school site design that causes many parents to prefer to drop off and pick up their children on the public streets in front of the school, rather than on the school site itself. The result is many pedestrians crossing North Gale Ridge Road and many on- street parking maneuvers at these times. The existing exit of the school's one-way loop driveway has limited visibility due to on-street parking and the curvature of the road. S-15 The Dowling Report provides a number of recommendations for the School District to consider, in cooperation with the City of San Ramon, should the School District seek to improve the accessibility of the entrance to Coyote Elementary School. The Dowling Report also determined that motor vehicle traffic safety and circulation were adequately addressed and consistent with applicable County goals, policies and standards. The recommendations affecting the School District should be .addressed as part of the District's projects. The remaining recommendations from the Hexagon Report and Dowling Report address the Project and are consistent with or represent minor refinements to mitigation measures described in the 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR. Accordingly, the proposed amendments will have no additional significant new changes or substantially change the already identified impacts analyzed in the 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR; therefore, no additional mitigation measures will be required. A more comprehensive summary of the Traffic Study is available in the attached Addendum. XI. AFFORDABLE HOUSING The Gale Ranch Phase III development includes a variety of multi-family units. Of the previously approved 1423 units, 58% was approved to be multi-family or attached units, including 381 apartment units, 188 townhomes, 196 condominiums, 78 Courtyard Homes (cluster of 5 units) and 25 "Modified" Courtyard Homes. Of the 381 apartment units, 160 units was approved to be set aside for very low and low income units. The remainder 221 of the 381 apartment units was approved to be available to moderate income households. With the proposed project, only 165 units of the 381 apartment units are going to remain in Phase III and the additional 216 will be relocated to Phase IV. The Community Development has demonstrated concerns in regards to the timing of the construction of the remaining 216 affordable units that are proposed to be relocated from Phase III development to Phase IV. In order to address this issue staff is recommending that applicant shall ensure that Phase IV will have a minimum of 635 affordable rental units. The applicant will also be required to submit a plan for approval of the County indicating how it will meet the requirements of the Dougherty Valley Affordable Housing Program, DVAHP, and that the Phase IV will provide integration of affordable units to the maximum extent feasible. See conditions No. 7,No. 8 and No. 9. XII. CONCLUSION: Staff recommends approval of Vesting Tentative Maps (#SD06-9034 and #SD06-9036) and Minor Subdivision (#MS06-0028), subject to the attached findings and conditions. Staff recommends the Commission adopt a motion to recommend that the Board of Supervisors approve the General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan Amendment, and amendments to the Final Development Plans as discussed in this report. Staff also recommends that the Commission find that the Addendum to the 1992 EIR and the 1996 S-16 SEIR was prepared in accordance with State and County CEQA Guidelines and deter-mine that the proposed action will not result in new significant environmental impacts, and will not substantially increase the seventy of significant environmental effects previously identified with approved environmental documents. List of Attachments: Exhibit A: Proposed General Plan Amendment Exhibit B: Proposed Specific Plan Amendment Exhibit C: Proposed Project Site Areas Exhibit D: Errata to the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan Relevant Correspondences Conditions of Approval Addendum to EIR Exhibit E: Traffic Studies: June 21, 2006 Hexagon Traffic Study September 22, 2006,Dowling Associates—Peer Review and Traffic/Circulation Report PERTINENT CORRESPONDENCES San:Kamon �<r .T CTTY OF SAN RAMON 2222 CAMIN)RA MON. SAN RAMON.CALIFORNIA 9458; P)ION[: (925)973-2500 WF.H SITE: \1n\'W'.5:4NRA�10N.C:\.GOV September 28, 2006 Ms. Telma Moreira Senior Planner Contra Costa County Community Development 651 Pine Street, 4th Floor,North Wing Martinez, CA 94553-0095 Subject: Comments on Gale Ranch Phase 2, 3 & 4 Final Development Plan, Vesting Tentative Map, General Plan & Specific Plan Amendment — County File #GP06-0003/SP06-0001/SD06-9034/SD06-9036/MS06-00028/DP06- 3050/DP06-5051/DP06-5052 Dear Ms. Moreira; As provided for in the Memorandum of Understanding, between Contra Costa County, the City of San Ramon, Shapell 'Industries and Windemere Ranch Partners relating to the Dougherty Valley (MOU), the City of San Ramon is providing comments for the above referenced plans. To date we have received the Gale Ranch Phase 2, 3 & 4 Final Development Plan, Vesting Tentative Map, General Plan &.Specific Plan Amendment (dated September 12, 2006), a Traffic Analysis (dated June 21, 2006) prepared by Hexagon Consultants for Shapell Industries, and a Peer Review and Traffic Safety/Circulation Report (dated September 22, 2006) prepared by Dowling Associates, Inca for Contra Costa County Community Development, therefore our comments are related to these above documents. Overall Comments 1. Recently the City has experienced concerns regarding noise and truck traffic. Because these modifications will be impacting current City of San Ramon residents please include a condition of approval that states: Noise generating construction activities, including such things as power generators, should be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday thru Friday and prohibited on state & federal holidays. In addition, the transporting of heavy equipment and trucks should be limited to week days between the hours of 9:00 am and 4:00 pm. In addition we would like the opportunity to review the construction "haul route". 2. Please include a condition to notify the surrounding homeowners within a 300' radius of Subdivision 9134, 30 days prior to construction activities. 3. Lilac Ridge Road was accepted by the City of San Ramon for maintenance on January 2004. Therefore, please provide a condition of approval that would require the developer N:\$11rojectslSan RamonlDougherty Va))e1v1$5Specific Plan\2006\g).3.4FDPamend_submit_comments.doc Mr. Telma Moreira September 28, 2006 Page 2 of 3 to obtain an encroachment permit from the City of San Ramon for construction activities related to that area. 4. Bollinger Canyon Road was accepted by the City of San Ramon for maintenance on February 2005. Therefore, please provide a condition of approval that would require the developer to obtain an encroachment permit from the City of San Ramon for construction activities related to the Middle School. 5. The Middle School parking is shown as 212 on-site spaces, this is similar to other schools in the area. However, the roadway plans for RA 1154 (Main Branch Road and South Monarch Road) have already been approved and do not provide for on-street parking. In fact South Monarch Road has been constructed at this time. The 212 on-site spaces are not sufficient for events such as parent/teacher night, concerts, etc. and there is concern that on-street parking is not provided. We would suggest that the City, County, Developer and School district work together to resolve this issue during these special events to maximize offsite parking. 6. Park plans for the park located at the Middle School will need to be reviewed by the City of San Ramon's Parks Commission prior to construction. 7. Plans for the housing product placed in Subdivision 9134 will need to be review by the City of San Ramon Architectural Review Board. 8. A condition should be written to include the 63 homes in Sub 9134 into the Gale 1 Homeowner's Association. 9. Some of the City's Standard details have been updated recently to include concrete rock finish on water fountains, and new recycling containers. These should be incorporated. 10. All signalized intersections should incorporate the City's Logo on the illuminated street signs and photocells to control these devices should be placed atop the nearest mast arm pole to the Signal Cabinet and not in the Service Pedestal. 1 l. Raised pavement markers should be placed on major arterials. 12. If possible, smaller standard painted arrows should be used along all turn pockets. Comments Retarding Specific Plan Amendment 1. Please provide the City with an electronic copy (preferably in PDF format) of the Amended Specific Plan. Comments Retarding the Traffic Studies 1. Dowling/Hexagon — After discussions, the City does still not agree that an all-way stop sign is warranted at the school driveway/South Monarch Road intersection. If implemented, there could be safety conflicts from conditions produced by unwarranted stop signs (i.e. high non-compliance motorists, a false sense of security by both pedestrians and vehicles exiting from the driveway/side street location). As a result, the unwarranted stop sign would also likely result in police enforcement issues. Due to the limited crossing times by students and school traffic, safe traffic control may be better served by establishing an adult crossing guard at this location. If future traffic conditions warrant an all-way stop sign control, the City could implement the traffic control improvement at that time. 2. Dowling — regarding the split phasing used on page 3 item 10. On our conference call NA Projects\San Ramon\Dougherty Valley\$$Specific Plan\2006\gl,3.4FDPamend_submit_comments.doc Mr. Telma Moreira September 28. 2006 Page 3 of 3 August 30, 2006 with all parties, it was agreed that the split phasing could be looked at by the City of San Ramon staff again when the school layout is confirmed. Thank you for your consideration and assistance in this matter. Please provide the City with any additional information regarding this approval. If you have any questions regarding these comments please contact Jennifer White at, (925) 867-3400. Sincerely, Phil Wong Planning Services Director by: Jenri'i r A UJh�te Dougherty Valley Project Manager :c Joye Fukuda,Engineering Services Director Jeff Eorio,Parks&Community Services Director Lisa Bobadilla,Transportation Services Manager Maria Robinson,Engineering Services Manager Karen McNamara,Public Services Director Jean Paul Ripert,Engineering Services Inspector Marshal Torre,Shapell Industries N:Wrojects\San Raman\Dougherty Valley\$$Specific Plan\2006\gl,3.4FDPamend_submit_comments.doc EAST SAY MUNICIPAL UTILITY visrRICT September 26, 2006 �C OCT 4'A4/VD 2 zoos Telma Moreira 0 Community Development Department �P1' Contra Costa County 651 Pine Street, N, Wing-41" Floor Martinez, CA 94553 Re Intent to Serve 63 Single-Family Homes, Gale Ranth Project—Dougherty Valley Settlement.Agreement Amendment Dear Ms. Moreira: This-letter cxpresses East Bay Municipal Utility District's (EBMCJD) intent, subject to approval by EBMUD's Board of an amendment to the 1995 Dougherty Valley Settlement AgreEmcttt (DVSA), to provide water service (conditioned on Contra Costa County land use approvals)to -the 63 single- family detached homes located at the intersection of North Gale Ranch Road and Lilac Ridge Road (site originally planned for a middle school)in San Ramon. The site is inside the EBN 1LM service area and adjacent to EBMUD's Ultimate Service Boundary, Ail amendment to the 1995 DVSA will need to address the proposed land use changes as well as the proposed water demand mitigation approach and related water conservation recon-imendatimis. The amendment will also need to be signed by each of the original parties (including EBMUD, Shapell Industries of Northern California, Windemere Ranch Partners; and Contra Costa Comity) after the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisor acts on the proposed land use changes, which is expected later this year. If you have any questions, please call me at(510) 287-1182. Sincerely, 7�, 2oseph M. Callahan Customers Services Manager New Business Office JMC;HPI-I:sb sbOG_ZHS.doo cc: M. Torre, Shapell Industries X. Irias W. Kirkpatrick 37s ELEVENTH STREET. OAKLAND. U WW7.1210. TOLL FREE 14664040MUO I00 'd -/Z2 3Z6 :1Si t21 (9fl,L190 ,20- 100 San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District 1500 Bollinger Road ~ San Ramon,CA 94583 Telephone: (925) D38'6dU0 Fax: (925) 838'6690 -.^^~ 78l/2UU6 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY ATTN:T2LMAK4DRElDA 651 Pine Street,4th floor,North wing, Suite Community D Martinez,CAV4553'0O95 ` Permit No: Type ofReview: Misc. Planning Applications Business Name and New Middle School Site Address: Bollinger Canyon&Monarch San Ramon Applicant Name and Gale Ranch III Address: New Middle School Site Bollinger Canyon&Monarch San Ramon,CA 94583 ` The District has reviewed the subject planning application and based upon the information provided ne would like to offer the following comments and recornmendations for conditions of approval. Conditions I Approved numbers oraddresses shall b \ oed on all new and existing buildings insuch a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Said numbers shall contrast with their background. 2 Other Project shall maintain prior plan review comment requirements. Submittal Requirements 1 Submit(2) full sets of building architectural plans to the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District for review and approval. 2 Submit plans for all gates crossing fire department access roads(nubUc, private streets, roads and insome instances driveways used for vehicle access)for review and approval bySan Ramon Valley Fire Protection District prior toconstruction. 3 Other Project shall maintain prior plan review comment requirements. lfdurinc,the course ofthe entitlement process the project changes uddionu requirements may apply. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposed project, If you have any questions please contact the undersigned uz(y25)838-660O. Darrell Jones ' Fire Inspector ' r uernu5 w.marry,Au.r l✓U11 i 111 U 111 Cy . V o n tra Community Development Director Development Costa Department County JUL � � ME Administration Building S G..L_ 651 Pine Street -: `'°� R V F 4th Floor, North Wing Martinez, California 94553-0095 T,, r Phone: (925)335-1214 `, Date: c�s1 coati AGENCY COMMENT REQUEST We request your comments regarding the attached application currently under review. DISTRIBUTION Please submit your comments as follows: _Building Inspection HSD,Environmental Health,Concord Project Planner 1 a E!Yh a. K^1 rD 1'f tYrs RSD,Hazardous Materials SDo m. 3 4, y q t 3 (, P/W-Flood Control(Full Size) County File M,5 p b. or 2 8 �-�� p( 00£3 3 P/W-Engineering Svcs(Full Size) Number: o Baa i Date Forwarded D Pa �_ 3-as t 3 o S t u...-d 30 ,5 .? _P/W Traffic(Reduced) Prior To: ! 3 1 2 rn to P/W Special Districts (Reduced) Comprehensive Planning We have found the following special programs Redevelopment Agency apply to this application: _Historical Resources Information System CA Native Amer.Her. Comm. AA2 Redevelopment Area CA Fish & Game,Region US Fish &Wildlife Service /Active Fault Zone -x Fire District ,• g6qF_4 u Sanitary District r r r D Flood Hazard Area, Panel#' ,2 Water District _ City 3z' o-,-.t, M fle'' AA0 60 dBA Noise Control r School District, Sheriff Office-Admin. &Comm.Svcs. A10 CA EPA Hazardous Waste Site _Alamo Improvement Association El Sobrante Pig. &Zoning Committee Traffic Zone _MAC DOIT-Dep. Director, Communications CEQA Exempt CAC R-7A Alamo Categorical Exemption Section CDD-GIS Community Organizations Please indicate the code section of recommendations that are required by law or ordinance. Please send copies of your response to the Applicant & Owner. No comments on this application. Our comments are attached. Comments: Signature SAn1 PWmOA) UPrUZY )5Ir­e _ Agency 7/3l v(0 Date Office Hours Monday - Friday: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Office is closed the 1 st, 3rd & 5th Fridays of each month YVL LY VY YI •`t 11'1111 I I\Vltl I LYL I - YI/YJ i JYJ SAN J o PROJECT APPROVAL CONDITIONS T0: City of San Ramon Planning Services Division DATE: July 25,2006 Arm.: Telma Moreira.Proiect Planner FROM: Dublin San Ramon Services Dititrict Reviewed by: Aaron Johnson_ Enginerrine Tech./GIS Specia� v SUBJECT: Proposed Relocation of GALE II Middle School Listed below are standard conditions of approval to be included when approval of the project cited above is being considered. Standard conditions that are checked should be incorporated into the final conditions of approval, along with any special conditions that arc listed under the "Special Conditions" subheading which follows the Standard Conditions- DSRSD will appreciatethe opportunity to review the Final Conditions of Approval prepared by the City prior to project approval- Standard Conditions ✓ 1. Prior to issuance of any building permit, complete improvement plans shall be submitted to DSRSD that conform to the requirements of the Dublin San Ramon Services District Code, the DSRSD '-Standard Procedures, Specifications and Drawings for Design and Installation of Water and Wastewater Facilities", all applicable DSRSD Master Plans and all DSRSD policies. ✓ 2. All mains shall be sized to provide sufficient capacity to accommodate future flow demands in addition to each development project's demand. Layout and sizing of mains shall be in conformance with DSRSD utility master planning. 3. Sewers shall be designed to operate by gravity flow to DSRSD's existing sanitary sewer system. Pumping of sewage is discouraged and may only be allowed under extreme circumstances following a case by case review with DSRSD staff. Any pumping station will require specific review and approval by DSRSD of prclitninary design reports, design criteria, and final plans and specifications. The DSRSD reserves the right to require payment of present worth 20 year maintenance costs as well as other conditions within a separate agreement with the applicant for any project that requires a pumping station. ✓ 4. Domestic and fire protection waterline systems for Tracts or Commercial Developments shall be designed to be looped or interconnected to avoid dead end sections in accordance with requirements of the DSRSD Standard Specifications and sound engineering practice. ✓ 5. DSRSD policy requires public water and sewer Iines to be located in public streers rather than in off-street locations to the fullest extent possible. If unavoidable, then public sewer or water easements must be established over the alignment of each public sewer or water line in an off-street or private street location to provide access for future maintenance and/or replacement. H�ENGDEFT%COA\SA.NRAMON\,Propwcd Rclocauou of GALE 11 Mi=c School DOC JUL-26-06 07:41 AM FROM- T-262 P . 02/03 F-943 Projcct Appro,ai Ca a Lnous pagc 2 of 3 ✓ b. Prior to approval by the City of a grading permit or a site development permit, the locations and widths of all proposed Casement dedications for water and sewer lines shall be subrnirted to and approved by DSRSD. 1009 7. All easement dedications for DSRSD facilities shall be by separate instrument irrevocably offered to DSRSD or by offer of dedication on the Final Map. ✓ S. Prior to approval by the City for Recordation, the Final Map shall be submitted to and approved by DSRSD for easement locations, widths, and restrictions. ✓ 9. Prior to issuance by the City of any Building Permit or Construction Permit by The Dublin San Ramon Services District, whichever comes first, all utility connection fees including DSRSD and "Lone 7, plan checking fees, inspection fees, connection fees, and fees associated with .a wastewater dischcrgr permit shall be paid ro DSRSD in accordance with the rates and schedules established in The DSRSD Code. ✓ 10. Prior to issuance by the City of any Building Permit or Construction Permit by the Dublin San Ramon Services District, whichever comes first, all irnprovement plans for DSRSD.facilities shall be signed by the District Engineer. Each drawing of improvement plans shall contain a signature block for the District Engineer indicating approval of the sanitary sewer or water facilities shown. Prior to approval by the District Engineer, the applicant shall pay all required DSRSD fees, and provide an engineer's estimate of construction costs for the sewer and water systems, a performance bond,a one-year maintenance bond, and a comprehensive general liability insurance policy,in the amounts and forms that are acceptable to DSRSD. The applicant shall allow at least 15 working days for final improvement drawing review by DSRSD before signature by the District .Engineer. ✓ 11. No sewer line or waterline construction shall be permitted unless the proper utility construction permit has been issued by DSRSD. A construction permit will only be issued after all of the items in Condition No. y have been satisfied. ✓ 12. The applicant shall hold DSRSD, its Board of Directors, commissions, employees, and agents of DSRSD harmless and indemnify and defend the same from any litigation, claims, or fines resulting from the construction and completion of the.project. 1/ 13. Improvement plans shall include recycled water improvements as required by DSRSD. Services for landscape irrigation shall connect to recycled water mains. Applicant must obtain a copy of the DSRSD Recycled Water Use Guidelines and conform to the requirements therein. H.\ENGDEFT\CDAtiSA.NRAMON\Pruposca Rdocauon of GALE 11 Middle School DOC JUL-25-06 07:41AM FROM- T-NZ P. 03/03 F-943 Proj=:Approvaj Candi4ons Page 3 of 3 -Special Conditions A Transfer Agreement shall b,-- entered into between Shapell Industries of Northern California (Shapell) and the San Ramon Valley Unified School District (SRVUSD) under which certain Shapell obligations in the Areawide Facility Agreements between Shapell and the District will be assigned to the SRVUSD. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Should you have any questions concerning the above; please contact Aaron Johnson at (925) 875-2246- li:�ENGDEtMCOAkSANRAMC)N\J-'ropo,;ca Relocauon of GALE 11 Micalc School.DOC C o m m u n ity ����� Dennis M.Barry,AICP Development Community Development Director osta Department County County Administration Building 651 Pine Street 4th Floor. North Wing KA Martinez, California 94553-0095 hc. illlam +II (925)335-1210 - Phone: ;;�; Date: �7-i cniiti't'�= AGENCY COMMENT REQUEST We request your comments regarding the attached application currently under review. DISTRIBUTION Please submit vour comments as follows: Building Inspection ` HSD,Environmental Health, Concord Project Planner L a w`ro 4' I tra HSD,Hazardous Materials SDo(,„ �j;3 4 P/W-Flood Control (Full Size) County File M,5, 0 6_ a�2 9 P/N'- Engineering Svcs (Full Size) Number: 5 P o 0o f Date Forwarded D Po �_ 34 S 1 a 6 51 ,—a 3 o S z _P/W Traffic (Reduced) Prior To: /_ 3 1 , Zen 0 � P/W Special Districts (Reduced) — Comprehensive Planning We have found the following special programs Redevelopment Agency apply to this application: —Historical Resources Information System CA Native Amer. Her. Comm. AA2 Redevelopment Area CA Fish & Game,Region US Fish & Wildlife Service _Active Fault Zone Fire District -%,, 4,.w,,d,,, --�L Sanitary District L C C q n L Flood Hazard Area,Panel# x Water District -e--City a-,.,1i &V 60 dBA Noise Control School District Sheriff Office-Admin. & Comm. Svcs. A10 CA EPA Hazardous Waste Site Alamo Improvement Association E1 Sobrante Plg. & Zoning Committee Traffic Zone _MAC _DOIT-Dep. Director, Communications CEQA Exempt CAC R-7A Alamo Categorical Exemption Section. _CDD-GIS Community Organizations Please indicate the code section of recommendations that are required by law or ordinance. Please send copies of your response to the Applicant & Owner. No comments on this application. Our comments are attached. Comments: Slgnat` 11r;=icr �J�= rHc ,5'�EI��F� -ccc Agency e7/Zy/pC Date Office Hours Monday - Friday: 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Office is closed the 1 st, 3rd & 5th Fridays of each month cAS' BA MUli!!Cl?AU�l�1_V D!STR1 July 26, 2006 Telma Moreira Contra Costa County Community Development Department 651 Pine Street,North Wing, 0' Floor Martinez, CA 94553 Re: Proposed Relocation of Gale Ranch Middle School, Contra Costa County Dear Ms. Moreira: East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) appreciates the opportunity to comment on the Proposed Relocation of Gale Ranch Middle School, which will include the development of 63 single-family medium density residential units in place of the original middle school site at North Gale Ridge Road and Lilac Ridge Road, in Contra Costa County. EBMUD has the following comments. DOUGHERTY VALLEY SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT (DVSA) In order to provide water service to the 63 homes now proposed for the middle school site, EBMUD will require an amendment to the August 8, 1995, DVSA, which was signed by the EBMUD Board of Directors, the County Board of Supervisors and Shapell and Windemere developers. Paragraph 2(b) of the DVSA did not oppose annexation of the elementary school site or middle school site to the EBMUD service area provided the properties be used only for school and/or park purposes. Exhibit F of the DVSA dealt with the demand fee calculation and payment provisions required by EBMUD to defray/offset the cost of water service to the development. The required amendment to the DVSA would address both sections. EBMUD would apply the dollar per gallon per day unit charge established for the Camino Tassjara Integrated project and credit the school's planned water use estimate against EBMUD's estimate of total demand (for the 63 unit exchange) to determine the demand offset charges that would be incorporated into Schedule N of EBMUD's Rates and Charges. All other standard charges including Service Capacity Charges (SCC) for new service connections would apply as well. WATER SERVICE EBMUD's San Ramon Pressure Zone, with a service elevation between 450 and 650 feet, will serve the proposed development. A main extension, at the project sponsor's expense, will be required to serve the proposed development. When the development 375 ELEVENTH STREET. OAKLAND. CA 94607-4240 . TOLL FREE 1-856-40-EBMUD Telma Moreira July 26, 2006 Page 2 plans are finalized, the project sponsor should contact EBMUD's New Business Office and request a water service estimate to determine costs and conditions for providing water service to the proposed development. Engineering and installation of water mains and services requires substantial lead-time, which should be provided for in the project sponsor's development schedule. EBMUD owns and operates a distribution pipeline in North Gale Ridge Road, which provides continuous service to EBMUD customers in the area. Based on the plans submitted for Phase II, a portion of the property is located at approximately 650 feet, which may require a Low Pressure Service Agreement, at the project sponsor's expense. A Low Pressure Service Agreement recommends installation and maintenance of individual storage and pumping facilities (hydropnuematic system) and associated plumbing to ensure an adequate water supply at the premises at all times, and would be at the project sponsor's expense The Gale Ranch School Site Relocation Project in San Ramon is located within the service area boundary of EBMUD's San.Ramon Valley Recycled Water Program. EBMUD is currently delivering recycled water to other sites near the project area, and also recommends that the project developer(s) coordinate and consult with EBMUD regarding the installation of dual plumbing systems for the use of recycled water for landscape irrigation in common areas of the residential development managed by an Homeowners Association. The developer(s) should be advised that recycled water service may be subject to low water pressures, between 35 and 80 psi. The cost of pressure boosting equipment shall borne by the developer(s). WATER CONSERVATION The proposed project presents an opportunity to incorporate water conservation measures. EBMUD would require that landscaping and irrigation installed in common areas comply with all applicable local, state and federal laws, regulations and ordinances, including but not limited to Water Conservation Landscaping in New Developments, Chapter 82-26 in Title 8 of Contra Costa County Ordinances, and the State Model Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance, Sections 490-495, Chapter 2.7 of Title 23 of the California Code of Regulations. In general, landscaping shall be Xeriscape or Drought Tolerant except for turf associated with playfields. No turf or overhead irrigation shall be allowed in planters less than eight feet wide and turf shall not exceed 25 percent of the total irrigated area. Irrigation timers shall be WaterSmart self-adjusting controllers. Contact EBMUD Water Conservation staff for a list of eligible controllers. Installation of water conservation appliances/devices within residences (high efficiency toilets, clothes washers, shower heads and dishwashers) would also be required. Telma Moreira July 26, 2006 Page 3 If you have any questions concerning this response, please contact me, at (510) 287-1182. Sincerely, O SEP/ CALLAHAN Customer Services Manager JMC:GAA:TNS:sb sb06 223.doc a Uv VUj!,1Unj V)=V: , ,,San Ramon 2122 C-1 OF SAN R-040N S,�N FL.�Mrnw C PHUNIL: (935)17 2500 lune 1, 2006 Stove- Savage Assistant Vice Presi don L/Rer-ional Site Development Manager Shapell Industries 100 Noah Milpitas Blvd. Milpitas, CA 95036 SUBJECT: Dougherty Valley Middle School Site Dear Stove: It is my understanding that you have been working with the San Ramon Valley Unified School District on the relocation of the proposed middle school. The current site is located directly across the street from Coyote Creek Elementary School in a very congested area. The City of San Ramat) is in Full support of the new proposed. site on the west side of Bollinger Canyon Road, The access to the site is better and it will be served by public transit, If there is anything, c can do to 11tciliiait the reloca- tion- please do not fieSitaTe TO aik-. Sincerely, CJ Herb Moniz Citi' Vlana,,cr 1i10 CI 1Y L LI-H K q'7.1.'i I'l 0-7_-25(15 "n71111 H—WHII-limirmijil 973�fifll) F-L.INUMIC DI nin4Pw,WI i-25bl vti�� UNIF1F��C" •Q" SA-IN R kMON VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DfS ERICT z 699 Old Orchard Drive. Danvilie. California 9 526 Robert Kessier, Superintendent (925) 55-2-293, e FAX (925) 835-3147 " i G ri;essleZsrvusd.ne: f .www.srvusd.ne; Mav 10. 2006 Supervisor John Goia Chairman. Contra Costa Count`- Board of Supervisors 651 Pine Street Martinez, CA 94553 RE: Gale Ranch Middle School Relocation Dear Supervisor Goia: The San Ramon Valley Unified School District joins with Shapell Homes in requesting that the Board of Supervisors direct staff to analyze the General Plan Amendment Request to relocate the existing Gale Ranch Middle School site from its current location adjacent to the Coyo,te Creek Elementary School to the Bollinger Canyon Road/Monarch Road location. Such a General Plan Amendment would best serve the community interest, especially the students, parents, and Gale Ranch neighbors, by not exacerbating the significant existing traffic congestion associated with the Coyote Creek Elementary School. The Gale Ranch Middle School is scheduled to open in 2008 and therefore, any assistance the Board or its staff can provide to help us meet that schedule would be much appreciated. Sincerely, obert Kessler Superintendent RK:gh cc: Supervisor Mary N. Peipho Supervisor Gavle B. Uilkema Supervisor Federal D. Glover Supervisor Mark DeSalnier Chris Truebridge, Shapell Industries Dennis Barry, CCCCDD Joseph Calabrigo, Town of Danville. Herb Moniz, City of San Ramon EXHIBIT A PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT EXHIBIT B PROPOSED SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT LO ca X—= C.) , i, E E m c > 3 <a) C 6 co Cl) N. o E ca E O U ¢ J a U n. a 0 0 ¢ LO N a oo a 3 m - I A N pp N N U7.2C l5 N N I G co coE LL LL N _ �- � N N N p, CC 1_ In(A ® d Ll Ll } CL cz a op Jay •> o Ecn >1 ct6 CL CD ao 0 � 0) ��66 'R ��' 0mo � � a��"foo LL(n Cn .p . / a 9 O ` ®� aEoiCIO g$£cg �'ti aa8 `o Lsop 2 SE !�mm mm O01 CL � .'.SA •� (/SCA, r . a S' Q Us a Zia Sig Jw .Cl 120 di 110) am R W � Ja oc woc w � z U tom, '� J a 1 W ND t/1G0 � RIMT� -- _ _.1, r.C.- � -.,tea:�.._..�._ate.,•. ! ;r�- � ;i, If ` i 1 LL .t�. f F J - Ott•' �q Vit' i 'O.,Ws� ; J 4 CO tz All No co Co x�. cm, 'ih`�w> 1 "R, ^ ; vt it i w ._ co a Oalnp�Vr t ' 14v 1'� �� ti23t iffy 471 vV �T frtr yt 1 ✓ rlGr (/ I¢x r�r.,.t �'4..s-� 4 e.}.. t�s�y,- +"✓��i��,�'�: s S.< �c 2}lxs i a �' ��tyt' s � � .-1 "S. Ci' 1 �'S1^ 2'1� �`trv� # �,/ J i✓'K �{a Y'�'y ✓L� 4 :.if�X�� i i"• � /}I'. �rr .ham'S >'strFr�vs`s. ' E�-�'�."c -f�V �i}+ 3�'.�r s� f ,� � y 's'�! �` r t fr � +y :2w ,iY.�v4i•Y" t �*'� �i> �' y9 � // s ,� �i rfi" �. � ✓�a�� Ujvifks. x- /fir: e S:;L cl) uj V} LL Lij � a a LU ¢ o w 1�y moo' rr W W g y LLJ ... ..i -i ¢ cc to U0 - (� O ¢ ; W in (n p f— in 1- ¢ Q 7 a Y g V tt int O "' 4 a d f'- a L ciL h k w Q < U? _. ¢ OAt Zj Z E. LIJ Ww Q LLILU -.J m U O ¢ thUJ o Op R O w I �.'Y I'.vl�,�a�z�$-�� 4�r.3' ri r { ?t ro;l!'r "�•-"„fit.¢ s +r„ r w � zw ' w Z O O C� H U W J !—Q WO WE a kv .V d' V W a O 4 3 t w _ w -E- V► w W W Wa w 3 v D�OJ C w r U z Z a V• Z T � L u N 2 LLI �❑ O Q V u)LU� a= CL o o o L — E. . �dYs2o - s:sY • 6 Y;� il1 N o 0 4 w _ Q Q J �- In W Q ❑ " V LUO U F w J m W U)J = � 0 c V O Q NORTH pa. 2o^s�Ra z , S 4' LL 4 J... r� a b 12 5a m c O m 11 4d t�V LEGEND '( =.Studyintersectton Figure:l 'DEVELOPMENT SITES Hexagon parCution•Convultanfs,InC: Gale Ranch Middle Schad TIA L.r Transportation JH 69ProJetlalGeleRwchT IqI awp Gale Ranch Middle School Relocation—Draft Traffic Report, June 16, 2006 3 Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. EXHIBIT D ERRATA TO THE DOUGHERTY VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN ERRATA TO THE DOUGHERTY VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN PRESENTED BEFORE THE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ON OCTOBER 10, 2006 ERRATA TO THE DOUGHERTY VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN (October 10, 2006) The following revisions and text changes are made to the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan. The text changes are referring to Figure numbers or by page number as it appears in the document. The text revised or new language is underlined, deleted language is indicated by sti4kethrough, and the original text is shown without underline or strikethrough. I. In order to allow relocation of approved Middle School and relocation of residential units within Phase Il, Phase III, and Phase IV of the Gale Ranch development, the following changes will be necessary to be made in the Land Use Map, Figure 4-1, of the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan. For easy of reference, Exhibit C identifies the specific location of the sites where land uses are to be modified as Areas A, B, C, and D. See attached Exhibit C. A. Gale Ranch Phase II: Modify Public and Semi-Public (PS) land use of previous approved Middle School site to Single-Family Residential Medium Density(SM). Shown as Area A. B. Gale Ranch Phase III: Modify portions of Multi-Family Residential Low Density land use (ML) to add Public and Semi-public (PS), Parks and Recreation (PR). Shown as Area B, and C. C. The following additional Figures will have to be revised in order to reflect the relocation of the Middle School and the corresponding use modifications to land use designations of the Gale Ranch development: Figure 5-1, Housing Densities; Figure, Figure 7-1, Open Space and Conservation; Figure 8-1, Community Facilities; Figure 9-1, Water Distribution System; Figure 9-2, Reclaimed Water System; Figure 9-3, Wastewater System; and Figure 10-4, Park and Trail Concept. II. Revise a street section as depicted on Street-Major (Double Loaded) of Figure 6-7 which was inadvertently modified from as originally shown on the 1996 Specific Plan. The section of the 2005 document includes a 5-foot side walk, and 5-foot landscaping strip on both sides of the road. In the 1996 document this section showed 5-foot sidewalk and 5-foot landscaping on one side of the road and an additional option for a 4-foot sidewalk, and 6-foot landscaping strip. This option EXHIBIT E TRAFFIC STUDY l Gale Ranch Middle School Relocation Review aI nod Tral.-, i c Safety/Circulatil►an Report Prepared for: Contra Costa County Community Development Department Submitted by: 'D,�w,la�g Ass�crafi�es,�inc ,� �� 7ranapo iicnEngineering+Planning+Rasearoh•Etlucahon u 180 Grand Avenue, Suite 250 Oakland, CA 94612 Phone: (510) 839-1742; Fax: (510) 839-0871 www.dowlinginc.com Contact: Richard Dowling September 22, 2006 Dowling Associates, Inc. I, Transportation Engineering•Planning• Research•Education September 22, 2006 Steven Goetz, AICP Deputy Director - Transportation Planning Division Contra Costa County Community Development Department 651 Pine Street, 4th Floor, North Wing Martinez, CA 94553-0095 Subject: Gale Ranch Middle School Relocation and Related Actions P06-080 Peer Review and Traffic Safety/Circulation Report Dear Mr. Goetz: Dowling Associates is pleased to provide you with this peer review of the revised Hexagon traffic study and Traffic Safety/Circulation Report for the Gale Ranch Middle School Relocation and Related Actions. This effort consisted of three tasks: 1. A peer review of the Hexagon Traffic Analysis (dated June 21, 2006), 2. An evaluation of traffic safety and circulation issues associated with the Final Development Plans for Areas A, C and D (prepared by Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar & Associates, dated June 28, 2006), and 3. Attendance at meetings and Planning Commission (as needed) to present the information on our analysis and respond to questions (to be completed later). Sincerely, Dowling Associates, Inc. Richard Dowling, Ph.D., P.E. Principal dlwork\proj\pToj2006\06080 galeranch\peer review.doc 180 Grand Avenue,Suite 250, Oakland, CA 94612 Phone: 510.839.1742 Fax: 510.839.0871 428 J Street, Suite 500,Sacramento, CA 95814 Phone: 916 266-2190 Fax: 916-266-2195 Introduction This report consists of two parts. The first part is a peer review of the traffic impact analysis conducted by Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. for the Gale Ranch Middle School Relocation, dated June 21, 2006. The second part is a traffic safety and circulation evaluation of the Final Development Plan, Vesting Tentative Map, General Plan and Specific Plan Amendment for Gale Ranch Phase 2, 3, &4, Subdivision 9134 & 9136 prepared by Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar &Associates, dated June 28, 2006 1. Peer Review As a result of existing traffic circulation issues in the vicinity of Coyote Creek Elementary School, the San Ramon Valley Unified School District requested that Shapell Homes consider relocating the Gale Ranch middle school from its planned location cater-corner to' the elementary school site. To accommodate relocating the school, Shaped Homes proposes the following shift in land uses within Gale Ranch: 1. Substitute the proposed 900 student middle school with 63 single family hornes on development area "A" (adjacent to Lilac Ridge Road, north of N. Gale Ridge Road) 2. 381 proposed apartments on development areas"B" and "C" with a 900-student middle school and 165 apartments (Gale Ranch Phase 3 area), and 3. 110 single family units and 458 apartments on development area "D" with 50 single family homes and 671 apartments (Gale Ranch Phase 4 area). The net effect of these changes maintains the original land development quantities of 949 housing units and one middle school on these parcels. Our comments on the Hexagon Report are as follows: 1. Check of Land Use Assumptions: It should be noted that after Hexagon completed the traffic impact study for the middle school relocation plan, the County updated the housing unit quantities assumed in the Final Development Plan (FDP) in the study area. Even with this updated information, the Hexagon report assumptions closely match those of the FDP with two minor exceptions. a. The FDP shows 16 more apartment units in Development Area "B"than were analyzed in the Hexagon Report. This difference means that the Hexagon Report shows a slightly higher impact for Development Area"B" with the new school, because it left out the trips that would have been generated by these 16 apartments under the existing FDP. These 16 apartments would have generated about 12 peak hour trips and thus the projected increase in trips due to moving the school to this location is actually about 12 trips lower than the report indicates. The total change in trips in Area "B" is further described in note 7 below. b, The FDP housing unit update resulted in the traffic study slightly underestimating the increase in the proposed number of apartment units in Development Area "D" by 12 units. This means that the Hexagon Report shows a slightly lower impact for Development Area "D" with the proposed changes, as 12 additional apartments would generate about 8 additional peak hour trips. This minor difference is not likely to significantly impact Hexagon's conclusions. The total change in trips in Area "C/D" is further described in note 8 below. 2. Check of School Trip Generation/Distribution (AM): The Hexagon report assumes an AM Peak Hour trip generation rate for the Middle School of 0.97 trips per student. The Hexagon report references the ITE Private School rates of 0.79 (K-12) and 0.90 (K-8) trips per student. The ITE rate for public middle schools is 0.53 trips per student and the SANDAL rate is 0.42 trips per student. Our own trip generation survey of the Diablo Vista Middle School on Camino Tassajara found an AM peak hour rate of 0.78 vehicle trips ends per enrolled student. Consequently we are comfortable with the AM peak hour trip rate used by Hexagon in their analysis. All other references show a lower trip rate. Hexagon's and our analysis of school trip generation and distribution are based on conversations with School District staff that describe the school as having 900 students generated by the Gale Ranch residential areas west of Alamo Creek. Future changes either to school enrollment or the school boundary could change the school's impacts at the study intersections. 3.. Check of School Trip Generation (PM): The Hexagon report assumes a PM Peak School Hour trip generation rate for the Middle School of 0.50 trips per student. The ITE rate is 0.30 trips per student for public Middle Schools, and 0.55 (K-12) and 0.61 (K-8) trips per student at private schools. Our own trip generation survey of the Diablo Vista Middle School on Camino Tassajara found a school PM peak hour rate of 0.57 trip ends per enrolled student. Although, the Hexagon PM peak hour trip rate is about 12% lower than the other rates and our own survey rates, we believe that does not significantly detract from the overall accuracy of their conclusions. Later on, in the safety and circulation study portion of this report, we adjust the Hexagon rate upwards to reflect the 12% higher rate observed at the Diablo Vista Middle School to determine if there will be queuing or traffic operations problems near the school during the afternoon peak hour of the school. . 4. Check of Trip Generation/Distribution of Other Land Uses: The Hexagon traffic study utilized the trip generation volumes and distribution produced by the Tri- valley Travel Demand Model for the residential land uses proposed for development areas A, C and D. 5. Check of Buildout Turning Movement Forecasts: We selected two intersections to check the AM turning movement forecasts, Dougherty/Monarch/Gale, and Dougherty/Bollinger (N). The initial turning movements for Buildout matched (within 1 trip or less) those contained in Appendix "E" of the Gale Ranch Phase 4 Traffic Study, dated January 21, 2005, by Hexagon. 6. Development Area "A" impacts: Inspection of Appendix "B" of the report suggests that 526 AM peak hour trips were subtracted from Development Area "A" rather than the 869 trip ends computed by Hexagon in Table 2 for the middle school. This is probably satisfactory, because it either overestimates the trip generation change 2 of the new land use for Development Area "A" (if the original buildout forecasts used the Hexagon estimate of trip generation for the school), or it accurately zero's out the school generation (if the model estimate of school trip generation were used in the original buildout forecasts. The result is an accurate estimate of the trip ge neration impacts of the land use change in Development Area "A". 7. Development Area `B/C" Impacts: Appendix "B" appears to indicate that 220.AM peak hour trips were subtracted from Area "B/C" (representing the 365 apartments removed) and 85 AM trips added for the 165 apartments added. Inspection of Appendix "C" shows that 571 AM trips were added for the school to the intersection of Monarch/Bollinger. Based on their description of how they manually distributed the school trips in section 2.3 (School Trip Distribution) of their report, their distribution appears appropriate. 8. Development Area "D" Impacts.Appendix "B" suggests that the model subtracted 394 AM peak hour trips (to represent the removal of 110 single family homes and 460 apartments) and added back in 446 trips (to represent the addition of 50 single family and 657 apartments). Inspection of Appendix "C" turning movements shows that they added a net 44 + 14 = 58 AM peak hour trips to reflect the land use changes. These added trip estimates appear reasonable. 9. Check of Intersection LOS sensitivity: The study intersection likely to be most sensitive to changes in trip generation and distribution assumptions is Bollinger Canyon Road at Wedgewood Road. It has a forecasted AM peak hour LOS of 0.89% D for both the existing and proposed scenarios. In examining the trip distribution exhibits in Appendix D it appears that reasonable changes in the study area's trip generation by zone would not significantly affect the LOS at this intersection. Based on the baseline Levels of Service at the study intersections, it does not appear that further refinements of the study area's trip generation and distribution would result in identifying any new significant impacts. 10. The Level of Service calculations for Bollinger Canyon Road at South Wedgewood Road and at South Monarch Road correctly assume north/south split phasing of the traffic signal. This signal is operated by the City of San Ramon. Although the LOS at Monarch Road is theoretically C using the CCTA LOS calculation method, the north/south pedestrians will need a significant amount of time to walk across Bollinger Canyon Road which could result in LOS E and F delays for autos when pedestrians are present. It is possible that the City of San Ramon may now or in the future time the signal to allow the pedestrians to cross only halfway across Bollinger to the wide median island (which has its own pedestrian push buttons). This would allow more flexible signal timing and reduce delays. In that case the delays for auto traffic may not be as great while pedestrian delays crossing the street will be greater. Regardless, the CCTA LOS method does not account for significant pedestrian volumes and crossing times. Note: The CCTA LOS calculation method does not utilize the Peak Hour Factor and thus does not identify 15-minute congestion levels occurring near schools at peak periods. Although Hexagon has calculated study intersection LOS' consistent with the methodology required by legal agreements and adopted planning policies, actual 3 congestion levels on Bollinger Canyon Road near the school site will seem significantly worse during the peak 15-minute period than the calculations indicate. 11. School Access Needs: Hexagon's vehicle storage calculations assume an AM peak hour peak 15-minute volume representing 45% all morning traffic, and that 18 vehicles can be served per 100 feet of loading area every 15 minutes. For the school's PM peak hour the school would generate 237 inbound trips during the PM peak hour and an assumed 88 vehicles in the peak 15 minutes. We agree with these assumptions and estimates. 12. School Access and Circulation: Hexagon recommends that three lanes be provided on the school access drive internal to the school site. We agree with this recommendation. While the usage of the lanes will be determined by and controlled by the school district, the center lane should not be used for dropping off or picking up students as described in the Hexagon report. Such use of the center lane would require students going to or from that lane to walk in front of vehicles using the right curb-side lane. The 3-lane configuration, with the left lane and center lanes as through'lanes, is consistent with the configuration of the access road for the Windemere Middle School. a. The school district must provide active traffic control by school personnel to direct the lead vehicles to pull all of the way forward in the curbside drop-off lane to maximize the efficiency of this lane and prevent vehicles from becoming trapped by traffic stopped in the center travel lane. b. We agree with Hexagon's recommendation that the curbside lane adjacent to the school on Main Branch Road have parking prohibited and be striped as a i right turn only lane into the school's access road. c. The 190 space parking lot and 500 feet of curbside loading zone proposed on the school site should meet storage demands and minimize on-street impacts. Staff for a 900 student school should require fewer than 90 of the available parking spaces. d. We concur with Hexagon's recommendation with regard to providing a southbound right turn lane and northbound left turn lane from Main Branch Road into the school access road, with traffic flow on the access road restricted to the southwest direction. e. The Hexagon report shows no southbound bike lane on Main Branch Road north of the school driveway. The combined off-street bike path and sidewalk on the west side of Main Branch Road should be 10 feet wide given its proximity to the school and anticipated usage. This trail should be separated from the travel way by at least a planter strip. Chapter 1000 of the Caltrans Highway Design Manual recommends a minimum five foot separation between a Class I bike path and edge of pavement of adjacent roadways, unless a physical barrier is provided to prevent bicyclists from encroaching on the road. f. To minimize queuing, Hexagon recommends configuring the access road entrance to allow concurrent northbound left turns and southbound right turns. We agree with this recommendation. 4 g. Hexagon recommends installing a 4-way stop at the southwesterly exit of the school access road onto South Monarch Road. Traffic volumes are be low those required to warrant an all-way stop, but a significant number of students are expected to cross South Monarch Road at this location. A crossing guard or 4-way stop will be needed at this intersection to facilitate student crossings on the south side of the intersection. Crossing guard activity in the south crosswalk would also create gaps in traffic necessary for traffic exiting the school driveway. h. In the future, the stop signs may be supplemented with some form of traffic calming on Main Branch Road and South Monarch Road adjacent to the school site. For example, solar powered radar speed signs (showing the speed of vehicles approaching the school) have proven to be effective in slowing vehicles near schools without the downside of roadway features like speed humps. Conclusion The Hexagon report adequately discloses the impacts of the proposed relocation of the middle school and the shift in planned development levels for Development Areas A, B, C, and D. The proposed project keeps the same middle school and the same number of dwelling units as originally approved. Three apartment units are changed.to 3 single-family units. The net impact of this change is to add less than 2 peak hour vehicle trips to the estimated generation of the developments originally approved for Development Areas A, B, C, and D. Thus, the traffic circulation impacts of the proposed changes are localized within the Dougherty Valley area. No significant traffic circulation impacts are anticipated to intersections outside of Dougherty Valley. s 5 2. Traffic Safety And Circulation Report This section evaluates the traffic safety and circulation issues associated with the Final Development Plans for Areas A, C and D of the Gale Ranch Middle School Relocation. Impacts in the Vicinity of the Coyote Creek Elementary School The proposed project includes the construction of 63 new homes on Site A in place of building a 900 student Middle School. This school and these homes would most noticeably impact traffic conditions along North Gail Ridge Road. The proposed 63 single family homes will generate 47 to 57 peak hour morning trips on North Gail Ranch Road. A 900 student Middle School on this same site would generate 477' to 869 morning trips on this same roadway (ITE trip rate of 0.53 trips per student vs. Hexagon rate of 0.965). Thus the proposed project has significantly less impact on North Gail Ranch Road and Coyote Creek Elementary School in the morning, as,the proposed project would generate less than one car per minute versus the existing plan which would generate about one car every 4 seconds. If the 900 students Middle School were built on Development Area "A", that middle school plus the 650 students at Coyote Elementary School, would result in a morning Level of Service "F at the intersection of North Gale Ridge/Lilac Ridge/Coyote School Driveway. With the proposed residential development on Development Area "A", the LOS would be A/B in the morning. The proposed residential development also has less impact than the existing development plan during the afternoon peak school hour and the peak commute hour. The 63 homes in the proposed project would generate less than 30 trips during the afternoon peak school traffic period. The existing development plan (with the middle school) would generate 447 afternoon peak school hour trips (using Hexagon trip rates). During the peak evening commute hour, the proposed 63 homes would generate about 64 trips, while the middle school would generate about 135 peak commute hour trips based on ITE trip rates. Existing Access Issues of Coyote Creek Elementary School The existing Coyote Creek Elementary School, located south of the intersection of Lilac Ridge Road and North Gale Ridge Road currently experiences significant congestion problems at school start and end times. If the middle school were to remain on Development Area "A", the access situation would be worsened with the concentrated traffic of both schools impacting Lilac Ridge Road and North Gale Ridge Road. As described above, the proposed middle school relocation to Development Area "B" would therefore avoid worsening these elementary school access problems. The discussion below provides some information on some of the options currently being considered by the City of San Ramon and the school district for improving access to the existing Coyote Creek Elementary School. The existing Coyote Creek Elementary School access problems are caused primarily by a school site design that causes many parents to prefer to drop off and pick up their children 6 on the public streets in front of the school, rather than on the school site itself. The result is significant pedestrian crossing activity and on-street parking at these times. Th e existing loop exit driveway has limited visibility due to on-street parking and the curvature of the road. • Dowling Associates computer simulations of traffic circulation at the school show that less on-street queuing and better traffic flow when traffic exits the loop opposite Lilac Ridge Road instead of entering there. This change in on-site circulation would be the responsibility of and subject to the approval of the school district and the City. • Striping a right turn only lane into the school and prohibiting on-street parking between the two school driveways would improve circulation and driveway visibility. This action would be the responsibility of and subject to the approval of the City of San Ramon. • Striping a separate westbound left turn lane and through lane approaching the east driveway would also improve circulation and help eliminate students crossing the street midblock to reach vehicles parked on the opposite side of the street from the school. The on-street parking prohibitions necessary to provide the right and left turn lanes would not impact any existing or future residential properties. These actions would be the responsibility of and subject to the approval of the City' of San Ramon. Consistency with Applicable County Goals, Policies and Standards This section addresses the consistency of the proposed development area changes with the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan dated August 2, 2005. Policy C-1: Develop a circulation network on neighborhood streets that minimizes heavy through traffic... The proposed development area changes are consistent with this policy. No new short cuts are created. Relocation of the school from Development Area "A" to "B", a site much closer to Bollinger Canyon Road reduces the distance that traffic must travel on residential streets to reach the arterial street. Policy C-2: Provide local neighborhood streets, which discourage through traffic... The proposed development area changes are consistent with this policy. No new short cuts are created. Policy C-3: Extend public transit service.... The proposed development area changes are consistent with this policy. The middle school will be located closer to proposed transit services on Bollinger Canyon Road. 7 Figure 6-7 -Local Street Cross-sections The residential street cross-sections for development area "A" match exhibit "H" within this figure, with the exception that 4-foot sidewalks are proposed rather than 5-foot sidewalks. Development area "A" includes one un-dimensioned knuckle, which appears to be consistent with Exhibit"0" in this figure. It is recommended that the design be consistent with the Specific Plan. The private street cross-sections for development area "C" include parking, while.Exhibit "L" in this figure does not. Due to the special circumstance s'in this development area (no other parking available for the single family homes) the FDP cross sections are recommended in lieu of the Specific Plan cross sections, Policy C-4: Provide an overall project design that will......maximize transit ridership. The proposed development area changes are consistent with this policy. The proposed development area changes will shift 200 apartments farther away from Bollinger Canyon Road. Three apartment units will be converted to single-family homes. This is compensated by the middle school being located closer to proposed transit services on ,Bollinger Canyon Road. Policy C-5: Provide rights of way for future transit systems The proposed development area changes are consistent with this policy. The changes do not affect the transit right-of-way on Bollinger Canyon Road. Policy C-6: Provide Park-and-ride locations along the arterial street network..... The proposed development area changes are not inconsistent with this policy. No changes are proposed as part of this project at this time to planned park-and-ride lots along Bollinger Canyon Road. No changes are required to the park and ride locations or sizes dues to the middle school relocation. Policy C-7:Encourage and facilitate the use of travel modes other than the private automobile... The proposed development area changes are not inconsistent with this policy. The changes are not likely to affect non-auto use. Specific sheet recommendations later on in this report would enhance non-auto travel. Policy C-8: Develop systems of safe and convenient bicycle routes... The proposed development area changes are consistent with this policy. Development area "D" provides a linear park that extends the pedestrian/bike path through this area, 8 Policy C-9: Encourage...safe use of bicycle.... The proposed development area changes are not inconsistent with this policy. No bicycle facilities are adversely affected. The pedestrian/bicycle path through Development Area "D" facilitates safe bicycle travel. Policy C-10: Locate intersections.to facilitate recreational movement on trails... The proposed development area changes are consistent with this policy. The proposed intersections in Development Area "D" align with the planned bike/pedestrian trail. Policy C-11: ....Provide connections between the various transportation facilities..... The proposed development area changes are consistent with this policy. The planned bike/pedestrian trail through Development Area "D" provides connectivity. Relocation of the middle school suggests that a re-thinking of the existing trail system is desirable to improve connectivity in the vicinity of the new school site. Policy C-12: Encourage telecommuting... The proposed development area changes are not inconsistent with this policy. The development area changes would have no discernable impacts on telecommuting. Policy C-13: .... Provide public education.... The proposed development area changes are not inconsistent with this policy. The development area changes would have no discernable impacts on public education. Policy C-14: Provide for a ...TDM program. The proposed development area changes are not inconsistent with this policy. The development area changes would have no discernable impacts on public education. Policy C-15: To be consistent with growth management provisions... The proposed development area changes are not inconsistent with this policy. The development area changes would have no discernable impact on this policy. Policy C-16: Encourage the incorporation of design amenities...to further objectives of the clean air plan.... The proposed development area changes are consistent with this policy. The development area changes are consistent with the Specific Plan. Policy C-17: Provide parking facilities.... The proposed development area changes are consistent with this policy. The development area changes provide sufficient parking. 9 Consistency with Applicable Mitigation Measures from Prior Planning Actions Figure 6-4 of the August 2, 2005 Dougherty Valley Specific Plan shows Bollinger Canvon Road as having three through lanes in each direction. The LOS calculations in the traffic study for the proposed project indicate the following number of through lanes on Bollinger Canyon Road: 1 through'lane and 1 through/right in both directions at Stoneleaf Road 1 through and 1 through/right westbound at Wedgewood Road 1 through lane and 1 through/right in both directions at Main Branch Road 1 through and 1 through/right westbound, and 2 through plus 1 right turn only lane eastbound at South Monarch Road The department plan checker should double check the parking space counts for Sheet FDP 6. The posted counts do not exactly match the parking lot layouts. The existing roundabout at the intersection of Main Branch Road and South Monarch Road has special design features to guide bicyclists and pedestrians through the intersection. The Basswood Trail terminates at South Monarch Road opposite the proposed school site. Relocating the middle school to the proposed site will create significant demand by trail users to cross South Monarch Road to access the school site at this intersection. The County should consider and evaluate various design features to facilitate pedestrian crossings of South Monarch Road for this trail at an appropriate location. The traffic study forecasts over 850 motor vehicles could potentially conflict with pedestrians and bicyclists that would cross South Monarch Road. Design features could include signing and widening connecting sidewalks to trail standards to guide trail users to an alternate crossing location and/or enhanced crosswalk signing such as a solar powered, actuated, wireless flashing yellow beacon. The 8' wide concrete West Alamo Creek Trail is shown on the Gale Ranch/Windenaere Trail Exhibit along the western frontage of Site A, but this frontage improvement is not clearly shown on the plan sheet V'I'M 2. Adequacy of Connections to Off-Site Circulation Features The relocation of the middle school and residential land uses as proposed provides comparable auto connectivity to the area's circulation system relative to the existing development plan. The new school site does`not overburden Main Branch Road or Monarch Road, which run adjacent to the proposed school site, and it reduces traffic volumes along North Gale Ridge Road. The proposed plan does not significantly impact the area's major arterial roadway system. The entrance to the middle school site is not adjacent to any major high-speed arterial roadways. The back of the proposed school site is adjacent to Bollinger Canyon Road. Regarding pedestrian and bicycle connectivity, the location of a major generator like a middle school implies the need for a similar relocation of bicycle/pedestrian trails in the vicinity of the new school site. 10 The County should consider and evaluate various design solutions for providing a paved trail connecting the Basswood Trail (#8 on the Gale Ranch/Windemere Trail Exhib at, dated 12/01/04) to the Middle School site, and to the Village Center Trail that passes through the center of Development Area "D", via South Monarch Road. Final Development Plan Sheet Specific Comments This section provides comments on specific sheets of the Final Development Plan Sheet VTM 2 (Development Area A). Within the development area, stop signs should be placed on the third leg of each"T" intersection. Handicap ramps should be placed on each corner of each "T" intersection. Maximum grade is 6.7%. The radii are not dimensioned and the knuckle is not dimensioned, consequently, no comments are made on these aspects. The residential street cross-section is acceptable except for sidewalk widths. They are shown as 4 feet when they should be 5 feet wide. This sheet provides no.design information for Lilac Ridge Road or for North Gale Road; consequently we have not reviewed these streets. Sheet FDP4 (Development Areas B/C) 1) School grounds should be fenced, especially around the baseball and soccer fields to discourage pedestrian access from street and on-street parking near these areas during intramural games and practices. 2) All-way stop, handicap ramps, and painted school crosswalks should be installed at intersection of school drive exit and South Monarch Road. 3) Bike lanes and sidewalks appear to be in place the full lengths of both Main Branch and South Monarch Roads. We recommend that the sidewalk adjacent to the school on South Monarch Road, between the Basswood Trail and the school driveway, be as wide as feasible with planter strip to accommodate surges of school age pedestrians and bicyclists. 4) A 10 foot paved, two-way, combined bicycle and pedestrian path should be along the west side of Main Branch Road between Bollinger Canyon Road and the school entry drive. 5) For safety purposes, the school district should ensure that the sidewalk shown in the roadway section A-A be constructed as a shared 12 foot wide bike/pedestrian path to accommodate the surges of pedestrians and bicyclists between the school entrance (within the site) and the sidewalks along South Monarch Road and Main Branch Road. 6) For safety purposes, the school district should ensure that the entry driveway to the school from Main Branch Road is closer to right angle with Main Branch Road to facilitate right turns into the site and to discourage high speed left turn movements. 11 7) To reduce queuing onto public streets, the school district should ensure that the access road through the school site is three lanes one-way in the southwest direction as shown on the site plan and in cross-section A-A. This will provide an access road similar to the configuration of the access road at Windemere Middle School. 8) Exclusive right turn and exclusive left turn lane should be striped on Main Branch Road at school entrance as recommended in the Hexagon report. 9) The school should provide traffic control personnel during start and end tines of school day to guide drivers to pull as far forward as possible before dropping off children so as to reduce queuing back onto public streets. 10)School personnel should encourage parents to use the parking lot to wait for children in the afternoon, rather than relying only on the "drop-off lane". 11)The school district should ensure that the intersections of the parking lot aisles with the school drive are more perpendicular so that drivers exiting the lots do not have to look over their shoulder for on-coming traffic. 13)0n-street parking should be prohibited on the west side of Main Branch Road from Bollinger Canyon Road to the school driveway. A right turn only lane should be striped on south bound Main Branch Road from Bollinger Canyon Road to the school entrance. 14)The school district should sign the school driveways for one-way operation at both entrance and exit. Similar signs should be placed at all parking lot driveways intersecting with the school driveway. Sheet FDP 6 (Development Area D) Private street cross-sections (A-A, B-B, C-C, D-D) appear adequate. We recommend a sidewalk-be constructed on at least one side of the semi-circular street running through the apartment complex. Sheet L-9 (Development Area A) Design review should ensure that proper sightlines are maintained for each intersection. Sheet L-10 (Development Area B/C) Design review should ensure that proper sightlines are maintained for each intersection. Sheet L-11 (Development Area D) Design review should ensure that proper sightlines are maintained for each intersection and trail crossing. 12 Gale Ranch Middle School Relocation Traffic Analysis DRAFT REPORT Prepared fora Shapell Industries of Northern California Prepared by: Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. June 21 , 2006 Table of Contents 1. Introduction .............................................................................................................. _.............2 2. Traffic Impact Analysis............................................................................................................4 3. Access and Circulation .............................................................................................. _.............9 List of Tables Table 1. Gale Ranch Development Sites: Existing and Proposed Plans.........................................4 Table 2. Trip Generation Estimates for the Gale Ranch Middle School.........................................6 Table 3. Levels of Service at Study Intersections—Existing Plan and Proposed Plan....................9 Table 4. Levels of Service and Queuing at Driveway Intersections............................................. 13 List of Figures Figure1 Development Sites.........................................................................................................3 Figure 2 AM.Peak-Hour Volumes...............................................................................................8 Figure3 Site Plan......................................................................................................................10 Appendices Appendix A Mode of Access at Middle Schools Appendix B Selected Link Plots Appendix C Intersection Turning Movements by Development Site Appendix D Level of Service Calculation Sheets Appendix E Arrival Distribution of School Traffic Appendix F Saturation Flow Rates —Drop—Off and Pick-Up Appendix G LOS Calculation Sheets Driveway Intersections Gale Ranch Middle School Relocation—Draft Traffic Report, June 16, 2006 1 Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. NORTH (/ac�a&e 2 Mid' Z' m a� 1 3 4 5 3 h 7 12 8 L E std C m gm m� 1 44 8ie 9 s M tt4 LEGEND D i =study imersectron Figure 1 DEVELOPMENT SITES n Hexagon Gale Ranch Middle School TIA u Trnnsponwion Consultants.Ina JH D9Fmjsdz%Gale Rawhff i.d»g Gale Ranch Middle School Relocation—Draft Traffic Report, June 16, 2006 3 Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. 1. introduction . The purpose of the traffic analysis presented in this memorandum is to evaluate the transportation impacts of relocating the planned 900-student middle school in Gale Ranch Phase 2 to a new site within the Gale Ranch Phase 3 development area. This analysis is two-fold: (1)prepare a traffic impact analysis for Measure C compliance to determine if the intersections affected by the land use changes would continue to operate at acceptable levels of service and (2)conduct a review and evaluation of the site plan focused on the access egress and drop-off/pickup activities at the school. Background In December 1992, the County of Contra Costa approved a General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan for the 6,000 acre Dougherty Valley area to guide development of up to 11;000 homes and supporting commercial, educational, office and open space land uses. The Gale Ranch and Windemere projects were included within this General Plan approval. Development of the Dougherty Valley is undertaken jointly by Shapell Industries (Gale Ranch: 5,830 units) and Windemere Ranch Partners (Windemere: 5,170 units). In addition to the housing units, the Specific Plan includes four elementary schools, two middle schools, a high school, a community college, a village center, and a shopping center as approved, the first phase of Gale Ranch (1,216 dwelling units)has been constructed. The second phase of Gale Ranch includes 1,885 residential units, an elementary school and a middle school. This phase is under construction.The third phase of development is the Gale Ranch Phase 3 subdivision that consists of 1,423 residential units and an elementary school. Gale Ranch 4 is Shapell's last phase of development and includes a total of 1,306 dwellings and a community park. Gale Ranch Phases 3 and 4 have yet to be constructed. As a result of existing traffic congestion in the vicinity of the Coyote Creek Elementary School, the San Ramon Valley Unified School District requested that Shapell Homes consider the relocation of the Gale Ranch middle school site from its current location across the street(Gale Ridge Road) from the Coyote Creek Elementary School. Shapell agreed to do so. A new middle school site was chosen by Shapell Homes and the School District and the traffic analysis of this proposed relocation is presented in this report. Figure I schematically shows the locations of the affected development areas labeled as A. B. C, and D. Under the proposed plan, the 900-student middle school along North Gale Ridge Road in Gale Ranch Phase:)- (Area A) would be relocated to a portion of an approximately 20-acre site in Gale Ranch Phase 3 (Area 13) that is designated under the existing plan for the construction of 365 apartment units. The"former"school site in Gale Ranch Phase 2(Area A)would be developed with 63 single-family units. The proposed plan would leave 165 of the 365 apartment units on a portion of the 20-acre site(Area Q and the remaining 200 units would be added to the Gale Ranch Phase 4 area, south of lvvleaf Springs Road (Area D). In the existing plan, Area D contains 110 single-family units and 460 apartments. Under the proposed plan. 63 single-family units would be relocated to Site A. leaving Site D with 657 apartments and 50 single-family units. Table I on page 3 presents a summary of the land uses of the existing plan and the proposed plan for each of the affected development sites. No net loss or gain of residential units is proposed. The resultant unit counts for the Gale Ranch Pahese I through 4 are as follows: Gale Ranch Phase 1: 1.216 units, no change Gale Ranch Phase 2: plus 63 units resulting in a unit count of 1,948 units Gale Ranch Phase 3: minus 200 units resulting in a unit count of 1.223 units Gale Ranch Phase 4: plus 1317 units resulting in a unit count of 1,443 units Gale Ranch Middle.School Relocation—Draft Traffic Report, June 16, 2006 2 Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Table 1 Gale Ranch Development Sites: Existing and Proposed Plans Development Area Existing Plan Proposed Plan A 900 Student-Middle School 63 Single Family B 900-Student Middle School 365 Apartments C 165 Apartments D 110 Single Family 50 Single Family 460 Apartments 657 Apartments Total 935 Units , Middle School 935 Units , Middle School Proposed total number of units for Gale Ranch Phases 1 through 4 in conjunction with the middle school relocation is 5,830 units. 2. Traffic Impact Analysis This traffic impact analysis only addresses the AM peak-hour traffic conditions at the intersections since the peak-hour of traffic for the middle school coincides only with the morning commute peak-hour of traffic. During the PM peak-commute hour, the amount of school-related traffic is negligible. The ambient traffic volumes during the school afternoon peak-hour (typically between 2:00 and 3:00 PM when school lets out) are much lower compared to the evening commute and traffic during this time period generally does not cause level of service problems at intersections. 2.1 Development of Traffic Volumes for the Proposed Plan The most recent and up-to-date peak-hour traffic volumes for the Dougherty Valley intersections are contained in the Gale Ranch Phase 4 Traffic Analysis, Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc., dated January 17, 2005. In this report, traffic conditions at all major Dougherty Valley intersections were analyzed assuming build-out of the Dougherty Valley. The Gale Ranch Phase 4 traffic analysis assumes the land use developments for the existing plan as shown"in Table 1. The AM peak-hour volumes presented in the Gale Ranch Phase 4 traffic report were the basis for developing the peak-hour volumes associated with proposed plan. Traffic volumes for proposed plan were developed at 12 key intersections. These intersections were selected based on their proximity to the development areas that are subject to change. The study intersections are shown on Figure 1 on page 2 of this report. The Tri-Valley Travel Demand Model (TVTDM) was used to conduct a series of select link analyses to determine the traffic changes associated with each of the land use components of the proposed plan. For example, the intersection turning movements for the proposed plan were developed by making adjustments to Gale Ranch Middle School Relocation—Draft Traffic Report, June 16, 2006 4 Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. the base ("existing plan) volumes from the Gale Ranch Phase 4 Report. The base volumes were adjusted as follows: Site A • Subtract middle school (model estimated) traffic [Existing Plan] • Add traffic from 63 residential units [Proposed Plan] Site B/C • Subtract traffic from 365 apartment units on sites B and C [Existing Plan] • Add middle school traffic from site B [Proposed Plan] • Add traffic from 165 apartments on site C [Proposed Plan] Site D • Subtract traffic from [110—63 = ] 47 single family units • Add traffic generated by the additional 197 apartment units [Proposed Plan] The TVTDM includes "school-related travel" as a separate trip purpose and estimates the number of school trips based on the school's student enrollment. While the model's estimates of school traffic is useful in the transportation planning process, the model results are not always reliable for use in detailed school traffic analysis, primarily because the model does not take into account the service area of the school.Therefore, the; "model estimated" school traffic volumes associated with site A were subtracted from the intersection turning; movement volumes and the middle school traffic for site C was estimated based on a more applicable trip generation rate and distributed using information about the school's service area. 2.2 School Trip Generation The most common source to estimate trip generation levels for land use developments is the data published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The ITE Trip Generation manual contains data that is based on survey information collected from transportation professionals around the country. The ITE survey data collected at public schools around the country often include regular student bussing. Most schools in the Bay Area do not have school bus programs for students. Therefore, the middle school in Gale Ranch will likely generate more traffic compared to traffic estimates that would be based on ITE trip generation rates because a significant portion of the students will be driven to and picked up from school by car. Ideally, a trip rate for "private" middle school should be used since private schools do not have school bussing, but the ITE does not publish any trip generation data for this school type. However, the ITE does publish rates for bothprivate and public elementary schools. Therefore, for the purpose of this analysis a more reasonable and conservative middle school trip rate was developed. This new rate was calculated based on the ratio of the private-to-public rate for elementary schools. This ratio was then applied to the ITE rate for (public) middle schools. This calculation resulted in an AM peak hour rate of 1.14 vehicle trips per student. Recently, Hexagon collected extensive traffic data at a number of schools in Santa Clara County. The data, which includes information about mode of access, parking demand, home-to-school distance, vehicle occupancy, drop-off and pick-up rates, and peak 15-minutes arrival rates, was collected at several public elementary, middle and high schools. A total of 15 schools (five of each type) were surveyed. The data from these surveys was used to estimate some of the travel characteristics assumed in this traffic analysis. For example, the data showed that on the average, about 18% of middle school students either walk or bike to school in the morning. A summary of the mode of arrival survey data is included in Appendix A. Assuming that about 3% of the students attending private schools walk/bike to school, the AM trip rate of 1.14 vehicles Gale Ranch Middle School Relocation—Draft Traffic Report, June 16, 2006 5 Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. per student was reduced by 15% to account for students that walk or bike to school, resulting iri a final trip rate of 0.97 vehicle trips per student. This rate is significantly higher(83%) than the 0.53 veN(--le trips per student reported in the ITE Trip Generation Manual for middle schools. Using the same methodology, a trip rate was calculated for the PM peak (school)hour. The trip generation rates and vehicle estimates for the Gale Ranch middle school during the morning and afternoon are presented in Table 2. The factDTS that were used in the rate calculations are shown in the notes at the bottom of the table. Table 2 Trip Generation Estimates for the Gale Ranch Middle School AM Peak Hour PM Peak(School) Hour Peak-Hr. Peak-Hr. Land Use Size Rate In Out Total Rate In out Total Proposed Use Middle School 900 students 0.97 478 391 869 0.50 210 237 447 Notes: AM peak-hour trip rate The ITE trip generation rate for public and private elementary schools are 0.42 and 0.90,respectively. The ITE trip generation rate for public middle schools is 0.53.The rate developed for the Gale Ranch Middle School was calculated as follows:0.90/0.42*0.53*0.85=0.97 .The 0.85 factor assumes that 15%of the students walk or bike to school. PM peak(school)hour trip rate The ITE trip generation rate for public and private elementary schools are 0.28 and 0.61,respectively. The ITE trip generation rate for public middle schools is 0.30.The rat'e developed for the Gale Ranch Middle School was calculated as follows:0.61 /0.28*0.30*0.76=0.50 .The 0.76 factor assumes that 24%of the students walk or bike from school. Source of Rates: ITE Trip Generation, 7th Edition and Hexagon Transportation Consultant,Inc. The resulting calculations show that the school would generate 869 AM peak hour vehicle trips; 478 inbound and 391 outbound. Thus, there would be 391 vehicles dropping off students in the morning. The difference in inbound trips., 87 trips (478- 391), represents primarily staff. The reason there wouldn't be one inbound trip per student is that students would carpool, take transit, walk or bicycle to school, are absent or arrive later in the day. 2.3 School Trip Distribution The distribution of school traffic largely depends on the school's "service area": the area where the students five in relation to the school. According to Tina Perault. School Facilities Planner of the San Ramon Unified School District, the Gale Ranch middle school would serve students residing in homes located in the Gale Ranch sub-divisions, west of the Alamo Creek. This information was used to allocate the school trips proportionate to the number of housing units located within this area. 2.4 Traffic Assignments As mentioned earlier in this report, the TVTDM was used to assign the traffic associated with the land use changes to the roadways and(study) intersections. Appendix B includes individual plots of the traffic volumes for each of the affected land use components. Appendix C contains a line-by-line tabulation of the development components and resulting traffic volumes at each of the study intersections. Figure 2 graphically shows the AM peak-hour intersection turning movement volumes at the 12 study intersections for both the existing and the proposed development plans. Gale Ranch Middle School Relocation—Draft Traffic Report,June 16, 2006 6 Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. 2.5 Intersection Level of Service AM peak-hour traffic conditions at the study intersections were evaluated for the'both the existing and the proposed plan. The levels of service at each of the study intersections were calculated and compared with the applicable level of service standards. Several regional and local transportation planning documents address' the issue of traffic level of service and other consistency requirements relevant to traffic studies for development projects in the Dougherty Valley area. Notable are the Contra Costa Growth Management Element, the Tri-Valley Transportation Plan, the 1996 Dougherty Valley Specific Plan, the 1992 Dougherty Valley Specific Plan EIR, the Dougherty Valley Settlement Agreement, and the Camino Tassajara Combined General Plan Amendment Settlement Agreement. For the purposes of this analysis, the Tri-Valley Transportation Plan and the Dougherty Valley Settlement Agreements can be regarded as the most specific sources of LOS standards for the Dougherty Valley, and will therefore be used as the standard for the evaluation of compliance with the Measure C Growth Management Program. For signalized intersections along Dougherty Road and Bollinger Canyon Road, the level of service standard is "D" and a v/c ratio of 0.91. For unsignalized intersections, level of service"F" for any or all of the individual movements would be considered unacceptable only if the intersection also meets one or more of the Caltrans signal warrants. The CCTA LOS method was used to compute the level of service for all of the signalized intersections. This method is described in the Contra Costa Transportation Authority's "Technical Procedures". This method identifies the critical conflicting movements at an intersection and calculates the ratio of volume- to-capacity for each conflicting critical movement. The critical movement volume/capacity ratios are summed to obtain the intersection volume/capacity ratio. Although the CCTA LOS is Contra Costa County's adopted method of calculating levels of service and determining impacts, the method is fairly simplistic and relies only on volume'to capacity calculations based on lane geometry and the number of signal phases. The CCTALOS software does not take into account signal timing plans. Therefore, the levels of service at signaLized intersections were also evaluated using the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual. This method calculates the level. of service based on the weighted average vehicular delay. Unsignalized intersections were analyzed using the methodology described in the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual. This method computes the delay for each movement at an unsignalized intersection and reports the level of service for each movement according to the delay. Table 3 shows the results of the level of service analysis at both the signalized and unsignalized intersections. The table includes the level of service results for the existing and the proposed development plans. Gale Ranch Middle School Relocation-Draft Traffic Report, June 16, 2006 7 Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. t 73. 466(285} ^N t ^ 86(l 41 a t"" 10681 � 5641567) "' v *f �—1337{1294} 3 2144(2135) T... 1�T}nvanRd Maga.°hR 1 (f �' ! 1 �' 106(125) e� 4 rri 4 goritn98rCa 9j r^ IA(J)36) Bollinger Canyon Rd .�50(57) t ( Bollinger Canvon Rd t J t r4°j v !j4(14 i63t1fi3- �j'- 20(20-J � I (# 981 '1 /� ti r 346((437 ^�0 1101(1248—� 247 + .-'e 0 ( 116{111 y S 60(59—� 7901 29 °a c.f °an rn 0 „ 8 boti f4�er L ff r So r 0!lin9ar �� Y 7 Can r a R 8t1tt 7�g�ifsgE Son'Ra 11 ts�t s.r 58(98)�) /s"�y �.?r5�9( °/��/ioa & 'E- o(at1 y 9 g'sl m �➢ �,",0��` n 2 MRd NORTH r �0a�sa o o JA s�grfr4r N 3 d S 1 a° a'''aa, 10 Ill Rai LEGEND 7 at y15Qn �1 'rt • =Study Intersection 12 vri XX(XX) -Existing Plan(Proposed Plan) P �,d m � D 11 12 P° v d Desi Fl rn 65(66) 119 1646 s.Wa�ae to � MI e�Sam 60 (600 h Figure 2 AM PEAK-HOUR VOLUMES Hexagon Gale Ranch Middle School TIA i.t Transportation Consultants,inc. JN.D1ProjeclsrGele RancMVFig2.dwg Gale Ranch Middle School Relocation—Draft Traffic Report, June 16, 2006 8 Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Table 3 Levels of Service at Study Intersections - Existing Plan and Proposed Plan Existing Plan Proposed Plan Intersection HCM 2000 CCTALOS HCM 2000 CCTALOS elay Delay # North-South Street East-West Street Control Dec] LOS V/C LOS [sec] LOS V/C LOS 1 Gale Ridge Rd Bollinger Canyon Rd Signalized 23.4 C 0.69 B 18.1 B 0.61 B 2 Dougherty Rd Monarch/Gale Ridge Rd Signalized 18.5 B 0.62 B 19.4 B 0.62 B 3 Dougherty Rd Bollinger Canyon Rd Signalized 44.1 D 0.86 D 39.9 D 0.82 D 4 S.Wedgewood Rd Bollinger Canyon Rd Signalized 25.4 C 0.89 D 25.6 C 0.89 D 5 Stoneleaf Rd Bollinger Canyon Rd Signalized 22.5 C 0.74 C 24.4 C 0.74 C 6 ,South Monarch Rd Bollinger Canyon Rd Signalized 28.7 C 0.73 C 35.8 D 0.79 C 7 Main Branch Rd Bollinger Canyon Rd Signalized 26.4 C 0.68 B 24.5 C 0.75 C 8 S.Monarch Rd Main Branch Rd Roundabout 3.8 A n/a Na 4.4 A n/a n/a 9 G-Street Ivyleaf Springs Rd Unsignalized 10.7 B n/a n/a 13.5 B n/a n/a 10 F-Street Ivyleaf Springs Rd Unsignalized 10.2 B n/a n/a 10.4 B n/a n/a 11 Stoneleaf Rd W.Branch Rd Roundabout 4.1 A n/a n/a 4.1 A n/a Nei 12 Stoneleaf Rd S.Wedgewood Rd Unsignalized 20.7 C n/a n/a 22.9 C n/a n/a_ n/a:The CCTALOS software applies to signalized intersections only. Table 3 shows that based on both the CCTALOS and HCM 2000 analysis methods, all intersections would operate at acceptable levels of service for the existing and proposed land use scenarios. The levels of service results of both methods are comparable and generally yield the same letter grade. Thus, the proposed land use changes associated with the school relocation would not violate the level of service standards of the Tri- Valley Transportation Plan or the Dougherty Valley Settlement Agreement. All intersections would continue to operate at an acceptable level of service. The levels of service calculation sheets are included in Appendix D. 3. Access and Circulation The new middle school would be located south of Bollinger Canyon Road on a parcel bounded by Main Branch Road and South Monarch Road. The most recent site plan for the school prepared by Akol and Yoshii Architects is.dated June 7, 2006. The site plan and the surrounding roadways are shown in Figure 3. According to the school district, the capacity of the school would allow for a maximum enrollment of 900 students. 3.1 School Access Vehicular access to the school would be provided via a 3-lane one-directional driveway that runs between Main Branch Road and South Monarch Road. The front of the school would face this driveway. As discussed earlier in this report, the middle school is expected to generate 478 inbound trips during the morning peak hour. Based on the geographic locations of the homes in relation the school, most of the traffic(about 71%) would arrive from the north via eastbound Bollinger Canyon Road and the remaining 29% would come from the Gale Ranch Phase 3 and 4 areas via Main Branch Road. In order to accommodate the morning peak-hour school traffic, an exclusive right turn-only lane would be provided on the west side of Main Brach Road between Bollinger Canyon Road and the entrance of the school. Gale Ranch Middle School Relocation-Draft Traffic Report, June 16, 2006 9 Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. rr�� YAfi as��A •�S'} iA•A Yi .� ��; iX tb Q � ��_,� �r� � „�''W s`�a`0;�`� �yrdt }�� i'' ��, � � �•,� 4. w �y'�i�t4 Eyypyyt� s{`��+ � �p '�•� ¢ s {�T{to c. � r � ,r Q 4.� �'�a ro$°' a¢. Y' 1 V. U� �s .��_yy $ h �fy •�4. 3�4 ¢' J' f'- Y e 'i. •F M�• .�•, r` Y �d Cay 'kP ,�a5d"� `*ic �n `°�' rf/" ..(� �p.t` j�� tq, MSS O '^ •'."�-3h a° §yd s� �y:r' x 'bti it�, 'et �•'..'�s Ile �, t ••i wt �,tl• cYb�.�r i > 0 A northbound left-tum pocket on Main Branch Road would be provided to facilitate left-turning traffic coming from the areas to the south. (The exclusive turn lanes are not shown on this site plan). The service road of the school has three travel lanes which allow southbound right turns and northbound left-turns to enter the school site simultaneously. Southbound traffic would not conflict with other traffic at this intersection while the northbound left-turns would only have to yield to southbound through traffic on Main Branch Road. Southbound is the off-.peak direction of travel in the morning and the through movements are projected to be very low:fewer than 80 vehicles per hour. Typical cross sections of Main Branch Road, just north and south of the entrance to the school are provided below. Cross Section 10 1 Branel 'North of School Entrance CD a aEff a� N � Y SchoolN o Y w 9 `n E`n � � � �, 3 Park C. fLC C O1 C. C ' m� Y ;O 2 8 5 12 14 Varies 14 5 7 5 t✓rO $c0461l b"I Branch, Soutl iof School Entrance Apart- a ff z 1° . 3 Park menu 3 �: ; a) m �, maco CD 5 7 varies 12. 12 12 5 7 ., . 5 ,hSs _lb'�.44�'R'p� X. 3.2 School Egress The three-lane service road in front of the school would merge into two lanes,just south•of the parking lot. The end of the service road would"terminate at South,Monarch Road and form the fourth•leg of the South Monarch Road/Bay Leave Drive Road intersection. At this intersection,the left lane of the school's service road would be used as a.coilnbined•left/through lane while the right lane would be striped as an exclusive right-turn-only lane. The traffic at this intersection would be controlled with STOP signs on all four approaches. 3.3 Morning Drop-oft One of the main.traffic issues associated with schools is the use and the capacity of the drop=off/pick-up area.If this area is too small,then traffic would back up onto the streets surrounding the school. The estimated AM peak-hour trips generated by the school(418 iiibound trips of which 391 are drop-offs) would not be spread out over a full hour. In fact the many of the drop-offs are concentrated in the 15- minutes just before school starts.As mentioned earlier in this report,Hexagon has conducted extensive surveys at secondary schools in Santa Clara County. Observations have shown that about 47%of'the morning drop-offs occur in the fifteen minutes before the start of school.Appendix E includes graphics of the vehicle arrival patterns observed during the morning and afternoon hours at middle schools in Santa Gale Ranch Middel School Relocation—Draft Traffic Report, Tune 16, 2006 11 Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Clara County. Based on this data, the drop-off area will need a capacity to handle 184 vehicles in fifteen minutes (0.47 x 391). Given the typical amount of time that it takes to drop-off a student(again based on observations at the middle schools), we found that drop-off areas can accommodate 18 vehicles per 100 feet in the peak 15 minutes —see Appendix F. Thus, for 184 vehicles, 1,022 feet of drop-off area will be needed. The two drop-off lanes would provide approximately 1,100 feet of storage area, which would be adequate to serve the drop-off demand in the morning. In order to use the two drop-off lanes effectively,it will be necessary for school staff to operate and control the drop-off/pick-up area so that vehicles pull all the way to the front and are stopped when students need to cross the aisles. The third lane of the access road will be needed so that vehicles can bypass the drop-off/pick-up area and access the parking lot. 3.4 Afternoon Pick-up In the afternoon,most of the students would be picked up by their parents and, as it would happen during morning drop-off, many of the cars(237 inbound trips of which 210 are pick-ups) would arrive during a 15-minute period around the time that school ends. Again,based on surveys at middle schools in Santa Clara County it was found that about 42%of the afternoon pick-ups occur within the fifteen minutes around the time that the school ends. Thus, the pick-up area will need to handle 88 vehicles in fifteen minutes (0.42 x 210=88). The surveys also showed that it takes longer to pick-up compared to dropping- off and observations have shown that a pick-up area can accommodate 10 vehicles per 100 feet in the peak 15-minutes -see Appendix F. Thus, for 88 vehicles, 880 feet of pick-up space will be needed. The two drop-off lanes would provide approximately 1,100 feet of storage, which would be adequate to serve the pick-up demand in the afternoon. As during drop-off,school staff would need to assist in controlling and operating traffic during pick-up for efficiency and safety. 3.5 Level of Service and Queuing Analysis of Driveway Intersections The traffic volumes at the intersections of the school's driveway with Main Branch Road and South Monarch Road would be the highest during the AM peak hour because(1)the school trip generation'rate is considerably higher and(2) the ambient traffic volumes are higher during the morning(commute)hour compared to the mid-afternoon(— 2:00 to 3:00)hour. In order to determine the levels of service and the queue lengths at the school's driveway intersections, a traffic operational analysis was conducted at both intersections.For this analysis, the 95h percentile queues and the levels of service were calculated based on the peak 15-minute traffic volumes. Estimating of queue lengths is an important element in the analysis and design of unsignalized intersections. Theoretical studies and empirical observations have demonstrated that the probability distribution of queue lengths for any minor movement at an unsignalized intersection is a function of(a)the.capacity of the movement and(b)the volume of traffic being served. Based on these two parameters, the 95d'percentile queue length for any of the movements can be calculated. The formula to calculate the 95th percentile queue is provided on page 17-23 on the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual and is shown below: Gale Ranch Middel School Relocation—Draft Traffic Report,June 16,2006 12 Hexagon Transportation Consultants,Inc. 2 3600 Vx 0 900T Vx —'+ Vx —' + Cm,x Cm,x Cm,x ss ~ CMx (CM,X 150T (3600 Where: Qss =95th Percentile Queue(veh) Vx =Flow Rate for Movement Cm,x =Capacity of Movement x (veh/h) T =Analysis Time Period(0.25 for 15-minutes) Table 4 below shows the results of the queuing analysis as well the level of service for each of the movements at the two unsignalized intersections with the school's driveway. The table shows that the intersections would operate at LOS C or better and that the queues at the intersection approaches would be short. Because of the heavy volume on the right—turn lane exiting the school,this turn lane would experience a maximum queue of six vehicles (about 150 feet). Based on the level of service and queuing analyses, traffic operational problems are not expected to occur at the school's entrance and exit intersections. Table 4 Levels of Service and Queuing at Driveway Intersections Intersection Queuing Parameters V, Cm X T Queue LOS Delay(sec) School Entrance/Main Branch Road Northbound Left 266 896 0.25 2 B 10.7 School Exit/South Monarch Road Southbound Through/Right 82 567 0.25 1 A 9.7 Westbound Right 521 758 0.25 6 C 16.7 Westbound Through/Left 217 612 0.25 2 C 15.2 Northbound Through/Left 179 585 0.25 2 B 11.1 Eastbound Left/Right 129 630 0.25 .1 A 9.7 The level of service calculation sheets that show the queuing parameters, the LOS and the delay values are included in Appendix G. Gale Ranch Middel School Relocation—Draft Traffic Report, June 16,2006 13 Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. APPENDIX A Mode of Access at [Addle schools Appendices APPENDIX A Mode of Access at Middie Schools !.y ll`ltX 4,yet xn a rr�tt'l�.L� [1tave 105 {r a•r.��41+� .,d.._i ..)...�n. �.,1- 76.3% . .76.3% 65.1% -u h 16.0% 26.7% OWN 160-101". 2.1% 1.6% 0.3% 0.2% ��liCTi[idr�le#� 1.4% 1.2% Mode Split Biddle Schools, Drop off 1.4% 3.9% 0:3% 2DT 1% 16'0°/On�k , il�l`ifl?9r rtib' nS�x4 I ':... i I t�i:I'y�ti r C.-Ipr ��chooibus i �PubiiC Transit Other i �,yJy 41*'L�'r�.v�r•{'�r L'y �!9't3 r�fi a3���J '�rr u.+.E 5 h�'� r7��Jr,°.10T''��a� t .�'��r•'�. rr �.,�r^�+'•,a�'�e. k'E�I•P��y���..ul�p"u��`��J� _��n���t",..L.�7&�.'��r:�^'�3�'�dSE`rl'�i �i��.�r����i �ct�,�.'.D'i'!���:�r"!i*el {�t`uk�'`t_ •`�r. Mode Split Diddle Schools, Fick up 'Sc2% 0 2% S`—R,V'f z il�^lrr I� 2 �7V -: 3 ta, ®5ch6oibus Public Transit �w�tirw`USF y�rti,J6" ' �e ,tom ®Other .. {��* } ` � 'I.� �(•Its Hat �,,, �iR gttSt 3 r9� £ 3r{1{�• }G,�yye.. �• "�F -��. y d ,��r+�ra i�, k t..�` ',n�a .r��t '"��.,�,rw?,,..`rjefl�{"�&? � �i � `'� n•"2�g" f r�f `+�y"„��{4� u'AFd5�.+.yf �^'[1rt .,{�a.fr g�{{',r t e�sr"7U�3 t6y��t• „� Ir i"sTn y+ r,21,ys J± Appendices APPENDIX B Selected Link Pots Appendices e--" 011 f tiV � tA4 L tt ca got a Ay i q Qi a�IIbxIIa'ty xII f -+ sA�ri ,..{ ��i7 fiTfi i za�R L Srft}j�Fry� e� of a r.°crres<a a^Ksa bic a:rxq ° .�" lig<a wt �,y �=vv11„ti �53"� to y "�'y °fie.•�c1,, rYna-i y� Ft S KI8• ' �#j.yy �4°Fbx{Ce °s e�dr;y y 4v �� ��igs pQQ < R II��f 2t �y, � � \• �QQQ,4�QQ ;tirattt atasas>ass ,�Fggg . "� 7 O n+ � Ogg4� tlfff $ax aFe{pr a6FFrr�rr° YfiiYi@i'�.L.�'E4Y:`s�i:�rS 5 x t N i N ` A9 JJAA6rrrtAa6CaRp y SOA o .a ,oOao ►�i ern �ffifffLL������,, �.'���jj . �Qi�7• go �......... j{# M 5 t �sf�i rr*•5 ��-^err'gCar.aa�.�.a�rrrrrrgrlri� � s 9{; r r t!•.•dR,aa;Ye ,fir tg'•ta' R it � R ti r �.( itaia;aa n Rta it'is14'14t�,AFt+cy�4' 4 .�.( � agRv a M Gill{{ n'f► 3•'P�.yys! pC �sR= Rer r+rr n..4!��, ys =a Y / f py rNrraq ea Z�..a�!•'�"rrrrrryaaa sRnlf R S W YTit t b § I � Fait ry � �2 �� � aRgvOR'^i>ICOOi�i`.iSa,�R�y of ;N a�1 \ •ria 14 p ; a w a Xpa4 ° A a � l'r3 ++�rargt r n dd ya ,L/ ,l� F CgPea$y H irdd Y! y • p W }• mc44 M CD P e ) SJ C CC a'1 ~"R :rrsrr:.s:rte �,rj H ,� cif 9 ' }ter,,..• p� s r}r bas Mib. r R e +}'1i; . rab r +. 0. ,•, ^y#°d SA as a M Sit p r+rrrrrra " lf' e� 6 T s.u f~fit B$ A C Df .rrrr N r •r MMj 1 e� k r a 4 { t A r/i rr ��:kiA1.'\4�a1.L'h ..i.wul"sadi4 rn � �tl4LOggya�� i 't qqi ti ,Tj ••a a �a v { tltl ,fl1FnAy%' t atitlia tltliit 4AAAiiYYi�(1 i� � Q r• 'i� 4M t R�. 1 if siiii► rr +t awl 4't f; i'�•1 a j ` q.rrr E2 �. iA n'lt J 1 , ;+4t rrr Vj uj f "� Z q � tltlm Rreraaaaa 4 i}�a! ' f � yyYlYLlbx�1 •V t � � i N a k,"+j" ff �Qi rr : afff •p7pp If'1 L4l 46utn.<.,. yaaaaa+imat'•asxax +rrrrer,r.r rsiuw,ll++i41+ orf 0+04 Cc) � Kr' ftafsa� t3C.41 a $.'yam afarFa==s F= 4tl +"y-1 ~ tf===aa..... a H fir.+t .v U H A "•""y w � 4M U i� pY 1 V4 y JT " Sasta++sicaiiiaaxao p " ' to fits sass $ fI'f�'w\' id ;* t IN ..coca ,a a in m� a � � so q V a � A a b + Y TYRY'aRtYYtT RTTRYt'Rt'YYRT 4 444+'+ rsrrsrRr.rrrrrrr,rr,e,�b taa irtaa. N � N A tl u k u 8 p u � T u Y R Oo T. aisc°` ~YR4. y9 }j (U as �issfs+osessaasc(�aaac:ssss�af � 4' a + a PP+t�+Y- fit 0 LLi F i is v•. ss . i p4,sapp ,�«arsaasa • ii+ r ' 4Rk<44iaa {"pt4C' M��r fr 44, t4d .a 44 R $. 4O .�, a r q :. �4x:taasces w In N $ y . • `��,« � ss '�1 W hss+n. ssaass Oc44b.assi4 rrc:laas�"rYrrry�y�.ry}c«cse+'+ '�tr �' YtY � p �• A pp4pp4 Y •nl s yT-c sT arr+rrrra+ s a rssarssssaL sassiest raspasaast ssrassss e0 �� � ji cr. n W. T yQy{ 4 ��y�y5,� gY1L44441Gaci4'SC4iS ¢ K�N 4 rtrrs 4f: � oy'. 4 4 � p M v. ♦ `Y YS � Gq a Iia a N jJ k qO p k s,+ Leyy •e r'+ flZ {{ Nl k W F: .• {a s'�. 11 , � �¢f a `�y IS' R ~ ,,y XXX=xXX el :c x+� CP 8 tf C? n9m J! 1 �� � rrrrrr.',rrrrr to re 1�+• grm p C t }ty fG V c k qR r.gc V 4 i ie 4 n!A f b@a• f �+iC 4 ♦� !1 h Cif � � � ''•ei. ti tpJn �� fi B4p3eb ki RP Fqq � l .. ^ if t}{ ikiki sRGi'� 14iie4T•+4� rsrr>r i � e'7"'a� (eS Ci. E'yak} % ►}r{ y ~ l 407 dJ , fit ~�+ a�ii Lgbb4�raaaaaaraar ,y u R y n -9. p e i ZS J'f' i u a e � -t�asrrrrssr�aa e Y G N N Q M 5� c� tri w.. erl �� f •,ice AA.0 CGS .40 t4....y' 1n�X F ff S n a• 8d $Q Y 4 o t rw� d f "'o++- a attttt•xrrrrr ` n t 2, a �efa F '7 of 9 A4t'js', aa4, Nn �grfaytl4 e* #" f SIM p tl N iy .w,•''`' �� ftlf ffowwrr 1XAly tyy�.gyt1 Y yYt fS 19 p L 7 AY ,ss r•i a0 {,� 1 1 I� 'MittT}Kb Ms �"vM' �fi td � aaaa Ft 'rF �A '•�" � f ;" � �4 r• " m Gtl r;a IL44 its + ip Y ZCGC� u � Aa t� 5l j �� f■ �,�QQ A 40 aiv° Orr 44J�J�rryy � `is � ** It It to tl tl f O tl +T Ll qz, Ln ' ; B per+ m0. fig ^ N NN �QW r T. r r r P i.Sf.r � sssstsis.si-_issss a �:'""t. t �$ - 4RixxYYYShi� Ilk i 4 78 BO oEa OEa 290 .a+ bA uu r.T. • a Y�I cm 4 a. y� ib Q. xxaixhv{�r3 �p •v�t�'"=tt 3��=t _y 1- e W bA . e s CD e d P SALQ V5 ,'4. 44 b RI ca ........b tR � � .nr••r••re �5i rev+r�.n..,,,ti,.nvs+✓J"i''"`--:�.�^^�"'- rG C ...........�aSSfafaaaaaaaaCa�%Y M M1yh ti H a a x $ •• Q,� APPENDIX C Intersection Turning Movements Ey Development Site Appendices 4 � AM Peak Hour Volumes Southbound . Westbound Northbound Eastbound Intersection Site RT i' TH, ;'LT. RT TH LT RT, TH LT` RT TH LT Total 1107 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total 5.Sfon�i'keleaaf&Bollin er vol Aow"' `:?Vlie`:Bu`Ilii • "Beseataliilits..•,� _., .�?._ :;ryr,"" .,, 1t,: `ar.,, :�iis,.,�'+,18A1t .:38 .i`.9 5i'k:xDr":;;2813 � $ "= t115- ,;19,.n�.8i•,6irti�;; iddleyS�ool; twleied GR?2°?'fr� :,�•:?' ��.��:�u� .f,"..%� -;0�•�$�0}7. �0�:ef•Q�"x`84,=; s:0�7R :0��_0 ;�7R : 1 r.6� s6� �.._.��x GR3 Middle:Sohool Site 365:Unfts = ': • : BCt 0'..' . 0 0 . , 0 73 '. '1` 0: 0 Q 0; 19 0 83 6 0 .S0 0 1 0 .: SFi1 1 S__ .Ird - :-Met ns dh D A-11-1111MOS- YJ iia nlitddtes ooi3sitea16 3:,. �[+�t :. rc � Etio €u _ . Y ..i .D_ 1_ 0. .; 0 1.01 ' 4Additfo�►af,167'Unfwl t+ 0 11. 07 DO li`E'`:aVeil' :64ttdOUL`UOdet6d:VOludtCS,., "5.0 "-.. r$15 r S. :�1 .It.44; 11932!::=96, ,01 .lOr i>260 $lt`!1329, rN19. `x`4041".:I U dated-Base 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 21 40 1 16 1 0 1 -8 1 1 1 210 0 280 Southbound . WestboUngNorthbound. Eastbound Intersection Site RT " W. LT RT I TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total 4.Wedgewood&Bollin or vol u'6'e �Vfalle': YiI d(sStiB sorVotllhteS:.i.,:.. F 1 , . 7` S ,,95x 8 2 . ,K1B2 'r'�IQ sa 20 "JI059't; ^ t m �u v DD�a D� i O 4 WWI, � � f1�1[d ile;5ohool.MbdeNad)GF i2iTii �,..R.s. .✓ti.,A E ,.0, 0� GR3;MiddleSdioolSite°:365,UnRs; 13C' Oi ; b;:; 1' 3 2 70 6 r '1' ( 6) U 0; 01 1T 0. 9Y; R84iCkiiiille$>lfflolifif3 g X667' i `�sl MM.I`iIilz BY, R4 Additional 197 Unlis ,+:.•_. _ Dt_ 0 0 1 --0- 16 0 0 0 0 0 13 O 18 ou he rYaile 'BulWout U dated+Volumes . .,:::•,$' 166:'c 13 . ;:130 ,:104'`''2735:I.`:57., I°525 i4t13v,.'=279st!s 39: 1248 ;20. ;:4276'':{ Updated=Base I I 'D 1 0. L24 18 1 -9 F 7 . "41:1 0 1 40 4 147 10 217 Southbound.:• '. .Westbound Northbound. 'Eastbound Intersection Site, RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total 4789 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total 12.F-Street flyVleaf.8prings,Rd vol dli 'd ":vat at3Utiil kBiig'e's1/IDttiMeE�.. ..t:.. :ts .,.�?r,0r?t u.Q 3. sQ[ Y_a;Qr:f•48Q.,itz 1S. ft 30.x:;..Ori:ni7131 Ir20L' s 4-''v . €r36 v, idtlie SeifiDOl' oileled'GR35Yi - = ay?MX �$A „Dry^ ODDW `o 0�VI'M �: } �.o .-a r-;,2 OW E.O1j.l 6 3 ra% GR3 Middle,:SchootSite, 0U . 0..V Oi 11 0', 0`, } 0' 0' 0 0lab. 0 s lulia8r�"safi.t='6is`Yi+�"5fa5i: ,T+t I} �:��k��� s. r:�a f�0 o ��as,€�•a�,�Pio�F�ot�- rr� �0�'�Sxrao �o��Q�.�'�o�s N� MAddlilonal,1370nits .+]'_. i D 6 W 0 0 1 1. 5 0 5' 1 1 0 >¢ . ou hert'.valle ;B'ulidouf:U ated!Volumeetd°,e•,.+� a •._ ;�. ,.Oj`:s`.0�, _,'Di,`. a.,0-; 11:150. ''r31i, ,.5p�=;' 0 sr'Z3 21,�kf71,iI.;�O��:ii�4D01'+ U Pdated=Base. - 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 16 1.24 1 0 1 3 .1 1 1 1 1 0 1 45 Southbound :1, Westbound:. Northbound Eastbound Intersection Site RT ' TH LT.I RT TH, LT RT. TH LT RT TH LT Total 4790 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 9 10 11 .12 Total 11.G-Street/M eaf S rin s Rd _ Vol i%ti fte '.v'le;BuUdtlutaB.ase,atll.. „p..s �5_ t ;_' ,'85Ut Y:i90D k •r„]11t- ak1fl:.. :1D '.YDc ai s VWt Ds :7.1 Mltfflleliafiool!Mode'leii jGiit2bTN sl c:G �� ,y. A v uD IN ta�0��r�0�- ?8� yD� 6�`��3`��,Dtw.s D;l�-0Y,. f�OM., GR3'Middle.Sch'oo6Sfte.865sUnits - z ._. _ BC. 0! _ ! 0. 1: ! 1! 0,'. '.. 1 V Q 0, 0• 0: + 6 4 R2 0 0 rx [Gov f>fHiltii Seft6olSffe 16 `si 1 f'.`, I ell',M O 0 0 ' 0S :6 l t i 4 :G 6._ 1 0 0` •Fi O . R41Addltionai 167UnRs +_ _ D' .0. 11 0 0' 0 1 5 90. 1S 1• 1 5 0 44 i ou he Vg11e ;Buiidoulli ated;VofUmes-r:° k.,:. ,a 45:°I i+'3 1 6Bt- -33..:1t<i,86s•.I I.T'`-a6 . iw]65 t• 11 U ated.-BaseI 1 0. 1 0 28 1 23 16 1 36 r 65 1 17 1 1 1 24 1 195 Appendices PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2015.5 C.C.P.) STATE OF CALIFORNIA ,A County of Alameda I am a citizen of the United States, I am over the age of eighteen years, and I am not a party to or interested in the above-entitled matter. I am a foreman or principle clerk of the printer and publisher of the Alameda Journal, —a newspaper published in the English language in — Alameda County, State of California. I declare that the Alameda Journal is a newspaper of general circulation as defined by the laws of the State of California, as determined by the order of the Superior Court of the County of Alameda,dated August 25, 1992, in the action entitled "In the Matter of the Petition of the Alameda Journal to Have the Standing of the Alameda Journal as a Newspaper of General Circulation Ascertained and Established," Case Number 702515-6. Said order provides that: "Petitioner's prayer for an order ascertaining and establishing The Alameda Journal as a newspaper of general circ ulation...within the City of Alameda, County of Alameda, State of California, is granted." Said order has not been revoked. I declare that the notice, a printed copy of which is annexed hereto, has been published in each regular and entire issue of the Alameda Journal and not in any supplement thereof, on the following dates to wit: Nov 7, all in the year of 2006 I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoiin,9 is true and correct. Exec6tei at Walnut Creek, California. On hi 8 day of.Wevember, 2006 . ... ..... ..... .............................................. ............ Signature Alameda Journal 1516 Oak Street Alameda, CA 94501-4520 (510) 748-1666 Proof of Publication of: (attached is a copy of the legal advertisement that published) NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE .._CONTRA-COSTA COUNTY BOAR® OF SUPERVISORS ON PLANNING MATTERS - 1 DOUGHERTY VALLEY/SAN RAMON AREA You are hereby notified that on TUESDAY NOVEMBER 14 2008 AT 1.00 P.M.inRoom 107,McBrien :i Administration Building,651 Pine Street,Martinez,California,the County Board of Supervisors will consider a GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT;SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT,AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS described as follows: f SHAPELL HOMES(Applicant and Owner):The applicant requests approval of a General Plan Amendment#GP06-0003,Specific Pian Amendment #SP06-0001,and Final Development Plan Amendments'#DP06-3050,#DP06-3051,and#DP06-3052. There is no net gain or loss of units. A.General Pian Amendment#GP06-0003:An amendment to the County General Plan,(2005-2020 )Land Use Element to allow the relocation of the Middle School originally approved for the Gale Ranch Phase II development which is,now under the jurisdiction of the City of San Ramon.The request also includes the replacement of the Multi-FamilyResidentlai Low Density(ML)'land Use designation with Public and . t Semi-Public(PS)and Parks and Recreation(PR)along the north eastern portion of Gale Ranch'Phase III,in order to accommodate the.Middle School, B.S eciflc Plan Amendment#SP06-0001:An amendment to the Dougherty Valley Specific Pian to allow modification of the Public and Semi-Public(PS)and Parksand Recreation(PR)land use designation for the previously approved Middle School site to Single-Family Residential-Medium Density(SM),and to allow modification of the Multi-Family Residential Low-Density(ML)land use,designation to Public and Semi-Public(PS)and.Parks and Recreation(PR).Several figures in the do Specific Plan will be revised In order to reflect the relocation.of,the Middle School and the corresponding use modifications to land use designations of the Gale Ranch development:Proposed changes are depicted in the Errata to the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan. C.Final Development Plan#DP06-3050(Portion of Gale Ranch Phase M:This.a Final Development Plan modification to approved County File#DP9573086 to allow relocation of Middle School with 63 detached single family residential units D,Final'Development'Plan#DP06-3051.(_Portion of Gale Ranch Phase i:This is a Final Development Plan modification to approved County File#DP99-3006 to reduce the number of"apartment units from 381 to.165 and allow location of Middle School. E.Final Development Plan#DP06-3052(Portion of Gale Ranch Phase W:This isa Final Development Pian modification to approved County File#DP04-3070 and to allow a reduction of detached single- family residential units(less 60 units)and an increase of apartment units(plus 213 units). The portion of4he Gale Ranch,,Phase 11 to be modified.is'located west of Dougherty Road,at the corner of Lilac Ridge Road.and North Gale Ridge Road.The portion of Gale Ranch Phase ill to be modifled is located south of Bollinger Canyon between South Monarch Road and Main Branch Road:The portion of Gale Ranch Phase IV to be modified is located south of ivyleaf Springs Road between South Monarch Road and Stoneleaf Road in the Dougherty Valley San Ramon area.(Zoning:P-1)(Zoning Atlas Page:W-16)(Census Tract 3551.03)(APNs for Phase ii:222-240-008 and 222-240-009 and APN for Phase ill and Phase IV.222-270- 001). For purposes of compliance with the provisions of the California Env!ronmental.Quality Act(CEQA),an Addendum to the 1992 EIR and the 1996 Supplemental EIR was prepared for this'project in September of 2006.The proposed project modifications are consistent with the previously approved environmental documents and there are no additional significant impacts. if you challenge the project in court,you may limited'to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice,or,in written correspondence delivered to the Countyat,, or prior to,the public`hearing. Prior to the hearing,Community Development Department staff will be available on Tuesday,November 14, 2006,in Room 108;Administration Building,651:Pine Street,Martinez,to meet with any interested parties in order to(1)answer questions;(2)review the hearing procedures used by the Board;(3)clarify the issues being considered by the:Board;and(4)provide an opportunity to identify,resolve,or narrow any differences which remain in dispute. If you wish to attend this meeting with staff,please call Telma Moreira,Community Development Department,at(925)335-1217 by 3:00 p.m,,on Monday,November 13,2006 to confirm your participation. Date:November 1,2006 John Cullen;Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator By Katherine Sinclair,,Deputy Clerk f. Legal CCT 7028;Publish November 4,2006 PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2015.5 C.C.P.) STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of Alameda I am a citizen of the United States, I am over the age of eighteen years, and I am not a party to or interested in the above-entitled matter. I am a foreman or principle clerk of the printer and publisher of the Alameda Journal, a newspaper published in the English language in Alameda County, State of California. I declare that the Alameda Journal is a newspaper of general circulation as defined by the laws of the State of California, as determined by the order of the Superior Court of the County of Alameda, dated August 25, 1992, in the action entitled "In the Matter of the Petition of the Alameda Journal to Have the Standing of the Alameda Journal as a Newspaper of General Circulation Ascertained and Established," Case Number 702515-6. Said order provides that: "Petitioner's prayer for an order ascertaining and establishing The Alameda Journal as a newspaper of general circulation...within the City of Alameda, County of Alameda, State of California, is granted." Said order has not been revoked. I declare that the notice, a printed copy of which is annexed hereto, has been published in each regular and entire issue of the Alameda Journal and not in any supplement thereof, on the following dates to wit: Nov 7, all in the year of 2006 I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Execute, at Walnut Creek, California. On hid 8 day ofrWevember, 2006 ..................................... ............ Signature Alameda Journal 1516 Oak Street Alameda, CA 94501-4520 (510) 748-1666 Proof of Publication of: (attached is a copy of the legal advertisement that published) NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE 1 CONTRA-COSTA COUNTY BOAR® OF SUPERVISORS ON PLANNING MATTERS . 1 DOUGHERTY VALLEY/SAN RAM ON AREA r You are hereby notified that on TUESDAY:NOVEMBER 14 2006:AT 1:00 P.M.in Room 107,McBrien i Administration Building,651 Pine Street,Martinez,California;the County Board of Supervisors will consider a s GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT;SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT,AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS described as follows: SHAPELL HOMES(Applicant and Owner):The applicant requests approval of a General Plan Amendment#GP06-0003;Specific Plan Amendment #SP06-0001,and Final Development { Plan Amendments#DP06-3050,#DP06-3051;and#DP06-3052. There is'no net gain or loss.of units. t A.General Pian Amendment#GP06-0003:An amendment to the County General Pian.(2005-2020]Land k Use Element to allow the relocation.of the Middle School originally approved for the Gale Ranch Phase II development which is.now under the jurisdiction of the.City of San Ramon.The request also includes the replacement of the Muitl-Family-Residential Low Density(ML)'Iand'use designation with Public and : 1 Semi-Public(PS)and Parks and Recreation(PR)along the north eastern portion of Gale Ranch Phase 111,in order to accommodate the.Middle School. B.Specific Plan Amendment#SP06-0001:An amendment to the Dougherty.Valley Specific Pian to allow modification of the Public and Semi-Public(PS)and Parks'and Recreation(PR)land use designation for the previously approved Middle School site to Single=Family Residential-Medium Density(SM),and to allow modification of the Multi-Family Residential Low:Density(ML)land use designation to Public and Semi-Public(PS)and.Parks and Recreation(PR):Several figures in the do Specific Plan will be revised in order to reflect the relocation of.the Middle School and the corresponding use modifications to land use designations of the Gale Ranch development:Proposed.changes are depicted in the Errata to the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan. C.Final Development Plan#DP06-3050(Portion of Gale Ranch PhasL :This a Final Development Pian modification to approved County File#DP95-3086 to allow relocation of Middle School with 63 detached single family residential units. D.Final Develoornent Pian 0006-3051:(Portion of Gale Ranch Phase lll)'Thls is a Final Development Plan modification to approved County,Fiie#DP99-3006 to reduce the number of apartment units from 381 to,165 and allow location of Middle School E.Final Develbprnent Plan#DP06-3052(Portion of Gale Ranch Phase IV):This is a Final Development Pian modification to approved County File#DP04-3070 and to allow a reduction of detached single- family residential units(less 60 units)and an increase of apartment units(plus 213 units). The portion of the.Gale Ranch;Phase li to be modified is located west of Daugherty.Road,at the corner of Lilac Ridge Road.and North Gale Ridge Road.The portion of Gale Ranch Phase III to be modified is located south of Bollinger Canyon between South Monarch Road and Main Branch.Road.The portion of Gale Ranch Phase IV to be modified is located-south of ivyleaf Springs Road between South Monarch Road and Stoneleaf Road in the Dougherty Valley San:Ramon area.(Zoning-,P-1)(Zoning Atlas.Page:W-16)(Census Tract 3551.03)(APNs for Phase 11:222-240-008 and 222-240-009 and APN for Phase III and Phase IV:222-270- 001). For purposes of compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA),an Addendum to the 1992 EIR and the 1996 Supplemental EIR was prepared for this project in September of 2006.The proposed project modifications are.consistent with the previously approved environmental . documents and there are no additional,significant impacts. If you challenge the project in court,you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice,or in written correspondence delivered to the Countyat,, or prior to,the public hearing. Prior to the hearing,Community0eveiopment Department-staff will be available on Tuesday,November 14, 2006,in Room 108;Administration Building,651:Pine.Street Martinez,to meet with any interested parties in order to(1)answer questions;(2)review the hearing procedures used by the Board;(3)clarify the issues being considered by the Board;and(4)provide an opportunity to identify,resolve,or narrow any differences which remain in dispute. if you wish to attend this meeting with staff,please call Telma Moreira,Community Development Department,at(925)335-1217 by 3:00 p.m.,on Monday,November 13,2006 to confirm your participation. Date-,November 1,2006 John Cullen,Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator By Katherine Sinclair,,Deputy Clerk Legal CCT 7028;Publish November 4,2006 Southbound Westbound Northbound I Eastbound Intersection Site RT .`TF1` _LT RT TH LT RT Tk LT RT TH LT Total 485Q 1 2 3 4 6 6 7 a 8 1a 11 12 Total -9.-Dougherty!Gale Ride Vol N{�didieXSChu"c{f#lfodBt�ed 4R12t1; �'sf 1,�a���','.+���t'�.�. A `'x�.�5,'7�a ";'�0��;r�,a� f01 . 7 +���'Dii,�t���U.�+a `�..��0. ,�•t : t (�a4� �6�+,5'st .GR3^A91ddle:Scli%iat�8Cte.365 Uhfts, �-•� BC,�;, 0,. ,,:„t} GR4 Addhtonal 1374iz►Its t .f 0 a t 4 a� a o I1Ca� 4i�lii[o71 lira»107 Valte.i6vlld6ft' lai6dtValii lees - 6r1: t2t6& 13r7fi rID136d 901n1J1M'tl(�13_481 d63;3g 61046 X1103 l�_4;a� { 2 3571v s is U dated .t3ase•;t a A4 ,. .,.:ah. z.0:_,.,alk .a.. u:;0' S outhbaund, - .rr.;,Westbound, . Northboundrt '.s _: ,EasiDourtd ' Stte, .RTP "IT. TN LT RT TH LT RT . TH. LT- Total 7 777 $824 1 2 4-.. M6 s " .7 s ':. 9 ya 11 12 Total 13.Stont:iiaaf&WeetSmfich Vol s 'w 25a, DGtf a "eVBtle"Biflldt+` a`s`elVctu psi ...w,.,^.moi�`�2�,...4�'•e„'03,xa 6?f�l�;s`�36tar 2�605ti��a�a, 221�'�� i},3"SO'f�' 0�»t 10��i�tR'�P�0' `k?`6 ,�:', tdaieysahool�16rideliedlGi�T2#Tal s .� N � ,��G, `a�'`��;1 0�1a i� o�.� o'�t�po. �i�o� �:0�•��;��. 4 , i��:e� �ti a�,�4�lbh t>�R3`.Ntt�lidle$SCtic t!Sttes8fi64ltrilm, a MORE;: ,U t3R3 r�ddl s a l a 16 . . I�o7 o a o 0 0 ii�o lii[a�i' o'' - GR4 Add3ttanat 13:7 ttnitOM �a7 ou'her;Valle IRO ld"o-M,l da'ted.W"luiries x 1k$MSY-1 , ,.::.:,:;r�';�i`X..;-,r xc ^ 'k �;C§r i� ;...� 4F yA6ti;' a^ 5...'Y^^✓'mow � .:s f ,:�' ni. ^3:vac �z 4•'k+,-:.,� +.N.,a.4a �'�5.+ v4 USix `�..f�tk F r+F�-1'�,�u.�..r..: i is`5 SAtui Ysa. 'n4 '�ac." L..r.�...}d. 5. ...._7 .. .n.x.:.H. ...,ir .0. :. L .. : ... Ai },.. A �^"."`1,- �:��r 4 .•....� Y$ii .t... y�*t 'y,,.� 'ruF1 �;el ^r.uen::rcer�3mm'txe.:f;.";Y+1"k°x5 .4ti;P.,•`'�kA M'rv+t+:}xs _._ 8outhbound,.. Westbound: _Northbound, Eas ound._ " A>Slte:.; RT ?M— tt L'T`�" If, ,t„I,1,1;..:,LT,.:R,1 TFl'' LT.'= .t TH L'•'I` Total 2 3 f 4 6:. 6 7, g,. 10111 1Total 1 1.4,,Stoneleaf:&S Wod ew.oad... . -.1 _ s. . ._ .. . -,Vat Oti!`"Beit"1/8116 tiltllfie(it;El968z1/Gftlltl"BS a,u_",r 3�yr:. � i 16 ctit0} b'•Y'$ �,'4aW.. 7..00 SSC =+.21��? :`II(tl`I�" �311�x'''im1441d e, ?rF p � � — 1dlleai�ioai.McteiedtsR2mTt } :. � #Ili ..8. ;C R Middle Schon!She as`s WORMS,���� _� v , sr� 1 a �ti�� o o �.tea d d [ l� � ;1 : gm W-ful WO ID-A 0 4 0 GR4 Additloncl 737 Units + a moi♦1<li! o �Fc7i god a 1Fa�Iirs7 1111'1•�tam� � ou �Vaile'78uUdout�t'J datedS,V31um F1�42t# X1610,� tE70�X15611 St2�t liii25�l�3,'P6�A i5fi� � 9120AI fig E ks-' ?°�s U dated . ..2. 0 Southbound.;;',. ound _,_.:..,:Northbound Eastbourxt :.. . iTif®t SeC,fiQtl:;. ,...: _. : ..,x:' Stte RT`.."`.•TH #;L.T . RT TFI LT RT TF1 LT RT TH.. . LT,. Total 5g1 Total 1 2 3 4 6 6 7 8 9 10 11 19 1Q.S:Monarch&Main Branch _ -Vol Vol tlo�i' a ""s'.ella'.13fi1f a`ttt: ase=YirllYrlies.a" _, .. # v 30 "tf20V 620AMU 30 AS . :ES if[t li 1 81 't?2a13 ;ax tii�iiefct+oc�` 1lbdelee`GR{2'1 sf� � tt o MKNIF + c o`er A . leo FARM it �+l��fs ._is �-�., A s•i _- illi Fu � , }� � GR4TA'ddntatu;!137 linits + MAfly �8'X01♦t�E4i 1�1�0'N<a1r�Oj tea]♦Iron�P : ou`Merl:aValie"}SutCdo"ti U' at8tit Kattim" 11127 i>v13a 4> 31'36 �. ibS34l��B2'1 ffS 0�2s�1151101!iRS >t Ett3tt4}r4&,4 S i,:Hist� ;:.�r P+ ,:,_,a.'?�� 5 7yt(�'?r s�C�.kI�Yt` t$'....24...+.. �'xt..i;,s .r.fin n�..,.aS:. m .i.«rL ,x Y..:r:,i#u.�r?.3;.c�:a Y`m;7�;Y; 'aa.++,h,.:ae"_:,, t..:s.?.::., -•S;�'�.7.:.:- _ -4,":>x,:132' y,4•,' -0 ,; Oti. f,..1 : r.0.. :;=?Atl Appendices SouthbounWestboundort oun stboun �_ Intersection sue "RTTH"" Lt° ';RT' TJ4 LT RT TH LT RT TH LT.` ,,Total 591 2 5 8 2 1 3 4 6 7 8 10 11 1 Total B011ln` er&;i�ftiin BrallCtin F -^` + M k s:a Vol B u tre># Vellp.BGlldoutaBesla}Vmiam0K". Itlrtlla{8�f►apli Modeled 6 t YtTi Sr sem-' ,i ,a ? oY VO ���o�,; ��� RU � ko�� qu o� 4��p off;r��aER GR3tMlddle,ScfioofSite':366Units,[..j.=`,�z_ BC,u ;.Ox t•,1 4'.0 t1. _ .Q„ z 2i1A'L410$a R4fAddltiona11R7urilt�l ' o o� Q ori; a 21i� o No� 6��g�lipoyl ou Heti tVelle.IBt�itclutt{9UiCeted�V"oturtrr� j 31�'130!R�64�t9fcTtir�Ii1'434t;i�iZslt�' 2Z4� . '9�FAMOVI!lf322�;1488'e�I:0� ,h,�k''i �" c,w.au },,m --c7 '=tY, •i° --'_ F �,W N, +"1.,, '�1` g:. dated'='Baser 0: a'20 -0 0 66:• 1 .;,,39. ry: p,,.;.307: .1g p.: :242 R 2 M . :w - t .xSouthbotlird..zz '>:.. estboundorthbound Eastbound ' % iFT,. TH LT. . :RT,...TH' LT.' RTx_ -T+i t" LT TO1'a{ intersection_. �� _ Site. . RT TH t.T _ 5922Tota 1 2 3 4 5 6... 7 8 r,, c 10 r..11 12 l ,6 Mpnarch&Bollin er �w£ 4 ;:�, *�. ( F r F w-„F �•r� F�.:_ . .,t �u hart'eVelle B611dID ;Base Voluriies �U a if238 €OWF281Y.iyfi@'W, MVE RIO °236H 6t#t 118f AMR 2mfZi MiadleYscnooi3 Mlode{edGSFi2tTiif`'s: fik � Cd ?:so Ico ox . Q i ro i ss�,4 :,GR3<Mfllle�SctiooliSiteA365�Units3[�:J;�,..� .�u_,.�.�, ..aBC,,� �§O:�ys�<1+�.:,i 01 i .0,,.�.•��.�_���0"�,. 11�;, 1a �74� 18 0 0 �;',9.i- ,j 4 . attlonet 1371Un{ts�+ ���moo,�! o ■Com No Who llr3�>�019■[oy ou Heil`Valle 78ul1doultU datedtV,olumes N21:3S i'0J%p2854 CYi65 hill I Ba2i6 8182 taZ150TCC i2384d tif6606f 1:149!0#X66�a1 a J ,.,,, _-#F�->�.y, .,. �,:7.c,v,, x��'?-m.: ,k�i-•9r. -saa�.�v;,Y.asmv,�e� ...,„s:.v:t FixJ,,,•n�.? _��rrr• :ti:.:tr•:r. _'t-�'>< ..c.,r��,*,n;x...M:,�' t ,�.,_.:. i .x.,...: -�..5..z�--. _ U dated;t686e �c.R�.,�•�;.ncf,. a,��Fi,� °.�.�a�ti.a�:,.:.;:i» �#+ ,�=5.'. 1��)sr':.,5.4�,+�O.,�i .r65a; n-„0 .t2D�t 40' 3 156:;; �` + �= 3'' „ rh h 1 -iw.a a...��xxh•.-SaY+.^.•.N4 t� .tft g ,Sout Wtmdi .:.r3 Westbound:< Norihkound:.,. _ IntersectiOri. $tfe. 'RT. T--H" LT,`".RT ,TH. "LT RT TH: . LT..";"RT TH LTA Notal 629$ i 2 3 's 4 5 6 7 8, 9i 10 11 12 ,Total : �b orttiG.ale,t3id c�&�B.Orli[t��X��+,,J. x�,t,xs.s,,,��i;swC%..{���4y.•�#�t��,�.�t,�.��`�'�n��.}2'..�:t r.r.k3 �y�-a�ih,.���h�rc:;�?�."'inx*���,�,�3��' VO{ ,LD OuTSett zVBUftftff dqdt,,ftstIV6W— MI. IMIUM1949M MOMIX7B14",'{t 2;4 LI w2a txR3�tdlti ilte School slte 31i51lnifssE��, _semX, ._ . .a �� o 0 =;"E+i z, s. 4M",M 0Q �(1 `o, o� R4TAiiaflornalfi37 iinits [+ * 0 0 0 -4 15 i " c►) 0� 0 0 i 0 13x; DOv hart;YeIC BUiCdoCitll! deteglume li1l7141 ($1:36.t?285"120689 i 2751 g( 6i I48l I6 136287 88ffit IfF377bt':' #.i ,2. a_ s .. ,...� -149. •209 U" ated=Base" 5 .` 0 3a', :181, 24 12 13. -6. 0 0 38 _ � ,.,�`.? .7 _e..,,tea.�•�� _ ;Southbound,�r Westborind Northbound: Eastbound intersection _ • 'Slte� RT� TH"s' LT' °';liT 6366 p 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 °` 9 10 11 12 Total :�'xllQi.i he. .&Boilin er r•.:"'° a " r.?'.t .s, k:"r-,.f7 &-T Oou hEii n a6uttdoUfitlA6eK ottitnes ✓ 8 a �1o68a"anise lt3Et4i So6 � :7t if 3~186 t�t16 C34fx*�x1 x..� Idtlle SRIioml,idldtle�ed GFtiTtt":sib=,t� *_ 1 "A' Al.,. 0UOY1 T Ate: .� GR3;N11ddle Sclio ll'slie3�5 tlntts[ I � MBO ; ate; o': _ e b Ly24 a kor o o o o 6 a sdl—ro k Fisi7fuli�fd'�TBThttS. 165 s 0 Q �S� 0 6iy i 0 33 R43Ad"dlti0lialFl37dUni D 0 0� 2 9� 1,1 0 1 "per"0 _tier! Viille-8ir11tS0 jtt-9tei9 VOliimes III8G9d 81075 18388 563 l .l�ri25~il Pb1�10. �' Rllr82iR itl14�'f9!5P4371<163i1�f566At'':� k �.�a.s Q�ro uw�� ��; r�,r.ran•_ Mc,�aa,., "�'}-�,f,F,-r,,.ap,:,.,t..vt�.�. vSL".,.F. t:;k::. '�.' r r.,l.:.k c �:., r�(.sw-to- :z.-.;t'';x..:. . U'dated=Base r w » F «. .- ter.. ss p uw ? 6`:`' 17 ;3 ,43" 19 s39 1D; .v ,.,,:,,g1. ._..0.. a qs Appendices APPENDIX E Arrival Distribution of School Traffic Appendices AM NEW Wed Jun 14, 2006 16: 18: 18 Page 13-1 --=----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed Plan - AM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) wwwwwwx*x**w*,r**x*wwxwx*wwwwwwwwww*wwxwww-h-ww*ww***ww*wwxwww*wwwww**xw*ww*w�wxxww Intersection #6366 Dougherty 1 Bollinger [N] xwwwww*wwwww*,rwxww*wwxww*wwx*wwwwwwwwwxw**wwww*ww*www***wwww*wxwwwxx***w*w,t**ww* Cycle (sec) : 14.0 Critical Vol . /Can. (X) 0.890 Loss Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 39 . 9 Optimal Cvcle: 122 Level Of Service: D w,r*x**w*w, *w*wwwww***ww*www**www*w*wwwwxwww**wwwx*w***ww*w*wwx**www*wwwwww�*wwww Street Name: Dougherty Bollinger Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------I---------------II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Ovi Ovl Ovl Ovl Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 2 0 3 0 1 2 0 3 0 1 2 0 3 0 1 2 0 3 0 1 ------------ ---------------II---------------II ---------------II---------------I Volume Module : Base Vol: 92 443 110 398 1075 869 163 437 111 125 1294 567 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 92 443 110 398 1075 869 163 437 111 125 1294 567 User Adj : 1 .00 1.00 1 . 00 1 .00 1 .00 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 . 00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 92 443 110 398 1075 869 163 437 111 125 1294 567 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 '0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 92 443 110 398 1075 869 163 437 111 125 1294 567 PCE Adj: 1 .00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 .00 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol. : 92 443 110 398 1075 869 163 437 111 125 1294 567 ------------I ---------------II---------------II---------------II---------------I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 0.91 0.85 0. 92 0. 91 0. 85 0. 92 0. 91 0.85 0. 92 0. 91 0.85 Lanes: 2.00 3 .00 1 .00 2. 00 3 . 00 1 . 00 2.00 3 . 00 1.00 2. 00 3. 00 1 .00 Final Sat . : 3502 5187 1615 3502 5187 1615 3502 5187 1615 3502 5187 1615 ------------1 ---------------i .---------------11---------------11---------------I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.03 0 . 09 0. 07 0. 11 0.21 0. 54 0.05 0 . 08 0. 07 0.04 0.25 0. 35 Crit Moves. wxww ww** wxx* www* Green/Cycle: 0.03 0.25 0.35 0.33 0.55 0. 60 0.05 0.23 0.26 0.10 0.28 0. 61 Volume/Cap: 0.89 0.34 0.20 0.34 0.38 0. 89 0.89 0 . 36 0.26 0.36 0.89 0.57 Delay/Veh: 122.7 43.3 32.0 35.4 17 . 8 33. 9 103. 3 45 . 1 41 . 1 59. 6 55.5 17 .0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 . 1 .00 AdjDel/Veh: 122.7 43.3 32.0 35.4 17 .8 33.9 103.3 45.1 41. 1 59. 6 55.5 17 .0 HCM2k95th: 8 10 6 12 16 53 9 10 7 5 32 25 Traffix 7 . 6.0715 (c) 2003 Dowiina Assoc. Licensed to Hexaaon Trans. San Jose Appendices AM-NEW Wed Jun .14, 2006 16:18:18 Page 12-1 Proposed Plan - AM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #6298 Gale Ridge / Bollinger Canyon Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.598 Loss Time (sec) : 9 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 18. 1 Optimal Cycle: 42 Level Of Service: B Street Name: Gale Ridge Bollinger Canyon Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------ 1 ---------------11---------------II---------------II ---------------I Control : Permitted Permitted Protected Protect ed Rights: Include Include Ovl Ovl Min. Green: 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 1 1 0 3 0 1 ------------ I ---------------II--------------- 11---------------II--------------- Volume --------------Volume Module: Base Vol: 49 5 51 136 1 171 98 829 8 27 2068 285 Growth Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 Initial Bse: 49 5 51 136 1 171 98 829 8 27 2068 285 User Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1 .00 PHF Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 PHF Volume: 49 5 51 136 1 171 98 829 8 27 2068 285 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 49 5 51 136 1 171 98 829 8 27 2068 285 PCE Adj : 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1 .00 MLF Adj : 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 Final Vol. : 49 5 51 136 1 171 98 829 8 27 2068 285 ------------ I ---------------11---------------II---------------II---------------I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 190'0 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0. 41 0.86 0. 86 0.70 0.85 0.85 0. 95 0.91 0.85 0. 95 0. 91 0 .85 Lanes: 1 . 00 0.09 0. 91 1.00 0.01 0. 99 1.00 3.00 1.00 1 .00 3. 00 1 .00 Final Sat. : 771 146 1493 1334 9 1607 1805 5187 1615 1805 5187 1615 ------------ I---------------II---------------II---------------11 ---------------I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat : 0.06 0.03 0. 03 0. 10 0.11 0. 11 0.05 0.16 0.00 0.01 0.40 0. 18 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green/Cvc1e: 0. 18 0. 18 0. 18 0. 18 0 .18 0.18 0.09 0. 69 0. 69 0.06 0. 67 0 . 67 Volume/Cap: 0.36 0. 19 0. 19 0.57 0.60 0. 60 0.60 0.23 0.01 0.23 0. 60 0 .26 Delay/Veh: 52.1 49.3 49.3 56.0 56. 4 56.4 67. 1 7 . 9 6. 6 63.2 13.2 9. 6 User De1Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 52. 1 49.3 49.3 56.0 56. 4 56 . 4 67 . 1 7 . 9 6. 6 63.2 13.2 9. 6 HCM2k95th: 9 4 4 15 10 14 10 8 0 2 27 9 Traffix 7.6.0715 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans. San Jose .:oven ices AM-NEW Wed Jun 14, 2006 16:18:18 Page L0-1 Proposed Plan - AM Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #5917 Main Branch / Bollinger Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Vol. /Cap. (X) : 0.781 Loss Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 24. 5 Optimal Cycle: 140 Level Of Service: C Street Name: Main Brach Bollinaer Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------ ---------------II--------------- II --------------- II--------------- Control: -----=--------Control: Split Phase Split Phase Protected Protected Rights: Include Include . Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 ------------ ---------------II---------------II---------------II---------------I Volume Module: Base Vol: 72 9 224 64 30 31 10 1488 322 71 1437 14 Growth Adj : 1 . 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 . 00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 Initial Bse: 72 9 224 64 30 31 10 1488 322 71 1437 14 User Adj : 1 .00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1 . 00 1.00 1.00 1 . 00 PHF Adj : 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1 . 00 PHF Volume: 72 9 224 64 30 31 10 1488 322 71 1437 14 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 72 9 224 64 30_ 31 10 1488 322 71 1437 14 PCE Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 . 00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 MLF Adj: 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 Final Vol. : 72 9 224 64 30 31 10 1488 322 71 1437 14 ------------ I ---------------II---------------II---------------11---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0 .95 0.86 0.86 0. 95 0.92 0.92 0.95 0.92 0. 92 0. 92 0. 95 0. 95 Lanes: 1 .00 0.04 0. 96 1. 00 0.49 0.51 1.00 1. 64 0_. 36 2.00 1. 98 0 .02 Final Sat. : 1805 63 1564 1805 863 892 1805 2888 625 3502 3572 35 ------------ I ---------------II---------------II-------------- --11----------------I Capacity. Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0 .04 0.14 0.14 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.52 0 . 52 0.02 0. 40 0 . 40 Crit Moves : **** **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0 .18 0.18 0. 18 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.01 0. 66 0. 66 0.03 0. 68 0. 63 Volume/Cap: 0 .22 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.77 0.77 0.59 0.78 0. 78 0.78 0.59 0 .59 Delay/Veh: 49.0 67.0 67 .0 103.4 101 101.1 115.7 18 .5 18.5 102. 1 12.7 12.7 User De1Adj: 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1 .00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 49.0 67.0 67 .0 103.4 101 101.1 115.7 18 .5 18.5 102.1 12.7 12."1 HCM2k95th: 6 20 21 9 8 8 2 46 45 6 29 2!3 ** F***M- e Yr*Yr*-�k'k**x***** F*Y:ix****'k k**YC Yc F*Y;.A-}.**Yc F tir*******xxic****x******k***it****k•k* Traffix 7. 6. 0715 (c) 2003 Dowling'Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans. San Jose ADDendices AM-NEW Wed Jun 14, 2006 16:18:18 Page 9-1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed Plan - AM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report FHWA Roundabout Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #5912 Monarch / Main Branch Average Delay (sec/veh) 4 .4 Level Of Service: A Street Name: Monarch Main Branch Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T. - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - . R ------------1---------------II---------------II---------------11--------------- I Control: Yield Sign Yield Sign Yield Sign Yield Sign Lanes: 1 1 1 1 ------------ ---------------{ I---------------II------------ --II --------------- I Volume Module :. Base Vol: 25 99 297 41 130 27 20 51 10 34 40 30 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 25 99 297 41 130 27 20 51 10 34. 40 30 User Adj : 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.001.00 1. 00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 25 99 297 41 130 27 20 51' 10 34 40 30 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 25 99 297 41 130 27 20 51. 10 34 40 30 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1,.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 . 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol. : '25 99 297 . 41 130 27 20 51 10 34 40 30 ------------ ---------------II--------------=II---------------II---------------I PCE Module: AutoPCE: 25 99 297 41 130 27 20 51 10 34 40 30 TruckPCE: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ComboPCE: 0 ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0. 0 0 BicyciePCE: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 AdjVolume: 25 99 297 41 130 27 20 51 10 34 40 30 ------------ ----- ------ Delay Module: >> Time Period: 0.25 hours << CircVolume: 112 99 205 144 MaxVolume: 1140 1147 1089 1122 PedVolume: 0 0 0 0 AdjMaxVol: 1140 1147 1089 1122 ApproachVol: 421 198 81 104 ApproachDel: 5.0 3 .8 3. 6 3.5 Queue: 1 .7 0. 6 0.2 0.3 T_raf-=ix_ 7 .6 . 0715 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans . San Jose :?pnendices i AM-NEW Wed Jun 14, 2006 16:18:18 Page 8-1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed Plan - AM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection 45835 Stoneieaf / S. Wedgewood Average Delay (sec/veh) : 10.0 Worst Case Level Of Service: C[ 22. 9] Street Name: Stoneieaf S.Wedgewood Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - ' T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------ ---------------II---------------II---------------11--------------- Control: --------------Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 ------------ ---------------II---------------II---------------II--------------- Volume --------------Volume Module: Base Vol: 316 25 25 15 55 42 20 20 56 15 70 38 Growth Adj : 1.00 1..00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1 . 00 Initial Bse: 316 25 25 15 55 42 20 20 56 15 70 38 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1 .00 PHF Adj : 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1. 00 1.00 PHF Volume: 316 25 25 15 55 42 20 20 56 15 70 38 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol. : 316 25 25 15 55 42 20 20 56 15 70 38 ------------ I ---------------II---------------II---------------II---------------I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4 .1 xxxx xxxxx 7.1 6.5 6.2 7 .1 6.5 6.2 FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4 .0 3 .3 3.5 4 .0 3.3 ------------ I ---------------II---------------II---------------II--------------- I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 97 xxxx xxxxx 50 xxxx xxxxx 830 788 76 814 797 38 . Potent Cap. : 1509 xxxx xxxxx 1570 xxxx xxxxx 292 326 991 299 322 1040 Move Cap. : 1509 xxxx xxxxx 1570 xxxx xxxxx 186 255 991 222 252 1040 Volume/Cap: 0.21 xxxx xxxx 0.01 xxxx xxxx 0. 11 0. 08 0.06 0.07 0.28 0.04 ------------ I ---------------11---------------II---------------II--------------- I Level Of Service Module: Queue: 0.8 xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx 0.4 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Stopped Del: 8.0 xxxx xxxxx 7 .3 xxxx xxxxx 26.7 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * A * * D Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 563 xxxx 322 xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 0.5 xxxxx 1.7 xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 12.4 xxxxx 22.9 xxxxx Shared LOS: x * x x * B C ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 15 .4 22.9 ApproachLOS: * * C C Traffix 7. 6.071-1 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans. San Jose Appendices AM NEW Wed Jun 14, 2006 16: 18: 18 Page '7-1 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Prot)Osed Plan - AM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report FHWA Roundabout Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #5824 Stoneleaf / West Branch Average Delay (sec/veh) : 4 .1 Level Of Service: A Street Name: Stoneleaf West Branch Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------I ---------------II---------------II ---------------II---------------I Control: Yield Sign Yield Sign Yield Sign Yield Sicdn Lanes: 1 1 0 1 ------------I ---------------II---------------II ---------------II---------------I Volume Module : Base Vol: 0 332 25 36 70 0 0 0 0 20 0 50 Growth Adj: 1.00 1. 00 1 . 00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 1.00 1 . 00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 Initial Bse: 0 332 25 36 70 0 0 0 0 20 0 50 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1..00 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 1.00 1 . 00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1 .00 1,00 .1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 332 25 36 70 0 0 0 0 20 0 50 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 332 25 36 70 0 0 0 0 20 0 50 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1",00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol. : 0 332 25 36 70 0 0 0 0 20 0 50 ------------I ---------------li---------------II ---------------li---------------I PCE Module: AutoPCE: 0 332 25 36 '70 0 0 0 0 20 0 50 TruckPCE: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ComboPCE: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 BicyclePCE: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 AdjVclume: 0 332 25 36 70 0 0 0 0 20 0 50 ------------I --------------- II-------------=-- II---------------II---------------I Delay Module: >> Time Period: 0.25 hours << CircVolume: 36 20 126 332 MaxVolume: 1181 1189 xxxxxx 1021 PedVolume: 0 0 0 0 AdjMaxVol: 1181 1189 xxxxxx 1021 AooroachVol: 357 106 xxxxxx 70 ApproachDel: 4 . 4 3.3 xxxxxx 3.8 Queue: 1 .3 0.3 xxxx 0.2 Traffix 7 . 6 . 0715 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans. San ,Jose .AP.vendiceS AM NEW Wed Jun 14, 2006 16:18:18 Page 6-1 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed Plan - AM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) intersection #4860 Dougherty 1 Gale Ridge Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Val./Cap. (X) 0.640 Loss Time (sec) : 9 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 19. 4 Optimal Cycle: 46 Level Of Service: B Street Name: Dougherty Gale Ridge Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L T - R ------------ i ---------------11-------------- I #---------------11-------------- Control: -------------Control: Protected Protected Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Ovl Ovl Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 ------------ I ---------------II---------------11---------------II---------------! Volume Module: Base Vol: 113 1048 13 137 2168 117 52 7 40 134 11 136 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 113 1048 13 137 2168 117 52 7 40 134 11 136 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 113 1048 13 137 2168 117 52 7 40 134 11 136 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 113 1048 13 137 2168 117 52 7 40 134 11 136 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol. : 113 1048 13 137 2168 117 52 7 40 134 11 136 ------------ I ---------------II--------------- II---------------II--------------- Saturation --------------Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.91 0.91 0.95 0. 90 0. 90 0.76 1.00 0.65 0.76 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 2.96 0.04 1.00 2.85 0. 15 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 Final Sat. : 1805 5113 63 1805 4882 263 1444 1900 1615 1450 1900 1615 ------------ I ---------------II---------------11---------------11---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module- Vol/Sat: 0.06 0.20 0.20 0.08 0.44 0. 44 0. 04 0.00 0.02 0.09 0.01 0.08 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.10 0.58 0.58 0.21 0.69 0 . 69 0.14 0.14 0.24 0.14 0.14 0.36 Volume/Car): 0.64 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.64 0. 64 0.25 0.03 0.10 0.64 0.04 0.24 Delay/Veh: 68.5 15.8 15.8 47.4 12.2 12.2 53.8 51.5 41.3 63.0 51 .6 31. 7 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 68.5 15.8 15.8 47.4 12.2 12.2 53.8 51.5 41 .3 63.0 51.6 31.7 HCM2k95th: 10 15 14 10 31 32 5 1 3 15 1 8 Traffix 7. 6.0715 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans. San Jose .-appendices AM NEW Wed Jun 14, 2006 16: 18:18 Page 5-1 Proposed Plan AM - Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #4790 G-Street / Ivyleaf Springs Road Average Delay (sec/veh) : 7.8 Worst Case Level of Service: B[ 13.51 Street Name: G-Street Ivyleaf Springs Road: Approach: North Bound South Bound East. Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------I---------------( {--------------II----------------I #---------------I Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 1 ! 0 0 0 0 1 ! _0 0 0 0 1 ! 0 0 0 0 1'. 0 0 ------------i ---------------II---------------II---------------I {---------------I Volume Module: Base Vol: 66 11 165 68 35 45 10 84 21 46 86 . 33 Growth Adj: 1.00 1 . 00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1 .00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 66 11 165 68 35 45 10 84 21 46 86 33 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 . 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 66 11 165 68 35 45 10 84 21 46 86 33 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol. : 66 11 165 68 35 45 10 84. 21 46 86 33 ------------I--------------- ll---------------11---------------II---------------I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 7 . 1 6:5 6.2 7 .1 6.5 6.2 4. 1 xxxx xxxxx 4 .1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 4 .0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx ------------I ------ ----------Il---------------11---------------IL---------------{ Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 349 326 94 397 320 103 119 xxxx xxxxx 105 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap. : 609 596 968 567 601 958 1482 xxxx xxxxx 1499 xxxx .xxxxx. Move Cap. : 538 573 968 450 576 958 1482 xxxx xxxxx 1499 xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0_12 0 . 02 0. 17 0. 15 0.06 0.05 0.01 xxxx xxxx 0.03 xxxx xxxx ------------i ---------------li---------------il---------------II---------------I Level Of Service Module: Queue: xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxxx Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7. 4 xxxx xxxxx 7 .5 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * * * * p * * A Movement: LT LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx . 775 xxxxx xxxx 572 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx 1 .3 xxxxx xxxxx 1 .0 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 11.7 xxxxx xxxxx 13 .5 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * B B ApproachDel: 11.7 13.5 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS : B B T_raffix 7 .6 .0715 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans. San Jose Appendices AM-NEW Wed Jun 14, 2006 16:18:18 Page 4-1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed Plan - AM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #4789 F-Street / Ivyleaf Springs Road Average Delay (sec/veh) : 3 . 9 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 10: 41 Street Name: F-Street Ivyleaf Springs Road Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------I ---------------11---------------11---------------II--------------- Control: --------------Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontro fled Rights: Include Include Include Inclu de Lanes: 0 0 1 ! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 ------------1 --=------------11---------------II---------------11--------------- Volume --------------Volume Module: Base Vol: 73 0 54 0 0 0 0 71 21 31 150 0 Growth Adj : 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 Initial Bse: 73 0 54 0 0 0 0 71 21 31 150 0 User Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 73 0 54 0 0 0 0 71 21 31 150 .0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol. : 73 0 54 0 0 0 0 71 21 31 150 0 ------------ ---------------II---------------II---------------II--------------- Critical --------------Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4 .1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx ------------ 1 ---------------II---------------11---------------I1----------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 294 xxxx 82 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 92 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap. : 702 xxxx 984 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1515 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap. : 691 xxxx 984 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1515 xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.11 xxxx 0.05 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.02 xxxx xxxx ------------ I ---------------II---------------II---------------II---------------I Level Of Service Module: Queue: xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0. 1 xxxx, xxxxx Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7 . 4 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * . * * * * * * * * A Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx 791 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx 0. 6 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0. 1 xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 10. 4 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7. 4 xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * B * * * * * * * A ApproachDel: 10. 4 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: B T_raffix 7. 6.0715 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans. San Jose Appendices AM NEW Wed Jun 14, 200.6, 16: 18:16 Page, 3-1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Proposed Plan - AM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #1111 S. Wedgewood J Bollinger Canyon Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Vol. /Cap. (X) : 0.694 Loss Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) 25 . 6 Optimal Cycle: 62 Level Of Service: C Street Name: S. Wedgewood Bollinger Canyon Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound. Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------1---------------11---------------II---------------11---------------! Control: Split Phase Split Phase Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Mina Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 ------------I ----.--=-------II---------------II---------------11-ti-------------I Volume Module : Base Vol: 279 13 52 130 13 166 20 1248 59 57 2135 104 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 279 13 52 130 13 166 20 1248 59 57 2135 104 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1..00 PHF Adj: 1 .00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 279 13 52 130 13 166 20 1248 59 57 2135 104 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 279 13 52 130 13 166 . .20 1248 59 57 2135 104 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 . 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol. : 279 13 52 130 13 166 20 1248 59 57 2135 104 ------------I ---------------II------=--------II --------------II---------------I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.920.88 0.88 0, 95 0.86 0.86 0.95 0.90; 0 . 90 0. 95 0. 90 0.90 Lanes: 2.00 0.20 0.80 1 .00 ' 0 . 07 0. 93 1.00 2.86 0.14 1. 00 2, 86 0. 14 Final Sat. : 3502 334 1338 1805 119 1517 1805 4918 233 1805 4911 239 ------------I --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.08 0.04 0.04 0. 07 0. 11 0.11 0.01 0.25 0.25 0.03 0. 43 0.43 Crit Moves: *** *** **** ** Green/Cycle: 0.11 0.11 0.11 0. 16 0..16 0.16 0.02 0.57 0.57 0.07 0. 63 0. 63 Volume/Cap: 0 .69 0.34 0.34 0.46 0. 69 0. 69 0.69 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.69 0. 69 De'lay/Veh: 64.8 58. 1 58 .1 54 .7 63 .7, 63.7 122.7 17. 4 17 .4 64.8 18.0 18.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.0.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 64.8 58.1 ' 58.1 54 .7 63.7 63.7 122.7 17.-4 17 .4 64.8 18.0 18,0 HCM2k95th: 14 6 6 11 16 16 2 19 19 5 35 34 Traf fix 7 .6 . 0715 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans . San Jose Appendices p A.M_NEW Wed Jun 14, 2006 16:18: 18 Paae 2-1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed Plan - AM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #1107 Stoneleaf / Bollinger Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.759 Loss Time (sec) : 9 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 24 . 4 Optimal Cycle: 64 Level Of Service: C Street Name: Stoneleaf Bollinger Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------ ---------------II---------------II---------------II---------------- Control: -------------"-Control: Split Phase Split Phase Protected Protect ed Rights: Include Include Include Include "Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 ------------ I ---------------II---------------II---------------11--------------- Volume --------------Volume Module: Base Vol: 280 10 171 31 5 81 19 1329 81 98 1932 4 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 280 10 171 31 5 81 19 1329 81 98 1932 4 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 i.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 280 10 171 31 5 81 19 1329 81 98 1932 4 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 280 10 171 31 5 81 19 1329 81 98. 1932 4 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol. : 280 10 171 31 5 81 19 1329 81 98 1932 4 ------------ I ---------------11---------------II---------------II----------------I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0. 92 0.86 0.86 0. 95 0.86 0.86 0..95 0. 94 0. 94 0.95 0. 95 0. 95 Lanes: 2.00 0.06 0. 94 1 .00 0.06 0. 94 1.00 1. 89 0. 11 1.00 1. 99 0.01 Final Sat. : 3502 90 1540 1805 95 1537 1805 3372 206 1805 3603 7 ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II---------------II--------------- I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.08 0.11 0. 11 0.02 0.05 0.05 0.01 0.39 0 . 39 0.05 0.54 0.54 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.15 0.15 0. 15 0 .07 0.07 0.07 0.01 0. 63 0. 63 0.09 0.71 0.71 Volume/Cap: 0.55 0.76 0.76 0.25 0.76 0.76 0.76 0. 62 0. 62 0. 62 0.76 0.76 Deiay/Veh: 56.7 70. 6 70. 6 62.7 89.3 89.3 149.7 16.1 16.1 69.2 14.4 14 . 4 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1 .00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 i .00 1 . 00 AdjDel/Veh: 56.7 70. 6 70 . 6 62.7 89.3 89.3 149.7 16.1 16.1 69.2 14 .4 14 . 4 HCM2k95th: 12 16 17 3 10 10 2 31 32 10 44 23 Traffix -7. 6.0715 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans. San Jose Appendices AMEX Wed Jun 14, 2006 16:17:01 Page 13-1 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Existing Plan - AM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #6366 Dougherty / Bollinger [N] Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Vol. /Cap. (X) : 0.932 Loss Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) 44 .1 Optimal Cycle : 154 Level Of Service: D Street Name: Dougherty Bollinger Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------1--------------- II---------------II---------------II-----=--------- 1 Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights: Ovl Ovl Ovl Ovl Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 2 0 3 0 1 2 0 3 0 1 2 0 3 0 . 1 2 0 3 0 1 ------------I ---------------II---------------II---------------II--------------- 1 Volume Module : Base Vol: 196 441 71 381 1069 869 163 346 116 106 1337 564 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 196 441 71 381 1069 869 163 346 116 106 1337. 564 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1 . 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 196 441 71 381 1069 869 163 346 116 106 1337 564 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 196 441 71 381 1069 869 163 346 116 106 1337 564 PCE Adj: 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol. : 196 441 71 381 1069 869 163 346 116 106 1337 564 ------------1 --------------- II-------=-------II--------------=11---------------I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 0. 91 0. 85 0. 92 0. 91 0.85 0.92 0. 91 0.85 0.92 0.91 0.85 Lanes: 2.00 3.00 1 . 00 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 1 .00 2.00 3.00 1.00 Final Sat. : 3502 5187 1615 3502 5187 1615 3502 5187 1615 3502 5187 1615 '-, ------------1 ---------------II---------------II---------------11--------------- 1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.06 0.09 0. 04 0. 11 0.21 0.54 0.05 0.07 0.07 0.03 0.26 0.35 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.06 0.26 0.36 0.33 0.53 0.58 0.05 0.22 0.28 0.10 0.28 0. 61 Volume/Cap: - 0.93 0.33 0. 12 0.33 0.39 0.93. 0.93 0.30 0.25 0.30 0.93 0.58 Delay/Veh: 108.7 42.3 30.1 35. 4 19.8 42.6 114 .8 45.2 38 .9 58.7. 60.5 17.5 User DelAdj: 1.001.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 108.7 42.3 30.1 35 . 4 19.8 42. 6 114 .8 45.2 38 . 9 58.7 60.5 17.5 HCM2k95th: 14 10 4 12 16 57 9 8 7 4 34 25 Traffic, 7 .6 .0715 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans. San Jose Appendices AM-EX Wed Jun 14, 2006 16:17 :01 Page 12-1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Existing Plan - AM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #6298 Gale Ridge / Bollinger Canyon Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0. 678 Loss Time (sec) : 9 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 23. 4 Optimal Cycle : 51 Level Of Service: C Street Name: Gale Ridge Bollinger Canyon Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------ ---------------II---------------II---------------II--------------- ,Control: --------------,Control: Permitted Permitted Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Ovl Ovl Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 1 1 0 3 0 1 ------------I ---------------II---------------II---------------II--------------- Volume --------------Volume Module : Base Vol: 49 11 38 102 1 166 247 790 8 15 2044 466 Growth Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 Initial Bse: 49 11 38 102 1 166 247 790 8 15 2044 466 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 . 00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 PHF Volume: 49 11 38 102 1 166 247 790 8 15 2044 466 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 49 11 38 102 1 166 247 790 8 15 2044 466 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1 .00 1. 00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .1.00 1 .00 Final Vol. : 49 11 38 102 1 166 247 790 8 15 2044 466 ------------ I ---------------II--------------- II---------------II---------------I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.37 0.88 0. 88 0.72 0.85 0.85 0. 95 0. 91 0.85 0. 95 0.91 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 0.22 0.78 1 .00 0.01 0. 99 1.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1 .00 Final Sat. : 701 377. 1303 1362 10 1607 1805 5187 1615 1805 5187 1615 ------------ I ---------------II---------------II---------------II---------------I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.03 0. 03 0.07 0.10 0. 10 0. 14 0.15 0.00 0.01 0.39 0.29 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.15 0.15 0. 15 0. 15 0.15 0.15 0.20 0.74 0.74 0.04 0.58 0.58 Volume/Cap: 0.46 0.19 0. 19 0 .49 0 .68 0.68 0. 68 0.21 0.01 0.21 .0. 68 0.50 Delay/Veh: 57 .2 52.2 52.2 56.2 63.5 63.5 56.7 5.5 4 .7 66.4 20.9 17.7 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1 .00 1 .00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 57 .2 52.2 52.2 56.2 63.5 63.5 56.7 5.5 4 .7 66.4 20 .9 17 .7 HCM2k95th: 11 4 4 12 10 15 20 7 0 1 32 20 Traf fix 7. 6.0715 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans. San Jose ADDendices AMEX Wed Jun 14, 2006 16:17 :01 Page 11-1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Existing Plan - AM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #5922 Bollinger 1 S Monarch Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Vol./Cap: (X) : 0.721 Loss Time (sec) : 9 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 28 .7 Optimal Cycle: 140 Level Of Service: C *WW*W**W*WW**WW****WW**WWW**WWWW*W*WWW**W*W*W***W*W*WWW**WWWWW*W'kWWWW***W�F�WW*W"k Street Name: S Monarch Bollinger Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T R L - T - R L - T - R ------------I--------------ii---------------; i--=------------H--------------- Control: --------------Control: Split Phase Split Phase Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 ------------I----------------II---------------Il---------------II--------------- Volume --------------Volume Module: Base Vol: 236 10 72 231 10 218 46 1191 68 21 1519 65 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 236 10 72 231 10 218 46 1191 68 21 1519 65 User Adj : 1 .0"0 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 PHF Adj: 1 .00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 236 10 72 231 10 218 46 1191 68 21 1519 65 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 236 10 72 231 10 218 46 1191 68 21 1519 65 PCE Adj: 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 MLF Adj: 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol. : 236 10 72 231 10 218 46 1191 68 21 1519 65 ------------I ---------------II---------------II --------------- II------7--------I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0 .92 0.87 0.87 0.95 0.86 0.86 0.95 0.94 0. 94 0.95 0. 94 0. 94 Lanes: 2 .00 0.12 0.88 1. 00 0.04 0. 96 1.00 1.89 0. 11 1.00 1. 92 0. 08 Final Sat. : 3502 201 1448 1805 71 1557 1805 3388 193 1805 3441 147 -----------I---------------ll---------------11---------------il--------------- I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0 .07 0.05 0.05 0.13 0. 14 0.14 0.03 0.35 0.35 0.01 0.44 0. 44 Crit Moves: **** **** **** . **** Green/Cycle: 0 .09 0.09 0.09 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.04 0,63 0. 63 0.02 0.61 0. 61 Volume/Cap: 0 .72 0.53 0 .53 0.66 0.72 0.72 0.72 0..56 0.56 0.56 0.72 0.72 Delay/Veh: 69.3 64 . 1 64 .1 56.7 60.7 60.7 99.7 15.3 15.3 85.7 20.0 20 .0 User DelAdj: 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1;00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 69.3 64.1 64.1 56.7 60.7 60.7 99.7 15.3 15.3 85.7 20.0 20 .0 HCM2k95th: 13 8 8 19 21 19 7 27 27 4 39 . 40 Traffix 7.6 . 0715 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans. San Jose Appendices AMEX Wed Jun 14, 2006 16: 17:01 Page 10-1 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Existing Plan - AM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) intersection #5917 Main Branch / Bollinger Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Vol. /Cap. (X) 0.694 Loss Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 26. 4 Optimal Cycle: 140 Level Of Service: C Street Name: Main Brach Bollinger Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R - ----------- I ---------------H-----------=--- 11--------------- --------------- � Control: Split Phase Split Phase Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 ------------ I --------------- --------------- --------------- -------------- Volume Module: Base Vol: 72 10 263 64 -10 31 10 1469 15 70 1502 14 Growth Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 Initial Bse: 72 10 263 64 10 31 10 1469 15 70 1502 14 User Adj: 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 72 10 263 64 i0 31 10 1469 15 70 1502 14 Reduct Vol : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 72 10 263 64 10 31 10 1469 15 70 1502 14 PCE Adj: 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj : 1 .00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol. : 72 10 263 64 10 31 10 1469 15 70 1502 14 ------------ --------------- --------------- --------------- ----------- Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.86 0.86 0. 95 0.89 0. 89 0. 95 0.95 0. 95 0. 92 0. 95 0. 95 Lanes: 1 .00 0.04 0. 96 1.00 0.24 0.76 1.00 1. 98 0.02 2.00 1 . 98 0.02 Final Sat. : 1805 60 1567 1805 411 1274 1805 3570 36 3502 3573 33 -- ------- I --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------I Capacity Anal vsis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.04 0. 17 0.17 0.04 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.41 0.41 0.02 0 .42 0. 42 Crit Moves : Green/Cycle: 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.01 0.59 0.59 0.03 0. 61 0. 61 Volume/Cap: 0.16 0. 69 0. 69 0. 69 0.48 0. 48 0. 69 0.69 0. 69 0. 69 0. 69 0. 69 Delay/Veh: 42.1 53.7 53.7 85.8 68.7 68.7 155.5 20.7 20.7 86.3 19.0 19.0 User DelAdj: 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 42. 1 53 .7 53.7 85.8 68.7 68.7 155.5 20.7 20.7 86.3 19.0 19. 0 HCM2k95th: 5 20 21 8 5 5 3 37 37 6 37 34 Trafix 7 . 6.0715 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans. San Jose .-appendices t AM EX Wed Jun 14, 2006 16:17:01 Page 9-1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Existing Plan - AM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level of Service Computation Report FHWA Roundabout Method (Base Volume Alternative) ww,rww,tww*wwww, wwwwwwwrrwwwwwwti�wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww*w*wwwwwwwwwwwwwww*w,rwwwww*w�*wwww Intersection #5912 Monarch / Main Branch wwwwwwwwwwwww,rwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwxwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww,rwwwww*wwwwwwww-rwwwwwwww,t-wwwww Average Delay (sec/veh) : 3.8 Level of Service: A t,t*w*+wwwwww*w,rww,fwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww,rw+wwwww�*,t*wwww www+www*,rwwwwwwww,wwwwwww�w*www Street Name: Monarch Main Branch Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T R L - T - R ------------I---------------II--------------- II---------------II ---------------I Control: Yield Sign Yield Sign Yield Sign Yield Sign Lanes: 1 1 1 1 ------------I---------------I (---------------II---------------G1---------=--=--! Volume Module: Base Vol: 25 95 165 20 40 30 20 50 10 30 40 30 Growth Adj: 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 initial Bse: 25 95 165 20 40 30 20 50 10 30 40 30 User Adj: 1. 00 1.00- 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 L 00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 PHF Volume: 25 95 165 20 40 30 20 50 10 30 40 30 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 25 95 165 20 40 30 20 50 10 30 40. 30 PCE Adj: 1. 00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 Final Vol. : 25 95 165 20 40 30 20 50 10 30 40 30 -=---------- ---------------II---------------il---------------Il---------------1 PCE Module: AutoPCE: 25 95 165 20 40 30 20 50 10 30 40 30 TruckPCE: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ComboPCE: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BicyclePCE: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 AdjVolume: 25 95 165 20 40 30 20 50 10 30 40 30 ------------I ---------------ll---------------II---------------i !--------------- Delay --------------Delay Module: >> Time Period: 0.25 hours << CircVolume: 90 95 90 140 MaxVolume: 1151 1149 1151 1124 PedVolume: 0 0 0 0 AdjMaxVol: 1151 1149 1151 1124 ApproachVol: 285 90 80 1'00 ApproachDel: 4.2 3.4 3.4 3.5 Queue: 1 .0 0.3 0.2 0.3 Traffix. '7.6 .0715 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans . San Jose Appendices r AM-EX Wed Jun 14, 2006 16:17:01 Paae 8-1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Existing Plan - AM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Re_nort 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #5835 Stoneleaf / S. Wedgewood Average Delay (sec/veh) : 10.3 Worst Case Level Of Service: C[ 20. 71 Street Name: Stoneleaf S.Wedgewood Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------ I ---------------11-----------=---11---------------11--------------- Control: --------------Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 ------------ 1 ---------------II--------------=11---------------11--------------- Volume --------------Volume Module: Base Vol: 315 10 25 15 40 15 20 20 55 15 70 40 Growth Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 Initial Bse: 315 10 25 15 40 15 20 20 55 15 70 40 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 , 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 315 10 25 15 40 15 20 20 55 15 70 40 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol. : 315 10 25 15 40 15 20 20 55 15 70 40 ------------ 1 ---------------II ---------------11---------------II---------------I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4 .1 xxxx xxxxx 7 .1 6.5 6.2 7. 1 6.5 6..2 FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3 .3 3.5 4 .0 3 . 3 ------------ i ---------------II---------------11---------------II---------------1 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 55 xxxx xxxxx 35 xxxx xxxxx 785 743 48 768 738 23 Potent Cap. : 1563 xxxx xxxxx 1589 xxxx xxxxx 313 346 1027 321 348 1060 Move Cap. : 1563 xxxx xxxxx 1589 xxxx xxxxx 205 274 1027 241 275 1060 Volume/Cap: 0.20 xxxx xxxx 0.01 xxxx xxxx 0. 10 0.07 0. 05 0.06 0.25 0. 04 ------------ I ---------------II---------------11---------------11---------------I Level Of Service Module: Queue: 0.8 xxxx xxxxx 0 .0 xxxx xxxxx 0.3 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Stopped Del: 7.9 xxxx xxxxx 7 .3 xxxx xxxxx 24 .5 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx:x LOS by Move: A w * A * * C Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 592 xxxx 353 xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 0 .4 xxxxx 1.6 xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 12 .0 xxxxx 20.7 xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * B * C ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 14 . 6 20.7 Approachl,OS: * * B C Traffic, 7. 6.0715 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans. San Jose Appendices AM EX Wed Jun 14, 2006 16:17:01 Page 7-1 ----------------------------------------------------------'---------------------- Existing Plan - AM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Level Of Service Computation Report FHWA Roundabout Method (Base Volume Alternative) wwwwwwxwwwxwwwwwwwwwwwwwwxwwwwww,�-wwwww*w�wwwwxwwxwwwwwwxxww*wwwwwwxwwwxww,t,txwwww Intersection #5824 Stoneleaf / West Branch wwwxwwwwwwwwwwwwwwxwwwwxwxxwwwww.wwwxwxwwwwwwwwwxwwwwwwxxwwx,rxwxxwwwwwwxww,r;yrxxwww - Average Delay (sec/veh) : 4. 1 Level Of Service: A wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww*wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwxw*wwwwwwwwwwvc,k-wwwww Street Name: Stoneleaf West Branch Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L -, T - R L - T - R L - T - R. L - T - R ------------I ---------------II---------------II---------------li----------=-----I Control: Yield Sign Yield Sign Yield Sign Yield Sign Lanes: 1 1 0 1 ------------I ---------------11---------------il---------------II---------------- Volume --------------Volume Module : Base Vol: 0 330 25 35 68 0 0 0 0 20 0 50 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 330 25 35 68 0 0 0 0 20 0 50 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1 .00 1 .00 1. 00 PHF Adj: 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1 . 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 330 25 35 68 0 0 0 0 20 0 50 ., Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 330 25 35 68 0 0 0 0 20 0 5Q PCE Adj: 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol. : 0 330 25 35 68 0 0 0 0 2.0 0 50 ----------- ---------------11--------------- II---------------II---------------I PCE Module: AutoPCE: 0 330 25 35 68 0 0 0 0 20 0 50 TruckPCE: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ComboPCE: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BicyclePCE: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 AdjVolume: 0 330 25 35 68 0 0 0 0 20 0 50 ------------I ---------------II---------------II---------------( I------=-------- I Delay Module: » Time Period: 0.25 hours << CircVolume 35 20 123 330 MaxVclume: 1181 1189 xxxxxx 1022 PedVolume: 0 0 0 0 AdjMaxVol: 1181 1189 xxxxxx 1022 ApuroachVol: 355 103 xxxxxx 70 ApproachDel: 4.4 3.3 xxxxxx 3.8 Queue: 1.3 0.3 xxxx 0.2 Traffix 7 .6 .071-5 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon 'Trans. San Jose Appendices AM EX Wed Jun 14, 2006 16:17:01 Page 6-1 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Existing Plan - AM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) wwwww*,r*wwww,rwwwwww*wwwwwwwwwwwww*wwww,rwwwwww**w**:***^kww,twwwwwwwwww**www•,+cww*www intersection #4860 Dougherty / Gale Ridge wwwwwwwwxwww,rw.wwwwwwwwwwww*www,twwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww**wwwwwwwwwwww,rwwwwww Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.644 Loss Time (sec) : 9 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 18 . 5 Optimal Cydle: 47 Level Of Service: B wwwwwwwwwwww,twwwwwwwwww-rwwwwwwwwwwwwww�wwwwwwwwwwwww.wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww,k-,rw*www Street Name: ' Dougherty Gale Ridge Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------ I ---------------11---------------11---------------H--------------- Control: --------------Control: Protected Protected Permitted Permit ted Rights: Include Include Ovl Ovl Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 ------------ I ---------------il--------------- Il---------------11-------------- Volume -------------Volume Module: Base Vol: 97 1058 13 137 2171 171 47 6 14 134 17 136 Growth Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 Initial Bse: 97 1058 13 137 2171 171 47 6 14 134 117 136 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 . 1 .00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 PHF Volume: 97 1058 13 137 2171 171 47 6 14 134 17 136 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 97 1058 13 137 2171 171 47 6 14 134 17 136 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 Final Vol. : 97 1058 13 137 2171 171 47 6 14 134 . 17 136 ------------.I ---------------II---------------Il---------------II--------------- Saturation --------------Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.91 0. 91 0. 95 0.90 0.90 0.75 1.00 0.85 0.76 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 2.96 0.04 1. 00 2.78 0.22 1 .00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 Final Sat. : 1805 5114 63 1805 4755 375 1433 1900 1615 1452 1900 1615 ------------ 1 ---------------11---------------II--------------II--------------- Capacity --------------Capacity Anal ysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.21 0.21 0.08 0.46 0. 46 0.03 0.00 0. 01 0.09 0.01 0 .08 Crit Moves: **** **** wwww Green/Cycle: 0.08 0.58 0.58 0.21 0.71 0.71 0. 14 0.14 0.23 0.14 0.14 0 .36 Volume/Cap: 0.64 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.64 0.64 0.23 0.02 0.04 0. 64 0.06 0.24 Delay/Veh: 71. 4 15.7 15.7 47 .5 11.3 11.3 53.7 51. 6 42.3 .63.4 51 .9 31.9 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 AdjDel/Veh: 7i .4 15.7 15 .7 47.5 11.3 11.3 53.7 51.6 42 .3 63.4 51. 9 31.9 HCM2k95th: 9 15 14 10 31 31 5 0 1 15 1 8 xwwwwwwwwwww-,twwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwxwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww�wwwwwwwww Traf fix 7. 6.0715 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans. San Jose .-appendices AM-EX Wed Jun 14, 2006 1.6:17 :01 Page 5-1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Existing Plan - AM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsianalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #4790 G-Street / Ivyleaf Springs Road Average Delav .(sec/veh) : 6. 9 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 10.7] Street Name: G-Street Ivvleaf Springs Road Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T R L - T - R Control: Stop Sign Stop Sian Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 1 ! 0 0 0 0 1 ! 0 0 0 0 1 ! 0 0 0 0 1 ! 0 0 -------------I ---------------il ---------------11---------------11 ---------------I Volume Module : Base Vol: 65 10 100 40 35 45 10 60 20 10 70 10 Growth Adj : 1 .00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1 00 1i00 1-..0.0 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 65 10 100 40 35 45 `•10 60- 20 10 70 : 10 User Adj: 1 .00 1 .00 1. 00 1 .00 1. 00 1 .00 1.00 1f00 1: 00 . 1 .00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1 .00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1. 00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 65 10 100 40 35 45 10 60 20 10 70 10 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol. : 65 10 100 40 35 45 10 60 - 20 10 70 10 ------------1 ---------------11 --------------- II---------------II ---------------I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gr): 7 . 1 6.5 6.2 7. 1 6.5 6.2 4 .1 xxxx xxxxx 4 . 1 xxxx xxxxx FoliowUpTim: 3.5 4 .0 3 .3 3.5 4 .0 3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx ------------I ---------------II--------------- II---------------il ---------------1 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 225 190 70 240 195 75 80 xxxx xxxxx 80 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap. : 735 708 998 718 704 992 1531 xxxx xxxxx 1531 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap. : 668 699, 998 633 695 992 1531 xxxx xxxxx 1531 xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0 .10 0.01 0. 10 0.06 0. 05 0. 05 0.01 xxxx xxxx 0.01 xxxx xxxx ------------ I ---------------II --------------- II---------------II ---------------I Level Of Service Module: Queue: xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx, 7 . 4 xxxx xxxxx 7 . 4 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * * * A * * A Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx 826 xxxxx xxxx 755 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx, xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx 0.8 xxxxx xxxxx 0. 6 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 10.5 xxxxx xxxxx 10.7 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS : B * * B ApproachDel: 10.5 10.7 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: B B x Traffix 7. 6 . 0715 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans. San Jose .-Appendices AM-EX Wed Jun 14, 2006 16:17:01 Page 4-1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Existing Plan - AM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #4789 F-Street / Ivyieaf Springs Road Average Delay (sec/veh) 3.2 Worst. Case Level Of Service: B[ 10.21 Street Name: F-Street Ivyleaf Springs Road Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------I ---------------II--------------- II---------------II--------------- Control: --------------Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 ------------ ---------------'II--------------- II---------------II--------------- Volume --------------Volume Module : Base Vol: 70 0 30 0 0 0 0 70 20 15 150 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 initial Bse: 70 0 30 0 0 0 0 70 20 15 150 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 . 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 70 0 30 0 0 0 0 70 20 15 150 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol . : 70 0 30 0 0 0 0 70 20 15 150 0 ------------I ---------------11--------------- II---------------II---------------I Critical Gap_ Module: Critical Gp: 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4 .1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx ------------ I ---------------II---------------II---------------II---------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 260 xxxx 80 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 90 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap. : 733 xxxx 986 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1518 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap. : 728 xxxx 986 xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1518 xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.10 xxxx 0.03 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.01 xxxx xxxx ------------ I ---------------II--------------- II---------------II---------------I Level Of Service Module: Queue: xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.4 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * x * * * * * * * A Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx 790 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx 0.4 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx 10.2 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.4 xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * B * * * * * * * A ApproachDel: 10.2 xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx AnproachLOS: B Traffix, 7. 6 .0715 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans. San Jose Appendices AM EX Wed Jun 14, 2006 16:17 :01 Page 3-1 --------------------------------------------------------------- Existing Plan - AM Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative). Intersection #1111 S. Wedgewood / Bollinger Canyon Cycle (sec) : 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) 0.695 Loss Time (sec) : 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delav (sec/veh) : 25 .4 Optimal Cvcle: 63 Level Of Service: C Street Name: S. Wedgewood Bollinger Canyon Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T_ - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------I---------------11---------------11---------------H--------------- Control: --------------Control: Split Phase Split Phase Protected Protected Rights: Include Include .Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 2 1 0' ------------1-----=--------II------=--------II---------------11--------------- I Volume Module: Base Vol: 289 13 11 106 13 166 20 1101 60 50 2144 86 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 289 13 11 106 13 166 20 1101 60 50 2144 86 User Adj: 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 11.00 1.00 1. 00 1 .00 1.00 1. 00 PHF Volume: 289 13 11 106 13 166 20 1101 60 50 2144 86 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 Reduced Vol: 289 13 11 106 13 166 20 1101 60 50 2144 86 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1 .00 1.00 1. 00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1 .00 1. 00 Final Vol. : 289 13 ll 106 13 166 20 1101 60 50 2144 86 ------------I ---------------II---------------II---------------11---------------I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 11900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 0.93 0.93 0.95 0.86 0.86 0.95 0.90 0. 90 0.95 0.90 0. 90 Lanes: 2.00 0.54 0.46 1.00 0.07 0 . 93 1.0.0 2.84 0. 16 1.00 2.88 0. 12 Final Sat. : 3502 958 811 1805 119 1517 1805 4880 266 1805 4957 199 ------------I ---------------II---------------11---------------II--------------( Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.08 0 .01 0.01 0.06 -0. 11 0.11 0.01 0.23 0.23 0.03 0. 43 0. 43 Crit Moves : **** *� ** *•*** **** . Green/Cycle: 0.12 0 .12 0.12 0.16 0.16 0 .16 0.02 0.57 0. 57 0.07 0.62 0. 62 Volume/Cap: 0.70 0.11 0.11 0.37 0.70 0.70 .0.70 0.40 0.40 0,40 0.70 0. 70 Delay/Veh: 64.3 55. 4 55. 4 53.6 63. 8 63.8 122. 9 16.9 16. 9 64.4 18.3 18 .3 User DelAdj: 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1. 00 AdjDel/Veh: 64.3. 55.4 55.4 53.6 63.8 63.8 122. 9 16.9 16.9 64 .4 18.3 .18•.3 HCM2k95th: 14 2 2 9 16 16 2 17 16 4 35 34 t*,i**+**,r*-k**-k**,r***x,ti;*,r**x:t**i:**:t:r*+i•*tr**;r,t***:t*rr,t*****i:*****,t*,t*****ir**ir,t,r*,r*,t Traffix 7 .6 .0715 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans. San Jose APPendices AM EX Wed Jun 14, 2006 16:17:01 Page 2-1 Existing Plan - AM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #1107 Stoneleaf / Bollinger Cvcle (sec).: 140 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.743 Loss Time (sec) : 9 (X+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 22 . 5 Optimal Cycle: 61 Level Of Service: C Street Name: Stoneleaf Bollinger Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L T - R L T - R ------------ I ---------------1i---------------II---------------I1----------------{ Control: Split Phase Split Phase Protected Protected Riahts: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 . 0 1 1 0 ------------ 1 ---------------II---------------# i"---------------ii----------------( Volume Module: Base Vol: 288 10 155 31 5 81 19 1119 80 58 1911 4 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 . 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 288 10 155 31 5 81 19 1119 80 58 1911 4 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 . 00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1 .00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 288 10 155 31 5 81 19 1119 80 58 1911 4 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 288 10 155 31 5 81 19 1119 80 58 1911 4 PCE Adj: 1 .00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 . 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol. : 288 10 155 31 5 81 19 1119 80 58 1911 4 ------------ I ---------------II---------------II---------------I1---------------I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 0.86 0.86 0. 95 0.86 0.86 0. 95 .0.94 0. 94 0.95 0.95 0.95 Lanes: 2.00 0.06 0.94 1.00 0.06 0. 94 1.00 1.87 0. 13 1.00 1. 99 0.01 Final Sat. : 3502 99 1533 1805 95 1537 1805 3335 238 1805 3602 8 ------------ I ---------------II---------------II-------------=-I1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.08 0.10 0.10 0.02 0.05 0.05 0. 01 0.34 0.34 0.03 0.53 0.53 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green/Cycle: 0.14 0.14 0. 14 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.01 0.66 0. 66 0.06 0.71 0.71 Volume/Cap: 0.60 0.74 0.74 0.24 0.74 0.74 0.74 00.50 0.50 0.50 0.74 0.74 Delay/Veh: 59.1 70.7 70.7 62.5 86.3 86.3 142.9 12.0 12.0 67.0 13.4 13.4 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 59.1 70.7 70 .7 62.5 86.3 86.3 142.9 12.0 12.0 67.0 13.4 13. 4 HCM2k95th: 13 16 16 3 i0 10 2 23 23 6 42 22 Traf-fix 7 . 6.071.5 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans. San Jose Appendices CCTALOS Software ver. 2.35 by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Proposed Plan 06/14/06 INTERSECTION 6366 Dougherty Road/Bollinger [N] San Ramon Count Date Time Peak Hour ------------------------------------------------------------------------ CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 8-PHASE SIGNAL ----------- 869 1075 398 I I i I I I <-- v ---> I Split? N LEFT . 163 --- 2.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 --- 567 RIGHT STREET NAME THRU 437 ---> 3.0 (NO. OF LANES) 3.0<--- 1294 THRU Bollinger [N] RIGHT 111 --- 1.0 2.0 3.0 1.0 2.0 --- 125 LEFT I <--- A ---> v v N I I SIG WARRANTS - W + E 92 443 110 Urb=Y, Ru r=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: Dougherty Road ORIGINAL . ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C ------------------------------------------------------------------------ NB RIGHT (R) 110 41 1650 0.0248 THRU (1)_ 443 443 4950 0.0895 LEFT (L) 92 92 3000 0.0307 0 .0307 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SB RIGHT (R) 869 779 * 1650 0.4721 0 . 4721 THRU (1) 1075 1075 4950 0.2172 LEFT (L) 398 398 3000 0.1327 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ EB RIGHT (R) 111 60 * 1650 0.0364 THRU (T) 437 437 4950 0.0883 LEFT (L) 163 163 3000 0.0543 0.0543 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ WB RIGHT (R) 567 348 1650 0.2109 THRU (T) 1294 1294 4950 0.2614 0.2614 LEFT (L) 125 125 3000 0.0417 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0. 82 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: D * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=DVSP .INT,VOL=VOLNEW.AMV,CAP= :-i DDendices CCTALOS Software ver. 2.35 by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Proposed Plan 06/14 /06 INTERSECTION 6298 GALE RIDGE/BOLLINGER Count Date Time Peak Hour ------------------------------------------------------------------------ CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 6-PHASE SIGNAL ----------- 171 1 .138 I I I <--- v ---> Split? N LEFT 98 --- 1 .0 1.1 1.1 1 .0 1. 0 --- 285 RIGHT STREET NAME : THRU 829 ---> 3 .0 (NO. OF LANES) 3.0<--- 2068 THRU BOLLINGER RIGHT 8 --- 1 .0 1.0 1.1 1 . 1 1. 0 --- 27 LEFT I <--- ---> I v f v N SIG WARRANTS: W + E 49 5 51 Urb=Y, Ru r=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: GALE RIDGE ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C ------------------------------------------------------------------------ NB RIGHT (R) 51 51 1650 0.0309 THRU (T) 5 5 1650 0.0030 LEFT (L) 49 49 1650 0.0297 0.0297 T + R 56 1650 0.0339 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SB RIGHT (R) 171 171 1650 0.1036 THRU (T) 1 1 1650 0.0006 LEFT (L) .138 138 1650 0.0836 T + R 172 1650 0.1042 0.1042 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ EB FIGHT (R) 8 0 * 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 829 829 . 4950 0.1675 LEFT (L) 98 98 1650 0 .0594 0.0594 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ WB RIGHT (R) 285 147 * 1650 0.0891 THRU (T) 2068 2068 4950 0 . 4.178 0.4178 LEFT (L) 27 27 1650 0.0164 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0. 61 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: B * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=DVSP.INT,VOL=VOLNEW.AMV,CAP= Appendices CCTALOS Software ver. 2.35 by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Proposed Plan 06/14/06 INTERSECTION 5922 S.MONARCH/BOLLINGER Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD �- - RIGHT THRU LEFT 6-PHASE SIGNAL ----------- 213 10 285 I 1 I ^ <--- v ---> I Split? N LEFT 46 --- 1.0 1.1 1.1 i.0 1.1 --- 65 RIGHT STREET NAME: THRU 1444 ---> 2.0 (NO. OF LANES) 2. 1<--- 1454 THRU BOLLINGER RIGHT 60 --- 1.0 2.0 1.1 1.1 2.0 --- 21 LEFT I <--- ^ ---> I v v N I I I S I G WARRANTS: W + E 394 50 92 Urb=Y, Ru r=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? Y STREET NAME: S.MONARCH ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL. MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C ----------------------------------------------- ------------------------ NB RIGHT (R) 92 92 1650 0.0558 THRU (T) 50 50 1650 0.0303 LEFT (L) 394 394 3000 0.1313 0. 1313 T + R 142 1650 0.0861 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SB RIGHT (R), 213 213 1650 0.1291 THRU (T) 10 10, 1650 0.0061 LEFT (L) 285 285 1650 0.1727 0. 1727 T + R 223 1650 0.1352 ---------------- - EB RIGHT. (R) 60 0 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 1444 1444 3300 0.4376 LEFT (L) 46 46 1650 0.0279 0.0279 WB - -RIGHT (R) 65 65 1650 0.0394 THRU (T) 1454 1454 3300 0.4406 LEFT (L) 21 21 3000 0.0070 T + R 1519 3300 0.4603 0,4603 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.79 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: C * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=DVSP .INT,VOL=VOLNEW.AMV,CAP= Appendices CCTALOS Software ver. 2.35 by TJKM Transportation Consultants ---------------------------------___ Condition: Proposed Plan 06/14 /06 -------------------------- INTERSECTION 5917 MAIN BRANCH/BOLLINGER Count Date Time Peak Hour ------------------------------------------------------------------------ CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 6-PHASE SIGNAL ----------- 31 30 64 ^ I I I <-- v ---> I Split? N LEFT 10 --- 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.0 1 . 1 --- 14 RIGHT STREET NAME : THRU 1488 ---> 2.1 (NO. OF LANES) 2. 1<--- 1437 THRU BOLLINGER RIGHT 322 --- 1 .1 1.0 1.1 1.1 2. 0 --- 71 LEFT <--- ---> i v v N SIG WARRANTS: W + E 72 9 224 Urb=Y, Ru r=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: MAIN BRANCH ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C ------------------------------------------------------------------------ NB RIGHT (R) 224 224 1650 0. 1358 THRU (T) 9 9 1650 0.0055 LEFT (L) 72 72 1650 0.0436 T + R 233 1650 0.1412 0. 1412 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SB RIGHT (R) 31 31 1650 0.0188 THRU (T) 30 30 1650 0.0182 LEFT (L) 64 64 1650 0.0388 0.0388 T + R 61 1650 0.0370 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ EB RIGHT (R) 322 322 1650 0.1952 THRU (T) 1488 1488 3300 0. 4509 LEFT (L) 10 10 1650 0.0061 T + R 1810 3300 0.5485 0.5485 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ WB RIGHT (R) 14 14 1650 0.0085 THRU (T) 1437 1437 3300 0 .4355 LEFT (L) 71 71 3000 0.0237 0.0237 T + R 1451 3300 0.4397 --------------------------- TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0. 75 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: C ------------------------ ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=DVEP.INT,VOL=VOLNEW.AMV,CAP= Appendices f CCTALOS Software ver. 2.35 by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Pronosed Plan 06/14/06 INTERSECTION -4860 Dougherty-Road/Monarch/Gale Rid Contra Costa County Count Date Time Peak Hour - - CCTA METHODRIGHT THRU LEFT 8-PHASE SIGNAL ----------- 117 2168 137 f I i ^ I I I ^ <--- v ---> I Split? N LEFT S2 -- 1.0 1.1 3.1 1.0 1.0 -- 136 RIGHT STREET NAME: THRU 7 ---> 1. 0 (NO. OF LANES) 1.0<-- 11 THRU Monarch/Gale Rid RIGHT 40 --- 1.0 1.0 3.1 1.1 1.0 --- 134 LEFT v I v N ( j I SIG WARRANTS : W + E 113 1048 13 Urb=Y, Ru r=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: Dougherty Road ------------------- 1 ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- NB RIGHT (R) 13 13 1650 0.0079 THRU' (T) 1048 1048 4950 0.2117 LEFT (L) 113 113 1650 0. 0685 0.0685 T + R 1061 .4950 0.2143 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SB RIGHT (R) 117 117 1650 0.0709 THRU (T) 2168 2168 4950 0. 4380 LEFT (L) 137 137 1650 0.0830 T + R 2285 4950 0.4616 0.4616 -------------------------------------------- EB RIGHT (R) 40 0 * 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 7 7 1650 0.0042 0.0042 LEFT (L) 52 52 1650 0.0315 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ WB RIGHT (R) 136 0 1650 '0.0000 THRU (T) 11 11 1650 0.0067 LEFT (L) 134 134 1650 0.0812 0.0812 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0. 62 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: B * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=DVSP . INT,VOL=VOLNEW.AMV,CAP= Appendices CCTALOS Software ver. 2.35 by TJKM Transportation Consultants ---------------- ---------- Condition: Proposed Plan 06/14 /06 INTERSECTION 1111 S.WEDGEWOOD/BOLLINGER CCC Count Date Time Peak Hour --------------------------------------------------------------------_--- CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 6-PHASE SIGNAL ----------- 166 13 130 I I I ^ I I I ^ <--- v ---> I Split? N LEFT 20 --- 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.1 --- 104 RIGHT STREET NAME : THRU 1248 ---> 3.0 (NO. OF LANES) 2.1<--- 2135 THRU BOLLINGER RIGHT 59 --- 1 .0 2.0 1. 1 1. 1 2.0 --- 57 LEFT I <--- ---> I . v I v N SIG WARRANTS: W + E 279 13 52 Urb=Y, Rur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? Y STREET NAME: S.WEDGEWOOD ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C ------------------------------------------------------------------------ NB RIGHT (R) 52 52 1650 0.0315 THRO (T) 13 13 . 1650 0.0079 LEFT (L) 279 279 3000 0 .0930 0.0930 T + R 65 1650 0.0394 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SB RIGHT (R) 166 166 1650 0 . 1006 THRU (T) 13 13 1650 0. 0079 LEFT (L) 130 130 1650 0.0788 T + R 179 1650 0.1085 0. 1085 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ EB RIGHT (R) 59 0 * 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 1248 1248 4950 0.2521 LEFT (L) 20 20 1650 0.0121 0.0121 ---=-------------------------------------------------------------------- WB RIGHT (R) 104 104 1650 0.0630 THRU (T) 2135 2135 3300 0. 6470 LEFT (L) 57 57 3000 0.0190 T + R 2239 3300 0. 6785 0. 6785 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.89 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: D * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=DVSP. INT,VOL=VOLNEW.AMV,CAP= .Appendices CCTALOS Software ver. 2.35 by TJKM Transportation Consultants ----------------------------------- ---=___ Condition: Proposed Plan 06/14/06 ---------------------------------___ INTERSECTION 1107 STONELEAF/BOLLINGER CCC Count Date Time Peak Hour ------------------------------ ---------------------- CCTA. METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 5-PHASE SIGNAL ----------- 81 5 31 I I I ^ I I I ^ <--- v ---> Split? N LEFT 19 --- 1.0 1.1 1.1 1. 0 1.1 --- 4 RIGHT STREET NAME : THRU 1329 ---> 2.1 (NO. OF LANES) 2.1<--- 1932 THRU BOLLINGER RIGHT 81 --- 1.1 2.0 1.1 1.1 i.0 --- 98 LEFT v I v N I I SIG WARRANTS: W + E 280 10 171 Urb=Y, Rur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: STONELEAF ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C ------------------------------------------------------------------------ NB RIGHT (R) 171 171 1650 0. 1036 THRU (T) 10 10 1650 0. 0061 LEFT (L) 280 280 3000 0. 0933 0.0933 T + R 181 1650 0. 1097 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SB RIGHT (R) 81 81 1650 0. 0491 THRU (T) 5 5 1650 0. 0030 LEFT (L) 31 31 1650 0.0188 T + R 86 1650 0. 0521 0.0521 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ EB RIGHT (R) 81 81 1650 0. 0491 THRU (T) 1329 1329 3300 0 . 4027 LEFT (L) 19 19 1650 0. 0115 0.0115 T + R 1410 3300 0. 4273 ------------- WB RIGHT (R) 4 4 1650 0. 0024 THRU (T) 1932 1932 3300 0.5855 LEFT (L) 98 98 1650 . 0.0594 T + R 1936 3300 0.5867 0.5867 ---- ----------------- -------------------___ TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.74 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: C -------------------__ * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=DVSP .INT,VOL=VOLNEW.AMV,CP_P= Appendices CCTALOS Software ver. 2.35 by TJKM Transportation Consultants -----------------------------------------___ Condition: Existing Plan 06/14 /06 -------------------------------- INTERSECTION 6366 Dougherty Road/Bollinger [N] San Ramon Counz Date Time Peak Hour ------------------------------------------------------- CCT_A METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 8-PHASE SIGNAL ----------- 869 1069 381 i I I I I I <--- v ---> Split? N LEFT 163 --- 2.0 1.0 3. 0 2.0 1.0 --- 564 RIGHT STREET NAME : THRU 346 ---> 3.0 (NO. OF LANES) 3.0<--- 1337 THRU Bollinger [N] RIGHT 116 --- 1.0 2.0 3.0 1 .0 2.0 --- 106 LEFT <--- ---> v I I I v N I I I SIG WARRANTS: W + E 196 441 71 Urb=Y, Ru r=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: Dougherty Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C ------------------------------------------------------------------------ NB RIGHT (R) 71 13 * 1650 0.0079 THRU (T) 441 441 4950 0.0891 LEFT (L) 196 196 3000 0.0653 0.0653 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SB RIGHT (R) 869 779 * 1650 0.4721 0.4721 THRU (T) 1069 1069 4950 0.2160 LEFT (L) 381 381 3000 0.1270 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ EB RIGHT (R) 116 8 * 1650 0.0048 THRU (T) 346 346 4950 0.0699 LEFT (L) 163 163 3000 0.0543 0.0543 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ WB RIGHT (R) 564 354 * 1650 0.2145 THRU (T) 1337 1337 4950 0.2701 0.2701 LEFT (L) 106 106 3000 0.0353 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.86 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: D ----------------------__ * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=DVSP.INT,VOL=VOLEX.AMV,CAP= AD.vendices CCTALOS Software ver. 2.35 by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Existing Plan 06/14/06 ------------------------------------___ INTERSECTION 6298 GALE RIDGE/BOLLINGER Count Date Time Peak Hour --------------------.---------------------------------------------------- CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 6-PHASE SIGNAL ----------- 166 1 102 I I I I <--- v ---> Split? N LEFT 247 --- 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 --- 466 RIGHT STREET NAME : THRU 790 ---> 3.0 (NO. OF LANES) 3, 0<--- 2044 THRU BOLLINGER RIGHT 8 --- 1 .0 1.0 1. 1 1.1 1. 0 --- 15 LEFT I <--- --->. I v I I v N I I I SIG WARRANTS: W + E 49 11 38 Urb=Y, Ru r=Y. S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: GALE RIDGE ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C ------------------------------------------------------------------------ NB RIGHT (R) 38 38 1650 0.0230 THRU (T) 11 11 1650 0.0067 LEFT (L) 49 49 1650 0.0297 0.0297 T +. R 49 1650 0.0297 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SB RIGHT (R) 166 166 1650 0. 1006 THRU (T) 1 1 1650 0.0006 LEFT (L) 102 102 1650 0.0618 T + R 167 1650 0.1012 0.1012 ----7------------------------------------------------------------------- EB RIGHT (R) 8 0 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 790 790 4950 0. 1596 LEFT (L) 247 247 1650 0.1497 0. 1497 ----------------_-------------------------------------------------------- WB RIGHT (R) 466 364 * 1650 0.2206 THRU (T) 2044 2044 4950 0. 4129 0.4129 LEFT (L) 15 15 1650 0.0091 ----------------------------___ TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0 .69 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: B -------------------------___ * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=DVSP .INT,VOL=VOLEX.AMV,CAP= ApPenaices CCTALOS Software ver. 2.35 by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Existing Plan 06/14 /06 INTERSECTION 5922 S.MONARCH/BOLLINGER Count Date Time Peak Hour ------------------------------------------------------------------------ CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 6-PHASE SIGNAL ----------- 218 10 231 I I I ^ I I I ^ I <--- v ---> I Split? N LEFT 46 --- 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.0 1 . 1 --- 65 RIGHT STREET NAME : THRU 1444 ---> 2.0 (NO. OF LANES) 2.1<--- 1519 THRU BOLLINGER RIGHT 68 --- 1.0 2.0 1.1 1.1 2.0 --- 21 LEFT I <--- ---> I v I I I v N SIG WARRANTS: W + E 236 10 72 Urb=Y, Ru r=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? Y STREET NAME: S.MONARCH ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C ------------------------------------------------------------------------ NB RIGHT (R) 72 72 1650 0.0436 THRU (T) 10 10 1650 0.0061 LEFT (L) 236 236 3000 0.0787 0.0787 T + R 82 1650 0.0497 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SB RIGHT (R) 218 218 1650 0.1321 THRU (T) 10 10 1650 0.0061 LEFT (L) 231 231 1650 0. 1400 0. 1400 T + R 228 1650 0. 1382 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ EB RIGHT (R) 68 0 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 1444 1444 3300 0. 4376 LEFT (L) 46 46 1650 0. 0279 0.0279 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ WB RIGHT (R) 65 65 1650 0.0394 THRU (T) 1519 1519 3300 0. 4603 LEFT (L) 21 21 3000 0.0070 T + R 1584 3300 0.4800 0.4800 -----------------------------------------------------------------------_ TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.73 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: C ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=DVSP.INT,VOL=VOLEX.P.MV,CAP= ADDendiCeS INTERSECTION 5917 MAIN BRANCH/BOLLINGER Count Date Time Peak Hour ------------------------------------------------------------------------ CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 6-PHASE SIGNAL ----------- 31 10 64 I I I ^ I I I I <-- v ---> Split? N LEFT 10 --- 1.0 1 . 1 1 .1 1.0 1.1 --- 14 RIGHT STREET NAME : THRU 1469 ---> 2. 1 (NO. OF LANES) 2.1<--- 1502 THRU BOLLINGER RIGHT 15 --- 1.1 1.0 1 .1 1.1 2.0 --- 70 LEFT <--- ---> v I I I v N I I SIG WARRANTS : W + E 72 10 263 Urb=Y, Ru r=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: MAIN BRANCH ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C ------------- NB RIGHT (R) 263 263 1650 0.1594 THRU (T) - 10 10 1650 0. 0061 LEFT (L) 72 72 1650 0.0436 T + R 273 1650 0. 1655 0.1655 ----------------- ------------------------------------------------------- SB RIGHT (R) 31 31 1650 0.0188 THRU (T) 10 10 1650 0.0061 LEFT (L) 64 64 1650 0. 0388 0.0388 T + R 41 1650 0. 0248 ------------ EB RIGHT (R) 15 15 1650 0. 0091 THRU (T) 1469 1469 3300 0. 4452 LEFT (L) 10 10 1650 0.0061 T + R 1484 3300 0. 4497 0.4497 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ WB RIGHT (R) 14 14 1650 0. 008S THRU (T) 1502 1502 3300 0. 4552 LEFT (L) 70 70 3000 0.0233 0.0233 T + R 1516 3300 0. 4594 ---------------------- TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0 . 68 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: B -----------------------___ * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=DVSP .INT,VOL=VOLEX.AMV,CAP= Appendices CCTALOS Software ver. 2.35 by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Existing Plan 06/14 /06 ---------------------------- INTERSECTION 4860 Dougherty Road/Monarch/Gale Rid Contra Costa County Count Date Time Peak Hour ------------------------------------------------------------------------ CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 8-PHASE SIGNAL ----------- 171 2171 137 I I I I I I I <--- v ---> I Split? N LEFT 47 --- 1 . 0 1.1 3. 1 1.0 1.0 --- 136 RIGHT STREET NAME : THRU 6 ---> 1 .0 (NO. OF LANES) 1. 0<--- 17 THRU Monarch/Gal e Rid RIGHT 14 --- 1 .0 1.0 3. 1 1 .1 1. 0 --- 134 LEFT <--- A ---> I v I I I v N I SIG WARRANTS: W + E 97 1058 13 Urb=Y, Ru r=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: Dougherty Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C ------------------------------------------------------------------------ NB RIGHT (R) 13 13 1650 0.0079 THRU (T) 1058 1058 4950 0.2137 LEFT (L) 97 97 1650 0.0588 0.0588 T + R 1071 4950 0.2164 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SB RIGHT (R) 171 171 1650 0.1036 THRU (T) 2171 2171 4950 0. 4386 LEFT (L) 137 137 1650 0.0830 T + R 2342 4950 0. 4731 0.4731 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ EB RIGHT (R) 14 0 * 1650 0. 0000 THRU (T) 6 6 1650 0.0036 0.0036 LEFT (L) 47 47 1650 0.0285 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ WB FIGHT (R) 136 0 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 17 17 1650 0 .0103 LEFT (L) 134 134 1650 0. 0812 0.0812 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.62 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: B -------------- * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED NT=DVSP.INT,VOL=VOLEX.AMV,CAP= CCTALOS Software ver. 2.35 by TJKM Transportation Consultants --------------- Condition: Existing Plan 06/14/06 ADoendices CCTALOS Software ver. 2.35 by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Existing Plan 06/14/.06 INTERSECTION 1111 S.WEDGEWOOD/BOLLINGER CCC Count Date Time Peak Hour ------------------------------------------------------------------------ CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 6-PHASE SIGNAL ----------- 166 13 106 I I I ^ I I I ^ <--- v ---> Split? N LEFT 20 --- 1.0 1 .1 1.1 1.0 1.1 --- 86 RIGHT STREET NAME: THRU 1101 ---> 3.0_ (NO. OF LANES) 2.1<--- 2144 THRU BOLLINGER RIGHT 60 '--- 1.0 2.0 1 .1 1.1 2.0 --- 50 LEFT <--- ---> v I I v N I I I SIG WARRANTS : W + E 289 13 11 Urb=Y, Ru r=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? Y STREET NAME: S.WEDGEWOOD ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C ------------------------------------------------------------------------ NB RIGHT (R) 11 11 1650 0. 0067 THRU (T) 13 13 1650 0.0079 LEFT (L) 289 289 3000 0.0963 0.0963 T + R 24 1650 0. 0145 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SB RIGHT (R) 166 166 1650 0. 1006 THRU (T) 13 13 1650 0.0079 LEFT (L) 106 106 1650 0. 0642 . T + R 179 1650 0.1085 0. 1085 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ EB RIGHT (R) 60 0 * 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 1101 1101 4950 0.2224 LEFT (L) 20 20 1650 0. 0121 0.0121 --------------------------------------------------------------------- --- WB, RIGHT (R) 86 86 1650 0.0521 THRU (T) 2144 2144 3300 0. 6497 LEFT (L) 50 50 3000 0.0167 T + R 2230 3300 0. 6758 0. 6758 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0. 89 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: D * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=DVSP .INT,VOL=VOLEX.AMV, CAP= Appendices CCTALOS Software ver. 2.35 by TJKM Transportation Consultants ------------------------------ Condition: Existing Plan 06/14 /06 --------------------------------- INTERSECTION 1107 STONELEAF/BOLLINGER CCC Count Date Time Peak Hour ------------------------------------------------------------------------ CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 5-PHASE SIGNAL ----------- 81 5 31 I ( I ^ I ^ <--- v ---> Split? N LEFT 19 --- 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.0 1 .1 --- 4 RIGHT STREET NAME : THRU 1119 ---> 2.1 (NO. OF LANES) 2. 1<--- 1911 THRU BOLLINGER RIGHT 80 --- 1.1 2.0 1 .1 1.1 1.0 --- 58 LEFT <--- ---> v I v N I SIG WARRANTS: W + E 288 10 155 Urb=Y, Ru r=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: STONELEAF ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C ------------------------------------------------------------------------ NB RIGHT (R) 155 155 1650 0.0939 THRU (T) 10 10 1650 0.0061 LEFT (L) 288 288 3000 0.0960 0.0960 T + R 165 1650 0.1000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SB RIGHT (R) 81 81 1650 0.0491 THRU (T) 5 5 1650 0.0030 LEFT (L) 31 31 1650 0.0188 T + R 86 1650 0.0521 0.0521 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ EB RIGHT (R) 80 80 1650 0.0485 THRU (T) 1119 1119 3300 0.3391 LEFT (L) 19 19 1650 0.0115 0.0115 T + R 1199 3300 0.3633 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ WB RIGHT (R) 4 4 1650 0.0024 THRU (T) 1911 1911 3300 0,5791 LEFT (L) 58 58 1650 0,0352 T + R 1915 3300 0,5803 0.5803 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.74 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: C --------------------------- * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=DVSP. !NT,VOL=VOLEX.AMV, '-AP= appendices APPENDIX D Level of Service Calculation Sheets :-Appendices ha l4j4�li IN1:p1'I'girl IJ'UU Y�rl..!4 1 ��rf i1�'�.Ifl�'1`II�sI Tli .bir l i It LY„r I1<I r ,�:dl_idt.u,�31.'it! I!,Ift)!{IiI y4F(�fJ.ail�+!�-<r�III F�1 31,f'J},��111{III �,�:pj�rt.r✓inl: 4:, ' j,Ii!I r lJl 11, t'.:I ) I'hl tea,j1:} p4. 77'trl 71111 G, tits(1S r1�b;pl��:I�1. i�I✓'1u11111"�,flli�!Iiirj+�+Ii'ItAIJ} hl;jl°�1,1.y�1 I!'�„U I,�I',I'll,'i;.'alit,I,III,�jhl'!-0ff.h'1'lll,1'i lll'II�IIi' I)I�,,}Llrygl�k-I4.I+�ilt!illuh�I'LLrlii,ny,la!i� Tf��r�{I�I�;�l�,',Ilr''I'a�i�il{�fllrl!I�irl. �1'iblf'�I III�IIwJylrl UJ,)J�I IJ{ill�rlr���llu d}f-r'f:{,�I I��I �Itrlll I II!, '::y7 ' I,! :�t!JI�I Ips I �II���I�t) rjU:l(I!. S ' f, ,1 U GIIrE��116 ,I ISII rl n1j'S I{l1 I Ilp'',mlii III II..f.�14111 'j1 hfVl'' � `I �1 I!'1, I II 'kl I 11 s r'j 11(IV?��I 111 Ill�llllnll�!I I)r t, 111N'ltlE.I lu IS T! '!�1!i1,1 I!I IfI.,PA 7p I?ii;'i'�y1 Irl Igo 1(W!,Illuli I�tI�' I Ir41.'I�Ii UI fi 111�:,I 1IFII,I,. id'_,II''II'�lr.;;'IIiIIII'I�I�I�!!}�!!�,111K `�I�I! I�ri lll�ll;�i" 1Aa-�l 11 T,714++IIIi'(I��rilllUllf If l'll'r l+� l (.-1':I I U , .11 ii 4 ill �l fall tU iiI'= . II n 11 1 ::'il 7�I I,ITJII lir 115, II Irl tl���111 1j11(41 j1 X11 I+ 1�1'i' II 1:d 111 iif� } 1 11 {li l I n 4 _.11111 111+1�r 1,'II.iJ Ih Nl it ill�1'l l'�l1Yll„ t l I. I'll t,n I tllihll;l 11 ( , 1) I([Inl I Mimi IS ,1 ! p 111IRII Iha) itljl^]I f',)It llt�l�. Il lllil t Ili :{,y'ly ILII 1' }I�f il;i.1.(� �'I.Jl til. m k11�'i:t1Mh, + l lllt'll�4l'I'ii��l ll�j�illu I,�1+f141J)! � I � 1111 1 r I1,d I I II III rl l��lll''i �1y�1111'ICIyI I )vII�Il1 Il�tigl 1 �'� ItJ,�Ii = �Il' rl),i •, )I ill 1'r Ls}i�ol Id 4,ll'I��lll�u�I h+I rI !.I I t��SII I f:'r,�l 1 I+ ;l�tl� l}� �Ir, I ISlli tll I I �If -;',lU I h!I'r��;jll lx iI4 Il!d!I II Il lil 14rl,li�ul i�til �n'II�a�1 >}�IWI�'(I''IiP P 21i r-ilr 11 rll N,�: Ilio '(t���(I J ,11ji}1'llli,tll INTI I)�r I,it 1} YI 411117, (Ir :illrl'!i 1' 1 .11 I1 Ii'' IIYI I "! I 11, I Y Ihl�Iill..l.y)h'Ifu�ll,�ldlll��{r't' II' vl ill In dlll L.,r�ll r mJ1 lfI a,,}I t,l. � �,I 11LI 111171,I�'.,p �I �II I Ilrl sry „}I+�I{,I I Il U i l�l rll'I, 1' ,I' Iln�llli il t J' 11 l l � , 1 ih I 1 I 1� I ,I.li I nil I,il 7 ( t I 111,!3 II��I tI,�h1i�!iII,J�lil Ib' IIM'1' �Ir}1 ilf 1�4^ {li�'I X11 u ! 711,1 rr lil l�l �i Ln111}I��;IIII�,III 'fl' I�,II Illil t 11111 I, ilh�Il 111 .� F r ''I 1 '�j 1+1111111111gIti.Il 11�! 11 _��II ,fld '.:! ,III, A I.I II ' !'1 .IS '+ I I1, Ill tl rII Ir S 1 I I :�l rl III , I� 11111D is Vl i'r '11Ijl ili}i 1 RAM II Iltt 1 , �'I y ,lf lr 1111 ,,14 II -Ij.�l'�hfi�V111`r}"II ,I+rC, �I al ,Ill 111 -II ;I Il llt r 4)I 1: ,ill I 1 II 11'' '..I , rlr I1Itl IA1 Jh li'I „' 1"ry'r ' 4,- �}_ 1:,'� tS�'pSlpplll}71i,7tif�t+� �1 !!!pJ app{)Ii11,1II� .�!�.1111!'1,g�',..r,111 rI I�i.j:r111'1,}I llll.�l'1111� .�,l��';,I tll:f�i1 1,,1 1�I lr�'11J i11'QT AA��I..fll yf'_lti��ll��, . 11,111�?rir ilhl ll� ln,,plli rtl+{lx Milli,111i1!I 4Il)-:?.hI 1l IILII,j1, Ill l.l�:r ILII litlin.,:1.',1 rt l: 'P t'II�1I'Ir�'.�1J �,rl,'h �ll 11'�I'!i 1i 11'11 N �1111'II�a'�IUA � li li•all_a a �� I ! ill l�,. IIII 7 ill 4111 r I I , �I;7;111 I lrl. I Jl -.'f/ , II } 4 r-hl tl},�1�}_.L'! �t I li,�,1.�. 7;�'��t�ll4rzt7,,'7�„�tYl7-, fl ryr,�-tivi,{rl�ln lr�jli Jliw�xi A}z"�turf,31,_�.a�U{'IJ�ftnr�,,}N I. i nnRl'1 _sl MEET 1 t J! ''� r 1 � III r,i4x��� l(,I!lII f f7ff INTI r.l.,{l�t�II1J71r11 tl"I 1A1 CI: I I:I,: r I 1i r l,.";t 11 rr t,il� f ( , V,1 r�lj!�Iry J(I4i`lq�'LiI1,L fN11,11'+I nl�ij' {I I,';-` IIIA ii�Vl II1 !.II IIII Ir! II till .I 111, {.� Ili 41ti] 4''(I C ,�I!��t11. 4Y11, I,1,�1,,�rVI�I I ilp UIh�IIl,ll l�9lil,linl�IIS,E II INI,dr1��lF{1,�1 a1,��II II jIIr�.7 lid 11111 ,'7;I{ll Y Ii;1 1111 �r.i1��_I II IIII�1�u 17:1,II 111jA ;fll I Ir I�YII II!�Illlil"Ili li l�l llq t'. I I III!j11N 11.141,r 'l) ISI�' 1 `lr IIGIIh'14IIIlui��, yl 111y17 N. i. E I t III r � It h , I ,(II�Y�Iro41 }7!i }fll' nl�l�I r14r l} il(!�'il'1�j 1i�.Gltl )11. 71'IIi,Ai'll,i lbl jr�flxR)I�II IIIY;, (,I'I,�:Urlll r'I'tJ+}Il rr..{trhl yJlrlsrw,tll�illll�?yls Ul}}III:,ia'I x'111 IBM, pt11/'u�` li, ,I llil afl�l 'ri7,l I,Ih!1r11I '}I �.,�I!.11!!l}If�k fAr Illlh lyll,111�,111111�1 1,1111++III�''��'�rulnl 11 I�.hiF,il li'!IIAI!I� Ir4�l,�',I� JIM `j r t i4 111 i1 J�IFO ! IIII)I,�_. 'I 71 III,1.1 J,nl I,(Irl II+111 lrll Il,it ap l ,nll 1 7 if f 111 r I,hl:r 1, h1 u:.,s it ' 117 41 I,IIr 1�tl 11!�I {�lll I'+.�I,�s r flll 1 h.I IFt 11 r II IJ IirlPrl Ulrlfh', f,°}!3 1,f;'I}1,111..7! WIN III 71 it lr t Ila"1V�'�rs f 1 1' rU ,I l�4IfI��L��I IIr1,1 n111II�1 IililJ�la�li'L�I'l,lll-iit}Ilrllt le��l llj!'llllh j111��1r.,�,�1 l PILL 11111,.,1')!!'11' �,h u�1i'tl ll;!!3 _ _ '���j�,14 Jr�l"S. �('I'alkyl �I10Efllb!��"7$I�}11'(_.I)"r,ll!lIl lll.r!IIIl7,II 1 ltll �lfl�I r'a1r1rP11;,,1ss,I�t �L�! IIII ti I�'r{Ilrr17a41j11 I'i:lrlll�I 'l;iA1114111 IIj161:11�11.� I' L...1��1!,I���II IIII111�(!i11I']<i}U i,,,l''t 1lrlllllll!.,II1111,111 IiJ„r+ ��tln.�II '�,Illji�r1ll'tli !�11111�IIM IIIw,1.141Pr1 li �7111�}11111 1�;�11n1111ly1 rr.If1!)�Fljit J17b1 A'fll!]y5'i17r'1..51'! f��tN JII f;I , i _ III A 1 Ill IIII I�}} ,lrl 11+ t I Y ,,II IL� IIr �I �; SII I'f Ifi, 11 J 1 ul r f r {' I t i' M1 t 111:Ill AI sYi 1 l it ll' IJ 1 4 1 I , I f laf i I. yhl 1 I I P} V 1111 i k f1 1 ! I IQr,I��,It1Il 11!y111611 if 11711�lia�I�I'11 rli IU�1'JbL,I�1lFf�l+Ilil.j 11111 IIi7111IN RYA �111�.44tIAAI'Itl 111111���'fl}I r7Y�J �p111Iy�ls IIa,IIJ7 1 �I +1 1 11 1 1f- j1'I ntr J 4TI 1 rNll til}'�.1��'I'1;'11t�l.11pl,tll.�1i1!b,ji- �4ji,IliT:>1111 7I,I I11J11 I,IIIf,I lU'I, rni�Ity ��J liai! }'. ,.�-U a1P{n,ilSl{'ll6 iI��I�fip awl�rl4N_" Ill rir;,14''91 11,1111�5111UI1'I 3'I dl'OMNI� ,wI„ �i�rt I,rd Il�f`Jr� i,1�a,1111 la 411{ll I El�.�lr � II�iyT itl,ly�arl+1�'31,1,.1(rIlI! II 171xrkr�l bar_f'{ui I�11 rlI}}Iif i,�t �.,.uUuC�11f �R I-Al ,A)?A�, II✓`'-�i�riial: M:. �1'"Irti14Ns I II "11�i T1 ISI 1 y 7 t„ 71 �l I A1 ra•� Ilq�}w,!Iti �IAJ i..l I to si' ti� I I1 t6�.�„t,,, ' !yy 411 1 1141 , l� 1 � I�d all II ,1,]Fl l( 4fj I,I f III}lu!�I�Im it u, � �Jr . {f'q�nit'rrCi;;��7111}syr,4�}I.4;f,r r111!4.itV"'1r1��1 �`�� 1jf+LL.0 14 {IYII �j.1I�!I ,Irtf 1111�y,11�11filuflj l}.`IIf,1 ( 1Uy UI�'l:,fblll tlr s ,i�rt ,�� '::1{ tIr I 1 (''111IrIII I?� 11 i1�;{I'II I y ,(z '1^tl 1'I��l�. P" 1���'ft41 Y�!-:7 f1 ti1 0�I r i1;5 t 1 I rf 51� ) �4 , II4'i��"I'a4(l rl��,�1��l r'I,Ir ilii`II I�� ,li l�dl Wlt'1+ rail,InY r i l � ¢�✓:L., � ri1Y5W �r t���YliS,a .+Vi �r�'ir14N ,' .fmyul`1�{x71 '3.Lr�f] 1�'C1f11{�.�7��115..��'1� i+ti' "Tlnlrl'UI (�l��aA{!!1"llrr-}ra..Y c n�mr'.Rh)rn;'.+EJI^�mm�r+d_", pLn ¢ 'li,J��1 yl u'N�i,,l'�bF�plf,4�kN 1y.11�!a �lJ ,,�'1 I �, 41 t�. 511 -FI,N I.. I , ,fV I '`JMI � •� � 7�Jr� IA ,; a?r iI":c �_ �v �'���;��'NI���wly�j�i11111i1U�pl��l���lil�4�'}���TI �JJ,,rt,���;111rf1p irl ll`�I p � yGt�k,,�r j1��p� �(•cli ua lµ�- 6 I r V �1,n 141F ,I.k�F9L�?�S 1�.�✓l�.1 y�hJ •�® • 4MIj�'�+I�tpTrl Vi)�9{hb lli�'F�ku�l�,hi�� �rNli.� lir skit Fill , , II ri al �II4,. ��I �I tlfA 1$tMtl,c ivlU� I'rt;l{�,1, � 4fiSi,�kf;9 APPENDIX F Saturation Flow Rates Drop-Off and Pick-up c _l!ppendices Saturation Flow Rates Pick-up and Drop-Off Union Morning AM Peak # Cars Loading area Sat flow rate avera a dwell time eak dwell time 8:15-8:30 97 1 583 1 0.17 1.57 1.42 Union Afternoon PM Peak # Cars Loading area Sat flow rate average dwell time eak dwell time 2:50-3:05 70 583 0.12 6.99 4.67 Rancho Milpitas Morning AM Peak # Cars Loading area Sat flow rate -average dwell time peak dwell time 8:00-8:15 61 348 0.18 1.01 1.25 Rancho Milpitas Afternoon PM Peak I # Cars Loading area Sat flow rate avera a dwell time eak dwell time 3:00-3:15 1 20 348 0.06 4.02 2.00 Fisher Mornin AM Peak # Cars Loading area Sat flow rate average dwell time eak dwell time 8:15-8:30 62 300 0.21 1.39 1 1.50 Fisher Afternoon PM Peak # Cars Loading area I Sat flow rate average dwell time peak dwell time 2:45-3:00 37 300 1 0.12 6.59 4.29 Middle Morning Average AM Peak # Cars Loadinq area Sat flow rate average dwell time peak dwell time 73 410 OAS 1.32 1.39 Middle Afternoon Average PM Peak # Cars Loadina area Sat flow rate avera a dwell time peak dwell time 42 410 0.10 1 5.87 3.65 Appendices APPENDIX G LOS Calculation Sheets Driveway Intersections Appendices AM-NEW-0. 47 Wed Jun 14, 2006 16:29:46 Page 2-1 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed Plan - AM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #5819 Main Branch / School Average Delay (sec/veh) : 2.3 Worst Case Level Of Service: B( 10.73 Street Name: Main Branch School Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L T - R ------------I ---------------( I---------------II---------------II---------------( Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include include Include Include Lanes: 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------( ---------------I (---------------i (---------------( (---------------( Volume Module : Base Vol: 266 285 0 0 77 636 0 0 0 0 0 0 Growth Adj:, 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 266 285 0 0 77 6,36 0 0 0 0 0 0 User Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 . 1 .00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 PHF Volume: 266 285 0 0 77 636 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final Vol . : 266 285 0 0 77 636 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------I ---------------il---------------li---------------II---------------I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4,1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------I ---------------II---------------II---------------il--------------I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 713 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap. : 896 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap. : 896 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.30 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------I ---------------1l---------------II---------------il---------------i Level Of Service Module: Queue: 1.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Stopped Del: 10.7 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: B * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap. : xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: Traffix 7.6 .0715 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans. San Jose .Appendices AM—NEW-0.47 Wed Jun 14, 2006 16:29:46 Page 3-1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed Plan - AM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Detailed Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method Base Volume Alternative , Intersection #5819 Main Branch / School Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T — R -----------I----------------1----------------1 ----------------I----------------I HevVeh: 0% 0% 0% 00 Grade: 0% 0% 0% 0% Peds/Hour: 0 0 0 0 Pedestrian Walk Speed: 4 .00 feet/sec LaneWidth: 12 feet 12 feet 12 feet 12 feet Time Period: 0.25 hour -----------I----------------f----------------1-----------------1--------.--------i Upstream Signals: Link Index: #15 Dist (miles) : 0. 000 Speed (mph) : 0 .00 SignalI•ndex: #5917 Cycle Time: 0 secs InitVolume: 0 0 Saturation: 0 0 ArrivalType: 0 0 G/C: 0.00 0 .00 *** Computation 1: Time for Queue to Clear at Each Upstream Intersection P: 0.000 0.000 gql: . 0.00 0.00 gq2: 0.00 0.00 gq: 0.00 0.00 *** Computation 2: Time Intersection Blocked Because of Upstream Platoons alpha: 0.000 beta: 0. 000 to (secs) : 0.000 F: 0. 000 f: 0.000 0. 000 vcmax: 0 0 vcg: 0 0 vcmin: 0 0 tp: 0.0 0.0 p: 0.000 *** Computation 3: Platoon Event Periods pdom/psubo: 0.000/0.000/Unconstrained *** Computation 4: Conflicting Flows During Each Unblocked Period InitCnflVol: 713 xxxxx xxxxx 0 xxxxx xxxxx 0 0 0 0 0 0 UpstreamAdj:1 .00 x.xxx x.xxx 1.00 x.xxx x.xxx 1. 00 1.000 1.000 1.00 1.000 1 .000 ConflictVol: 713 xxxxx xxxxx 0 xxxxx xxxxx 0 0 0 0 0 0 *** Computation 5: Capactiy for Subject Movement During. Unblocked Period InitPotCap: 896 xxxxx xxxxx 0 xxxxx xxxxx 0 0 0 .0 0 0 UpstreamAdj:1 . 00 x.xxx x.xxx 1.00 x.xxx x.xxx 1 . 00 1.000 1. 000 1.00 1.000 1.000 PotentCap: 896 xxxxx xxxxx 0 xxxxx xxxxx 0 0 0 0 0 0 Traffix 7.6 .0715 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans. San Jose _o-vendices AM-NEW-0. 47 Wed Jun 14, 2006 16:29:46 Page 4-1 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed Plan - AM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way .Stop Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #5906 S.Monarch f School Cycle (sec) : 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X) : 0.688 Loss Time (sec) : 0 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh) : 13 . 5 Optimal Cycle : 0 Level Of Service: B Street Name: S.Monarch School Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L T - R - -----------I ---------------II---------=-----II--------------- II---------------I Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include , Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes: 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 ------------I ---------------il---------------II---------------II---------------I Volume Module : Base Vol: 6 173 0 0 62 20 83 0 46 185 32 521 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 6 173 0 0 62 20 83 0 46 185 32 521 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 6 173 0 0 62 20 83 0 46 185 32 521 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 6 173 0 0 62 20 83 0 46 185 32 521 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol. : 6 173 0 0 62 20 83 0 46 185 32 521 ------------I ----------------II---------------it---------------ii---------------I Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.03 0. 97 0.00 0.00 0.76 0.24 0. 64 0.00 0.36 0.85 0.15, 1.00 Final Sat. : 20 565 0 0 429 138 405 0 225 522 90 758 ------------i ---------------fi---------------li---------------{ I----------------f Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.31 0.31 xxxx xxxx 0.14 0.14 0.20 xxxx 0.20 0.35 0 .35 0.69 , Crit Moves' **** **** **** **** Delay/Veh' 11.1 11.1 0.0 0.0 9.7 9.7 9.7 0.0 9.7 11.6 11.6 16.7 Delay Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 .00 1.00 . 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 11 .1 11.1 0.0 0.0 9.7 9.7 9.7 0.0 9.7 11. 6 11.6 16.7 LOS by Move: B B * * A A A * A B B C A.pproachDel: i1.1 9.7 9.7 15.2 Delay Adj : 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 11.1 9.7 9.7 15.2 LOS by Appr: B A A C Traffix 7.6 .0715 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans. San Jose Appendices f AM_NEW_0. 47 Wed Jun 14, 2006 16:29:46 Page 5-1 Proposed Plan - AM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Detailed Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method Base Volume Alternative Intersection #5906 S.Monarch / School Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L T - R L - T - R -----------I----------------I----------------!----------------]----------------- Time ---------------Time Period: 0.25 hour HevVeh: 0% 0% 0 0% Alpha Value: 0.01 -----------!----------------!----------------!---------------- 1----------------I GroupType: 2 2 3A 5 P [C1] : 0.15 0.12 0.13 0 .50 P [C2] : 0,02 0.05 0.49 0 .12 P [C3] : 0.59 0.48 0.07 0.28 P[C4] : 0.22 0.30 0.28 0 .10 P [C5] : 0.02 0. 04 0.03 0.01 Padj [C1] : 0.019 0.021 0.016 0 .010 Padj [C2] : 0.011 0.012 0.002 0.004 Padj [C3] : -0.015 -0.011 0.001 -0.007 Padj [C4] : 0.013 -0.018 -0.016 -0.006 Padj [C5] : -0.002 -0. 004 -0.003 -0.001 -----------]------=---------I----------------I----------------I----------------I Lanes: L1 L2 Ll L2 L1 L2 L1 L2' LaneType: LTR NOLANE LTR NOLANE LTR NOLANE RITE LTTHRU -----------I----------------i----------------I----------------1---------------- [ HeadwavAdj: 0..007 xx.xxx -0.146 xx.xxx -0.085 xx.xxx -0.700 0 .426 Volume: 179 xxxxxx 82 xxxxxx 129 xxxxxx 521 217 Capacity: 585 xxxxx 567 xxxxx 630 xxxxx 758 612 DegOfUtil: 0.29 x.xx 0.13 x.xx 0.19 x.xx 0. 68 0.35 DepHeadway: 5.78 xx.xx 5.81 xx.xx 5.42 xx.xx 4 . 69 5 .82 ServiceTime: 3.8 xx.x 3. 8 xx.x 3.4 xx.x 2. 4 3.5 Delay: 11.1 xxx.x 9.7 xxx.x 9.7 xxx.x . 16.7 11.6 -----------I----------------I----------------I----------------I----------------I Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound < ----------- ---------------- ----------------I----------------!---------------- I A=roachDel: 11. 1 9. 7 - 9.7 15.2 Delay Adj : 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 11.1 9.7 9.7 15 .2 . LOS by Appr: B A A C OverallDel: 13.5 OverallLOS: B Traffix 7.6.0715 (c) 2003 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans. San Jose AoPendices ADDENDUM 1992 EIR (SCH# 91053014) and 1996 SEIR (SCH# 96013003) MIDDLE SCHOOL AND RESIDENTIAL RELOCATION WITHIN PHASE II, PHASE III, AND PHASE IV OF THE DOUGHERTY VALLEY DEVELOPMENT COUNTY FILES: GP# 06-0003 AND SP#06-0001 VTM# 06-9134; VTM# 06-9136 AND MS#06-00028 DP# 06-3050; DP# 06-3051; AND DP# 06-3052 DOUGHERTY VALLEY- SAN RAMON, CA Lead Agency: Contra Costa County Community Development Department 651 Pine Street North Wing— 4th Floor V Martinez, CA 94553-0095 September 2006 Table of Contents I. Background Information ........................................... ........i II. Proposed Project...................................................... .......5 III. Impact Assessment of Proposed Addendum. A. .Land Use........................................................ .......6 B. Proposed General Plan Amendment...................................................._.......8 C. Proposed Dougherty Valley Specific Plan Amendment...... 8 D. Affordable Housing........................................... .........9 E. Neighborhood Park........................................... .........9 F. Agricultural Resources...............................................10 G. Aesthetics ...............................................................11 H. Air Quality...............................................................11 I. Biological Resources...................................................13 J. Cultural Resources.....................................................14 K. Housing/Population/Employment.....................................15 L. Noise.........................................................................15 M. Public Health and Safety/Energy Conservation..................16 N. Hazardous Materials......................................... ..........17 D O. Public Services................................................. ....17 P. Potable Water................... Q. Reclaimed Water.........................................................19 R. Drainage............................... ........................ .....20 S. Solid Waste..................................................... .....20 T. Police Services................................................. ......20 U. Fire Services..........................................................21 V. Traffic and Circulation...................................... .......21 W. Soils.....................................................I...............31 X. Hydrology and Water Quality....................................31 IV. Required CEQA Findings....................... V. Conclusion.....................................................................34 VI. List of Attachments........................................................34 VII. Supporting Information Sources........................................35 iii I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1992 On December 22. 1992. the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County approved the Dougherty Vallee Specific Plan. which applied to 5. 979 acres of unimproved land in the unincorporated area of the County, located generally east of the City of Sari Ramon and south of the Town of Danville ("Planning Area" or "Specific Plan area"). Shapell.. the developer of Gale Ranch, owns approximately 2.708 acres of the planning area formerly known as Gale Ranch ("Gale Ranch Site"). Windemere Ranch BLC, L.L.C. ("Windemere") owns approximately 2379 acres of the planning area. The remaining 892 acres are owned by the United States Camp and Reserve Training Field facility known as Camp Parks. In 1992, the County Board of Supervisors certified an environmental impact report evaluating the potential impacts of the Dougherty Valley development. Even though the 1992 EIR was prepared with specificity and addressed the proposed Planning actions and approvals to the extent possible, it stated that further environmental review based on the. 1992 EIR would be required for subsequent detailed land use approval necessary for the developing future phases of the Dougherty Valley planning area. The adequacy of the 1992 EIR was challenged in two lawsuits, one filed by the Town of Danville and other cities and non-governmental agencies (the "Danville Lawsuit") and the other filed by the East Bay Municipal Utility District ("EBMUD") (the "EBMUD lawsuit"). 1994 On March 22, 1994, the County Board of Supervisors approved the Dougherty Valley Affordable Housing Program, DVAHP and the program was amended in October, 2001. Under the DVAHP, Windemere is required to provide affordable housing. Specifically, 25% of the 3,995 du units allowed for the Windemere portion of the 8.500 du "traffic performance standard checkpoint" level, are to be affordable units. Windemere is currently constructing or planning to construct affordable housing to satisfy the Phases I-V of affordable housing requirement, and well as planning to construct the required additional affordable units of its 5,170 maximum allowed portion of 11.000 units, which would be delivered through the Phase III of the proposed project. See additional information on affordable housing in Housing/Population/Employment Section of this Addendum. In May 1994, after extensive,discussions, the Town of Danville, City of San Ramon, County of Contra Costa and the Project developers reached a settlement agreement 1 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum—September 2006 ("Dougherty Valley Settlement Agreement") providing for certain mutual contractual obligations on the part of the parties in connection with the developmen-i of the Dougherty Valley. The Dougherty Valley Settlement Agreement establishes detailed performance standards and traffic performance requirements that apply to development within the Specific Plan and. in some cases. to other development within the Co-unn-. the Citv of San Ramon or the Town of Danville. All remaining parties engaged in extended discussions, resulting in five additional settlement ag-Teements which addressed various issues of concern including, among others. those pertaining to water supply and wastewater capacity. After these settlements were executed, all remainino, challenges to the 1992 Specific Plan and EIR were dismissed. -The obligations set forth in the Danville Settlement Agreement and the other settlement agreements resulting from the Specific Plan Project remain in effect and would apply to the Phases III-V Project. In December of 1994, Contra Costa County approved a General Plan Amendment, Development Agreement, Rezoning, Preliminary and Final Development Plans and Vesting Tentative Map for Gale Ranch I under development by Shapell. Gale Ranch 1, also known as the Bridges, is located west of Dougherty Valley Road and included in the Specific Plan area.' A separate EIR was prepared and certified by Contra Costa County for this 618-acre area. The Gale Ranch I Project is nearing completion. 1995 In 1995, the County entered into a development agreement with Windemere Ranch Partners (the predecessor-in-interest to Windemere BLC Land Company, LLC,the owner of the Windemere development) and Shapell Industries, Inc ("Shapell"), and approved preliminary development plans for the area. 1996 A Final Subsequent EIR was prepared and certified by the County Board of Supervisors in November of 1996 for the Dougherty Valley General Plan Amendments, 1996 Specific Plan, and Windemere I and Gale Ranch ii Projects ("1996 SEIR"). In November 1996, Contra Costa County approved Specific Plan Amendments. Tentative ntat Subdivision Maps and Final Development Plans for Gale Ranch 11 (Shapell Industries) and Windemere I (Windemere Ranch Partners) Projects. Gale Ranch II included 11.825 single and multiple family residential units, retail commercial, a part and-ride lot, a day care center, an elementary school, a middle school. and park and open space facilities on a total of 97') acres. The Windemere I Project includes 2.232 single and multiple family residential units, commercial development, a fire station, a village center and community park, neighborhood parks. a park-and-ride lot. and a community college on a total of 388 acres. 2 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum-September 2006 A Final Subsequent EIR was prepared and certified by Contra Costa Counts, for the Dougherty Valley General Plan Amendments. 1996 Specific Plan. and Windemere I and Gale Ranch II Projects ("1996 SEIR") in November 1996. The 1996 SEIR included a comprehensive analysis of potentially significant environmental impacts relative to the specific Windemere I and Gale Ranch II Project areas. Water and wastewater systems approved consistent with the 1996 SEIR were designed to accommodate full development of the Specific Plan area. Of the environmental issues examined, only traffic and circulation impacts were identified as significant and unavoidable. All other environmental impacts were either found to be adequately evaluated in the 1992 EIR, less-than-significant, or less-than- significant with the adoption of the additional mitigation measures provided in the 1996 SEIR. 2002 In November 2002, Contra Costa County approved the Windemere Phase II project which consists of 448 residential homesites. An Addendum to the 1996 SEIR was prepared and adopted. The Phase II Addendum provided a comprehensive update and analysis on the current status of the Windemere Project on number of items including biological resources, Regulatory Approvals and Permits, Service Area annexations and the San Ramon Valley Unified School District Agreements and concluded that all environmental impacts were either found to be adequately evaluated in the 1992 EIR, less-than-significant, or less- than-significant with the adoption of the additional mitigation measures provided for in the 1996 SEIR and the 1999 Zone 7, Water Agency (Water Supply Planning Program) SEIR. 2003 On October 28, ,200'), the Contra Costa County Planning Commission adopted an Addendum, and approved the vesting tentative map and final development plan for Gale Ranch Phase III. The development constitutes of approximately 554 acres of the Gale Ranch portion of Dougherty Valley. The Gale Ranch Phase III abuts the Main Branch of Alamo Creek and the West Branch of Alamo Creek on the southwest, and the PG&E transmission line corridor on the northwest. This project consists of 1,423 single and multiple family residential units with a linear park and 10-acre elementary school. Also, in October of 2003, the County Board of Supervisors authorized the review of the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan Amendment. There are two principal causes for the amendment. Most of the amendments are revisions that would bring the document up to date.. correct format and figure citations and/or to bring it into conformance with the County regulations and entitlements (tentative maps) already granted for the implementation of the Specific Plan. The other reason of the amendment are changes 3 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum—September 2006 required by the California Fish and Game. the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. the Regional Board. and United States Department of Fish and Vvildlife. The recluiremcnts of these agencies necessitated_changes to the Specific Plan in order to avoid impact anc expand habitat areas. Examples are a) relocation of the Co=unit)' Center recreational facilities from the confluence of the lwain and West Branch of.Alamo Creep, b) the realignment of the Dougherty Road. c) the reconfiguration of the Class 1 bikeway from near the West Branch creekbed to tops of its western bank. and d) the redesiall of the Village Center to incorporate a wildlife connectivity corridor through.the middle of it. Additionally, the City of San Ramon has requested the removal of all of the over- crossings throughout the Dougherty Valley-area. The Specific Plan Amendment is now under review and anticipated to be decided by the Board of Supervisors in the Spring or Summer of 2005. Additionally, in December of 2003, the County planning Commission approved the Neighborhood Plan for the Dougherty Valley Village Center. The Village Center plan makes provision for 528,100 square feet of public facilities, retail, office, recreation and residential uses within 41.3 + acre area located in the southern portion of Dougherty Valley. The acreage is split with Windemere historically controlling 14.6 acres and Shapell 27.7 + acres. The proposal includes the construction of a 28,500 square foot Community Center; a 11.600 square foot Community Library; and a 4,500 square foot police substation within the Community Center building. The Shapell's portion of the Village Center is proposed to be constructed as part of Gale Ranch, Phase IV. 2004 On April 27, 2004, the County Planning Commission approved the Vesting Tentative Map and Final Development Plan for Windemere Phases III-IV, with a total of 635.2 acres (including 1,798.2 acres of open space/conservation easements) and a total of 1.877 single-family units, 293 apartments, 179 condominiums, 141 townhomes, and 8 neighborhood parks. 200 On January 25, '2005, the Contra Costa Coun-�, Planning Commission adopted an Addendum, and approved the vesting tentative map and final development plan for Gale Ranch Phase IV. The development.constitutes of approximately 1,306 units and 831 acres (including open space). Gale Ranch Phase IV is the fourth and final phase of the development of the Gale Ranch portion of the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan. The project area lies south and west of Gale Ranch Phase III. It is comprised of six distinct areas: four residential neighborhoods, a 30-acre community park, staging area/corporation vard and the southern portion of the Dougherty Valley Village Center, In August 2005. the 1996 Dougherty Valley Specific Plan was reviewed and updated. There were three principal reasons for the update as follows: (1) to incorporate revisions to the plan document updating text and figures, correcting format and figure citations, 4of35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum—September 2006 and to generally bring the document into conformance With the County regulations and entitlements (tentative maps) already granted- (2) to reflect changes required by the CDFG. the Corps. the California Regional Water Quality Control Board and the USFWS. which in mani, cases have already been incorporated: and (3)) to adhere to request made by the City of San Ramon to remove all reference to requirements in the plan document relating to the provision of trail over crossing (bridge) structures. 11, PROPOSED PROJECT: MIDDLE SCHOOL AND RESIDENTIAL RELOCATION WITHIN PHASE 11, PHASE 111, AND PHASE IV DEVELOPMENT A. Background: The 1996 Dougherty Valley Specific Plan envisioned a middle school located on a 15-acre site near trails,transit and parks at the intersection of North Gale Ranch Road and Lilac Ridge Road within the Gale Ranch Phase 11 site. Construction of the middle school is scheduled to commence in the spring of 2007 and the school is scheduled to open for the 2008 school year. In September 2005, the School District requested that Shapell consider relocating the middle school because traffic generated by the already operating Coyote Creek-, Elementary school significantly impacted traffic in the neighborhood and additional traffic generated by the proposed middle school would make traffic conditions untenable To accommodate the School District's request, Shapell'proposes relocation of the middle school to an alternative 15-acre site near trails. transit and parks at the intersection of Bollinger Canyon Road and Monarch Road within the Gale Ranch Phase III area. In June 2006, the County Board of Supervisors authorized a General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Amendment study relating to the relocation of the Gale Ranch Middle School within the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan Area, Specifically, the amendment proposal involves replacing the existing middle school site at the intersection of North Gale Ranch Road and Lilac Ridge Road with single family residences, relocating the middle school to a new site at the intersection of Bollinger Canyon Road and Monarch Road now designated for multi-family residences; and relocating the multi-family residences to a new location in the southerly portion of Gale Ranch near a roadway called Ivy Springs Road. This Proposal would not result in a net increase or loss of residential units. 5 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum-September 2006 B. Residential Units Reiacatian The 1996 Dougherty Valley Specific Plan. and the approved Vesting Tentative Map for phase III (now designated the proposed middle school site: area B as shown on the Exhibit A) for the construction of 216 apartment units_ each of which will be displaced by the relocated middle school. To compensate for the displacement of housing at the proposed school site, the previously approved school site area (area A as shown on Exhibit C) will be designated for the construction of 63 single-family units. Within Gale Ranch Phase IV, originally. 110 single-family units and 458 apartment units were planned immediately south of Ivy Leaf Springs Road. The proposed 63 singe-family units to be'located on area Aare originally relocated out of,110 single-family units of Phase IV. Three single4amily units will be transferred from the existing 458 apartment units (458 apartments.minus 3 single-family units equals 455 apartment units) of Phase IV. Phase IV (area D as shown on Exhibit C) will be designated for the construction of a total 671 apartment units (455 + 216 units from previous Phase III) and 50 single-family homes. The construction of single-family units on the original school site (Gale II) and the reconfiguration of units within Gale III and Gale IV will result in no net increase or loss of residential units. III. IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF THE MIDDLE SCHOOL AND RESIDENTIAL UNITS RELOCATION A. Land Use As previously discussed, relocation of.the middle school will require changes to four development areas in the Gale Ranch project. Figure 1, attached as Exhibit "C" schematically shows the locations of the affected development areas labeled as "A," "B;" "C" and "D." The middle school relocation will not change the developed acreage of the development areas. As the Modified Land Use Summary Table below shows. the middle school relocation will change the planned use and/or the number and type of residential units constructed in the above-mentioned development areas. The relocation will affect two Gale Ranch housing types: apartments and single-family units. These home types are located in neighborhoods with apartments nearest to and in the Village Center as originally contemplated by the 1992 EIR and the 1996 SEIR. With the middle school relocation, apartments will remain nearest to and in the Village Center. No additional land that is not currently designated for 6of35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum—September 2006 development by the 1992 EIR and the 1996 SEIR will be developed as a result of the middle school relocation. Deveiopment Currently After 4 of Emits Area Planned Relocation Changed A Middle School 63 Single Family + 63 Units Gale II Medium Densitv 381 Apartments B 900 - Student. Gale III Middle School - 216 Units C 165 Apartments Gale III Single Family High Density 110 Singe-Family + 153 Units D 458 Apartments 671 Apartments Gale IV 50 Single Family Medium and High Density Total 949 Units 949 Units 0 Middle School Middle School Area "A," the original school site, will be designated for the construction of 63 single family units on lots sized consistent with existing single family unit lots located adjacent to the Original School Site. These 63 single family units will be relocated from Area "D" for the purpose of assuring that no net gain or loss of residential units occurs as a result of the middle school relocation. The middle school will be relocated to Area "B," the new school site, which is a 15 acre portion of the 21 acre parcel created by the Gale Ranch Phase III Vesting Tentative Map. This 21 acre parcel was originally designated for the construction of a total of 381 apartments. The remaining 6 acres of this development area is depicted as Area"C" and will be developed with 165 apartment units as originally planned. Area "D" is currently designated for multiple family low density use and planned for the construction of 110 single-family units and 458 apartment units. From this 7of35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum—September 2006 area. 63 sinale family units will be relocated to Area "A." The 216 apartment units displaced by the relocation of the middle school to Area .`B" will be relocated to Area "D" adding to the 458 apartment ututs currently planned for Area "D" resulting in a total of 67.1 apartments. The remainder of Arca "D" will be designated for the construction of 50 single family homes. The apartments are three-stories in height and will be constructed closest to the Village Center as previously planned. The complex will include one covered garage space for each unit. and there is a shared recreation center for the apartment dwellers. The architectural style is depicted in the application materials. The new mix of apartment units and single-family units will not substantially change the character of Area "D.'' B. Proposed General Plan Changes A General Plan modification to allow relocation of Middle School originally approved for the Gale Ranch Phase II development which is now under jurisdiction of the City of San Ramon. This is also to replacement of. Multi Family Residential Low Density (ML) land use designation with Public-Semi Public, (PS) and Parks and Recreation (PR) along the northern eastern portion of Gale Ranch Phase III, in order to accommodate the Middle School. C. Proposed Dougherty Valley Specific Plan Changes Specific Plan modification will be required to modify the existing PS, Public and Semi-Public designation to SM, Single-Family Medium Density in order to accommodate the proposed 63 housing units. Accordingly, the new location of the Middle School, previously designated as ML, Multi-Family Low Density (ML) to PS, Public and Semi-Public to allow location of the new school. The ML, Multi-Family Low Density range is 7.3-11.9 dwelling units per net acre. The relocation of units within Phases II, III, and IV will still be consistent with the range, of the ML, Multi-Family Residential Density as designated in the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan. In order to reflect modification of land use designations within areas A and B, modification would also need to be done on the following figures of the Dougherty `Valley Specific Plan: Figure 4-1, Land Use; Figure 5-1, Housing Densities; Figure, Figure 7=1, Open Space and Conservation; Figure 8-1, Community Facilities; Figure 9-1, Water Distribution System; Figure 9-2, Reclaimed Water System; Figure 9-3, Wastewater System; and Figure 10-4, Park and Trail Concept. 8 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum—September 2006 There is also a request to revise a street section as cic-picied on Street-]\/iajor (Double Loaded) street section of Figure 6-7 of the 2005 Specific Plan {"identified as Figure I IA of the 1996 Specific Planl. Till-, section of the 2005 document includes a 5-foot side walk. and 5-foot landscaping strip on both sides of the road. In the 1996 document this section showed 5-foot sidewalk and 5-foot landscaping on one side of the road and an 'additional option for a 4-foot sidewalk. and 6-foot landscaping strip. It is important to keep this option as originally included in the 1996 Specific Plan for it provides flexibility for a larger size of landscaping which can offer a more water efficiency conservation practices. This optional 4-foot sidewalk and 6-foot landscaping strip option was inadvertently modified in the 2005 Specific Plan revision and it is now as provided in the original street section of the 1996 document. D. Affordable Housing The affordable housing for the development areas will be provided consistent with the Dougherty Valley Affordable Housing Program as approved by the M Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors on March 22. 1994. E. Neighborhood Parks Neighborhood parks are called for in the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan. 'The planned parks play distinct and different roles as recreation amenities for the Gale Ranch residents and will not be affected by the middle school relocation. As previously planned and contemplated by the 1992 EIR and the 1996 SEIR. the apartments in Area "D" will have their own private recreation area(s), that are consistent with the amenities and quality found in similar multi-family areas in other parts of the Gale Ranch. These private recreation areas are not counted as GALE RANCH PARK ACREAGE Phases Park Acres Required Park Acres Provided Phase 1 22.10 19.44 Phase 2 33.20 40.05 Phase 3 26.00 24.30 Phase 4 1 22.48 33.80 Totals 106.00 117.59 9 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum-September 2046 Dail of the Gale Ranch Park acreage. The total park acreage required at build-out.of Gale Ranch. based upon providing 6.5 acres per 1000 persons. is approximately 106 acres. This ratio will be preserved with the relocation of the middle school. Summary of Discussion The 1992 EIR Land Use section identified 9 construction' related impacts.. two of which were cumulative impacts. Of the 9 impacts, three, were considered to be less than significant therefore, no mitigations were necessary. Of the 6 identified- sl2gnificant impacts, 4 of them were considered to be significant and unavoidable. The 1996 SEIR identified 5 additional construction related impacts, one of which was considered to be beneficial, one unknown, and three were considered to be significant. All of the significant impacts were considered less than significant after adoption of mitigations. The middle school relocation will have no additional significant new changes or substantially change the already identified impacts; therefore, no additional land use C mitigation measures are required for the proposed project. F. Agricultural Resources The private landowners of the Dougherty Valley entered into Williamson Act contracts with the County, which obligated the landowners to limit the use of the land to agriculture and compatible uses for at least 10 years, Landowners gave the County their notice of non-renewal a little over I I years ago. The Shapell property contract expired in November 1991. Summary of Discussion: As stated in the 1992 EIR, the Dougherty Valley project would convert'approxirrately 6.000 acres of farmland to urban use and open spaces. Of the 6,000 acres that comprise the area. 2.000 acres have been mapped as "farmland of local importance" and the 4 remaining .000 acres s are mapped as grazinc, land. The 1992 Dougherty Valley Specific Plan was adopted and the General Plan was amended to place those lands from "Agricultural Preserve"to "Agricultural Lands" and designate the Dougherty Valley as P-1, Planned Unit Development to allow a mix of housino, school facilities, community facilities,parks and other open space areas. Because the relocation of the middle school and the relocation of residential uses will be accomplished by shifting uses to areas previously identified and evaluated for urban M_ development, these changes will not result in any additional significant new changes and 10 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum-September 2006 will not substantially? change the alrcadv identified agricultural resources impacts analyzed in the 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR: therefore, no additional mitigation measures will be required. G. Aesthetics Presenting the scenic resources of Contra Costa County is an important goal J in the Countv's General Plan. The 1992 EIR discussed General Plan Policies from the Open Space Element considered to be relevant for the proposed Dougherty Valley Project. It also considered simulated views of how the proposed development would visually affect the view of open spaces and the view of existing nearby housing developments. Discussion: The 1992 EIR summary of its adopted mitigation measures is that even though mitigation would reduce identified impacts, not all of them would be to a less-than- significant level because the project would still contribute to a reduction in regional open space and a permanent loss of regional rural/pastoral visual character and scenic views. The 1992 EIR identified 13 significant impacts and 33 mitigation measures. Of the 13 identified impacts, 5 of them were found to be significant and unavoidable after mitigations. The 1996 SEIR did not identify any new impacts beyond those identified in the 1992 EIR. As mentioned above, relocation of the middle school and residential development will not alter the character of the Gale Ranch Development or alter its aesthetics in a manner not already contemplated by the 1992 EIR and the 1996 SEIR since the proposed relocation of the school and residential units will be accomplished by shifting uses to areas previously identified and evaluated for urban development. Accordingly, the proposed Amendments will have no additional significant new changes or substantially change the already identified impacts analyzed in the 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR; therefore, no additional mitigation measures will be required. H. Air Quality The State of California and the Federal government have established ambient air quality standards for several pollutants. The air pollutant of greatest concern in the Planning Area include carbon monoxide (CO), various components of photochemical smog (ozone and other pollutants), and particulate matter. The closest air quality monitoring station to the Dougherty Valley planning area is in Livermore. Air quality monitoring data from this station show occasional violations of the Federal and State ozone standards and the Sate standard for particular matter. 11 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum—September 2006 According to Section 15064(e) and Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. a PrQject will normally have a significant impact if it would: 0 Violate any ambient air quality standard: 9 contribute substantially to an existing or projected air qualiT�I violation. e expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentration; result in substantial air emissions or deterioration of air quality; • create objectionable odors; or • alter air movement, moisture, or temperature or result in any change in climate, either locally or regionally. Discussion: Construction of the Dougherty Valley Project (grading and earth moving activities, emission from fossil fuel combustion of heavy-duty and light duty construction equipment) would result in temporary emissions of particular matter (PM10), oxides of nitrogen (Nox), reactive organic gases (ROG), and carbon monoxide (CO). The 1992 EIR identified this air impact to be significant because it exceeded the BAAQMD emissions threshold. The 1996 SEIR states that important changes have occurred in the area of air quality management between 1992 and 1996, and that the BAAQMD has established revised thresholds of significance for regional impacts subsequent to the 1992 EIR. Additionally, the 1996 SEIR states that concentrations of federal non-attainment pollutants have been gradually declining. The BAAQMD, the MTC, and ABAG have prepared a Bay Area 2001 Ozone Attainment Plan'. This plan is a proposed revision to the Bay Area part of California's plan to achieve the national ozone standard. As of January 2003, the Bay Area is considered to be at attainment for the state and national 1-hour and 8-hour carbon monoxide standard. The 1992 EIR identified 6 impacts (and 17 associated mitigation measures) that would result from the development of the Dougherty Valley. They were of three types: construction-related dust impacts, increases in carbon monoxide concentrations along streets providing access to the site and increases in regional pollutant emissions. Those mitigations measures helped to substantially reduce g the impacts identified in the 1992 EIR but not to a less than significant level because the impacts were considered to be significant and unavoidable. The SEIR 1996 did not identify any new significant impact beyond those already identified in the 1992 EIR. The mitigation measures identified in the`1992 EIR were consistent with policies taken from the BAAQMD clean air plan which were mostly applicable to the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan. 12 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum-September 2006 Construction of the middle school and the residential units that will be relocated as a consequence of the middle school relocation were contemplated in the 1992 EIR and in the 1996 SEIR. Relocation of the middle school will not affect the already considered construction related impacts. The construction related impacts discussed in the previous 1992 EIR do not require revision and therefore. the previously identified mitigation measures would ensure that ternpo:rary construction-related impacts from the middle school relocation would substantially reduce the already identified impacts of the 1992 EIR. consistent with the requirements of the 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR. Accordingly, the proposed Amendments will have no additional significant new changes or substantially change the already identified impacts analyzed in the . 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR: therefore. no additional mitivation measures will. be required. I. Biological Resources The Planning Area lies adjacent to a region known for its botanical resource and with rolling hills characterized by annual grasslands. Although the Dougherty Valley has been intensely grazed for at least 100 years, several sensitive and valuable botanical resources remain. Discussion: The 1992 EIR provides a- detailed discussion of biological resources in the Planning Area and an analysis of anticipated impacts, and measures to mitwate those identified impacts. A list of 27 mitigation measures were identified in the 1992 EIR. Four of the significant impacts were considered significant and unavoidable. The 1996 SEIR identified one additional impact beyond the already identified ones in the 1992 EIR, relating to the potential reduction of available habitat for the red-legged frog. The Dougherty Valley developers worked with the appropriate resource agencies to develop an appropriate mitigation plan, including creation of a new seasonal wetland complex in the West Branch Corridor, new.seasonal wetlands in the northeast adjacent to the Main Branch, sep creation, stock pond creation and refurbishment, stringent grazing management procedures and an extensive riparian planting program in both the Main Branch and West Branch corridors. The proposed relocation of the middle school and residential uses will be accomplished by shifting uses to areas previously identified and evaluated for urban development; there will be no change in the amount or location of acreage planned for residential and/or community use. Each area contemplated by the 13 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum—September 2006 1992 EIR mad the 1996 SEIR will continue io be used for residemlaand/o:- community use therefore not changing previously determined impacts. Accordingly. the proposed Amendments will have no additional significant new changes or substantially change the 'already identified impacts analyzed in the 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR; therefore. no additional mitieation measures will be required. J. Cultural Resources The Contra Costa County General Plan indicates that extensive.lowlands areas of the Planninaz' Area are of medium to low archeological sensitivity. As previously discussed in the 1992 EIR and the 1996 SEIR, significant amounts of acreage will be set aside for parks, open space.. creek corridors and slopes. Discussion: The 1992 EIR identified four significant impacts and six related mitigation measures. All of the significant impacts were found to be less than significant after mitigation. The 1996 SEIR identified one additional significant impact that stated that "The construction of keyways along the channels of the Alamo Creek have the potential to expose pre-historic artifacts." It was determined that with the adopted mitigation measures, this significant impact would bring the impact to a less than significant level. The proposed relocation of the middle school and 'residential uses will be accomplished by shifting uses to areas previously identified and evaluated for urban development. This relocation will not affect any planning areas of archeological sensitivity and will not increase or decrease the number of acres set aside for neighborhood parks, community parks, open space, creek corridors, and slopes. Each area contemplated by the 1992 EIR and the 1996 SEIR will continue to be used for residential and/or community use therefore not changing previously determined impacts. Accordingly, the proposed Amendments will have no additional significant new chances or substantially change the already identified impacts analyzed in the 1992-EIR and 1996 SEIR; therefore., no additional mitigation measures will be required. 14 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum—September 2006 K. Housing/Population/Employment The Dougherty Valley Specific Plan includes a variety of housing building types that are intended to be affordable to a wide variety of income levels. Discussion: The Dougherty Valley Affordable Housing Program was approved by Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors on March 22, 1994. The 1992 EIR identified 5 project related impacts to be beneficial; therefore, no mitigations were necessary to be implemented. The middle school relocation will not affect Gale Ranch's positive impact of providing a substantial new addition to the housing stock of the Tri-Valley region of Contra Costa and Alameda Counties that could help address job/housing balance for that region. No net increase or decrease in residential units will occur as a result of the proposed relocation of the middle school and residential units. In addition, this relocation will not affect the Project's provision of affordable housing as required under the Affordable Housing Program. The proposed middle school relocation related impacts will be the same as the ones already identified in the 1992 EIR. Accordingly, the proposed Amendments will have no additional significant new changes or substantially change the already identified impacts analyzed in the 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR; therefore, no additional mitigation measures will be required. L. Noise As identified in the 1992 EIR, the primary noise generator in Gale Ranch is traffic. Recommendations such as construction of high acoustically-effective barrier and high acoustically-effective fences along Dougherty Road and other neighborhoods have been and are being implemented. These recommendations ensure that exterior noise exposures will be kept at 60 dB DNL or lower. The middle school relocation will not increase exterior noise exposures. Relocating the middle school to an area independent of the elementary school will in fact maintain current noise levels in the elementary school neighborhood and avoid elevated noise levels due to increased traffic. Additionally, the New School Site benefits from an acoustically effective barrier located along nearby Bollinger Canyon Road. This barrier maintains traffic generated noise at acceptable levels. 15 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum—September 2006 M. Public Health and Safetv/Energy Conservation Enerav Conservation The Contra Costa County General Plan 1995-2010 contains policy and direction in the Conservation Element to conserve energy. It is anticipated that most substantial use of energy for the Dougherty Valley Project will be for residential operation (heating, cooling. lighting, etc.). This is estimated to amount to about 50 percent of total, long-term energy use. The second highest energy use will be fuel consumption for travel to and from the area. This is estimated to be Approximately 30 percent of the long-term input. Buildings will be designed to meet Uniform Building Codes in 'order to meet energy efficiency standards. The- 1996 SEIR has adopted several rnitigation measures related to energy conservation such as a requirement that the developer comply with the California Energy Commission guidelines, include,fluorescent fixtures; consider inclusion of solar hot water heater; provide new homes with a spare outlet in the garages for charging of electric cars, etc.) Electromagnetic Fields The 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR analyzed the exposure of ne,%N, residents to electromagnetic fields and identified this impact as significant. The project description incorporates the 1996 mitigation measures, which would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. There are no new impacts beyond those identified in the 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR. The 1992 EIR analyzed the exposure of school-age children at public school sites to electromagnetic fields and found this impact to be less than significant because there are no schools planned to be located near high-voltage transmission lines. No mitigation measures were identified. The 1996 SEIR did not identify any new related impacts. The New School Site will not be located near high-voltagge, transmission lines. There are no new impacts bevond.those identified in the 1992 EIR. Accordingly, the proposed Amendments will have no additional significant new changes or substantially change the already identified impacts analyzed in the 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR: therefore, no additional mitigation measures will be required. 16 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum—September 2006 N. Hazardous and Hazardous Materials Accidental Spills The 1996 SEIR analyzed the impact of potential accidental spills of oils and greases on human health and identified this impact as significant. The proposed relocation of, the middle school and residential units will incorporate the 1996 mitigation rrneasures that would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. There are no new impacts beyond those identified in the 1996 SEIR. Electric Magnetic Fields Chapter 13 of the 1992 EIR analyzed the exposure of new residents to the electric magnetic fields and identified one significant construction-related impact and one less than significant construction-related impact. Both impacts were determined to be less than significant after adoption of mitigation measures. Chapter 4.11 (Public Health and Safety/Energy Conservation) of the 1996 SEIR identified three significant impacts. The 1996 EIR concluded that all of the significant impacts were considered less than significant after implementation of mitigation measures. The proposed relocation of the middle school and residential units will incorporate the 1996 mitigation measures that would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. There are no new impacts beyond those identified in the 1996 SEIR since the proposed shifting of uses results in the relocation of the school and residential units to areas already identified and evaluated for urban development. Accordingly, there will be no new additional significant impacts with the proposed relocation, and the already identified mitigation measures will be sufficient to bring significant impacts to a less than significant level. O. Public Services and Utilities Parks The Gale Ranch minimum required park acreage is 6.5 acres per 1,000 people at ?.8 persons per household. As mentioned above, the proposed relocation of the middle school and residential units will not affect this ratio and will not negatively impact the provision of park services to project residents. In fact- the New School Site is centrally located within Gale Ranch. Therefore, the playfields of the middle school will be more accessible to Gale Ranch's residents. 17 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum—September 2006 Sewer Svstem The 1992 EIR.analyzed the impact of the generation. collection and treatment of Dougherty Valley wastewater and identified this impact as significant because wastewater treatment facility would not be available to meet County public service performance standards. The 1996 SEIR identified the impact of the Dougherty Valley, excluding the Country Club at Gale Ranch, not being within the existing service area of a sanitary district as significant. Both 1992 and 1996 EIRs analyzed the impact of off-site wastewater facilities. The EIRs. also stated that this impact should be analyzed by the appropriate service agency when the facilities are designed. These off-site impacts were analyzed by the central Contra Costa County Sanitary District (CCCSD) for service to the. entire Dougherty Valley as part of the 1996 SEIR. The relocated middle school falls within CCCSD's service area and will be served by CCCSD, with no anticipated impacts to services. P. Potable Water Supply The 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR analyzed the impact of the demand for. distribution and treatment of potable water for Dougherty Valley and identified this impact as significant. The 1996 SEIR identified the impact of Dougherty Valley, excluding the Country Club at Gale Ranch, not being within the existing service district of a water supplier as a significant impact. The 1992 EIR identified the potential impact of the construction and operation of off-site water facilities and stated that this potential impact should be analyzed by the appropriate service agency when facilities are designed. These off-site impacts were analyzed as a part of the 1996 Berrenda Mesa Water District (BMWD) EIR and the 1998 Zone 7 Supplemental EIR (Pers. Con.: B. Michalaczyk, DSRSD). The 1996 SEIR did not identify any new related impacts. There are no new impacts beyond those identified in the 1992 EIR. The 1996 SEIR analyzed the impact of the construction .of water reservoirs and identified this impact as significant. The estimated volume of potable water used by the middle school is similar to the volume used by 8 to 10 single-family units. As discussed above, the middle school will replace,200 apartment units at the New School Site. Therefore. the I mount of potable water supplied to the New School Site will be dramatically reduced. DSRSD supplies the New School Site with potable water and does not object to the middle school relocation. 18 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum—September 2006 EBMUD was originally in agreement to supply potable water to the Original School Site in Gale Ranch Il. EBMUD has indicated that an amendment to the Dougherni Valley Settlement Agreement will be required in order to allow water, service to the provided to the proposed 63 residential units. Shapell laas been diligently working with EBMUD on this matter. EBMUD's Board of Directors is scheduled to meet on September 26, 2006. and a Letter of Intent to serve the proposed development is anticipated to be provided by the Board of Directors. The project's final maps will be conditionally approved upon required a-reement with the water agency. In summary, the middle school relocation incorporates the 1992 and 1996 mitigation measures that would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. There are no new impacts beyond those identified in the 1996 SEIR since the proposed shifting of uses results in the relocation of the school and residential units to areas already identified and evaluated for urban development, and EBMUD has indicated a willingness to serve the middle school on at New School Site. Accordingly, there will be no new additional significant impacts with the proposed relocation, and the already identified mitigation measures will be sufficient to bring significant impacts to a less than significant level. Q. Reclaimed Water The 1992 EIR analyzed the impact of the need for a recycled water distribution system to help offset the demand for potable water and identified this impact as significant. The middle school relocation will incorporate the 1992 mitigation measures that would reduce these impacts to a less than significant level because it would ensure that onsite recycled water service improvements would be provided. The 1996 SEIR identified one beneficial impact. DSRSD and EBMUD are engaged in a joint effort to supply Gale Ranch with reclaimed water. Relocating the middle school will not increase the volume of reclaimed water necessary to irrigate the middle school and its play fields. Nor will it require a new supplier or reclaimed water. There are no new impacts beyond those identified in the 1996 SEIR since the proposed shifting of uses results in the relocation of the school and residential units to areas already identified and evaluated for urban development. Accordingly, there will be no new additional significant impacts with the proposed relocation, and the already identified mitigation measures will be sufficient to bring significant impacts to a less than significant level. 19 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum—September 2006 R. Drainage Svstem The 1992 EIR analyzed the impact of the need for drainage infrastructure for Dougherty Valley and identified this impact as significant because of the substantial demand for such infrastructure. The 1996 SEIR analyzed the impact of (1) increased peak flow at the County line, if detention basins were not built, and (2) the increased risk of drowning in the basins and identified these irrnpacts as significant. The 1996 SEIR analyzed the impact of an increased mosquito population if drainage ways are altered and identified this impact as significant. The middle school relocation will occur within the parameters of the 1996 mitigation measures that would reduce these impacts to a less than significant level. There are no new impacts beyond those identified in the 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR. S. Solid Waste The 1992 EIR analyzed the impact of the generation of Dougherty Valley solid waste and the demand for solid waste services and identified these impacts as significant. The middle school relocation will incorporate the 1992 mitigation measures that would reduce these impacts to a less than significant level because these measures would prolong adequate disposal capacity at County landfills in accordance with County public services standards. The 1992 EIR also analyzed the impact of the demand for solid waste collection service and identified this impact as less than significant because a solid waste hauling company could provide this service. The 1996 EIR did not identify any new related impacts. The proposed relocation of the middle school and residential uses will not generate any additional solid waste since no net increase in residential units or population is proposed. Accordingly, the proposed Amendments will have no additional significant new changes or substantially change the already identified impacts analyzed in the 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR; therefore, no additional mitigation measures will be required T. Police Services The 1992 EIR analyzed the need for approximately five County Sheriff s deputies and necessary equipment and identified this impact as significant. The middle school relocation will occur within the parameters of the .1992 mitigation measures. The 1996 SEIR did not identify any new related impacts. The proposed relocation of the middle school and residential uses will not generate any additional need for police services since no net increase in residential units or 20 of 3 Gale Ranch Middle School and.Residential Relocation Addendum—September 2006 population is proposed. Accordingly, the proposed Amendments will have no additional significant new changes or substantially change the already identified impacts analyzed in the 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR: therefore. no additional mitigation measures will be required. U. Fire Services The 1992 EIR analyzed the impact of Dougherty Valley on the adequacy of area fire stations and equipment and their ability to respond to increased fire hazards. It identified these impacts as significant. The project description incorporates the 1992 mitigation measures that would reduce these impacts to a less than significant level. In 1996, a fire response time analysis was prepared by the San Ramon Valley Fire District. It states that adequate fire response times can be achieved from one of two existing fire stations to meet County public services performance standards. The 1996 study identified -one fire station located on Bollinger Canyon Road Loop and Windemere Parkway that would provide adequate fire response time. The 1996 fire response time analysis was amended in 1999 based on new road configurations and it found that new roadways improved the previously adequate fire response times. Consistent with the Growth Management Performance standard, the proposed project is located within a 1.5-mile radius of the Bollinger Canyon Road/Windemere Parkway fire station Construction of the Bollinger Canyon Road/Windemere Parkway fire station was finalized in February 2002. The 1996 SEIR did not identify any new related impacts. The 1992 EIR analyzed the need for additional firefighters and identified this impact as less than significant and provided no mitigation measures. There are no new impacts beyond those identified in the 1992 EIR. The proposed relocation of the middle school and residential uses will not generate any additional need for police services since no net increase in residential units or population is proposed. Accordingly, the proposed Amendments will have no additional significant new changes or substantially change the already identified impacts analyzed in the 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR; therefore, no additional mitigation measures will be required. 21 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum— September 2006 V. Traffic and Circulation 1. Circulation Backround The 1992 EIR analyzed the County General Plan and Dougherty Valley Specific Plan and identified the significant,impacts and associated mitigation measures. They include the cumulative impact of developing 11.000 residential units. along with commercial units and a community college inthe Dougherty Valley. The 1992 EIR identified 15 significant transportation impacts (6 construction related impacts and 9 cumulative impacts). Approximately half of the identified significant impacts were considered to be significant and unavoidable Mitigation measures were developed: 6.5b (pedestrian connections), 6.5c (trails) 6.5d (Transportation Demand Management Program), 6.5e (high speed internet access), which help reduce these identified impacts on Routes of Regional Significance. Conditions of approval implement mitigation measures 6.5 a (transit service fee), 6.6 (regional road fees) to further reduce the impacts on Routes of Regional Significance. The 1996 SEIR identified 15 additional -significant transportation impacts. Fourteen of the 15 additional significant impacts were considered to be less than significant after implementation of the identified mitigation measures., The 1996 SEIR identified modifications to mitigation measures previously identified in the 1992 EIR for 2010 General Plan Condition Impacts (Cumulative). The modifications were prepared in consultation with affected jurisdictions and are consistent with the Dougherty Valley Settlement Agreement agreed to by the County, San Ramon, Danville and the project proponents in 1994. The 1996 SEIR also identified impacts to internal circulation and transit access that can be mitigated through traffic calming measures. There are no new unmitigated impacts beyond those identified in the 1992 EIR and the 1996 SEIR. Locating the Middle School at the Original.School Site The traffic characteristics of modern-day schools are considerably different from those schools experienced a few decades ago. Empirical data have shown significant increases in traffic at and around school sites. By far most of the auto traffic is generated by the increasing number of students that are dropped-off in the morning and picked up in the .afternoon. Especially in northern California, where most schools do not have school bus programs, the majority of the students 22 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum-September 2006 are driven to and from school by their parents. Schools are unique traffic generators in the sense that they create considerable amounts of traffic in fairly short time periods. School traffic is typically concentrated in two periods of about 20-minutes when school starts and ends. Most schools experience traffic problems during drop-off and pick-up times because the roadway infrastructure is often inadequate to safely and efficiently accommodate all modes (car.. walk, bike.) of transportation. The traffic situation at the Coyote Creek Elementary School along North Gale Ride Road is no exception. The 750-student school has its only access off North Gale Ridge Road and all student-traffic is concentrated at the main entrance of the school. This creates challenges, conflicts and back-ups in the mornings and afternoons when students are dropped-off/picked up, walk and bike to/fi-om school while competing for the limited infrastructure. From a traffic point of view, it would be undesirable to build a 900-student Middle School on the currently vacant site across from Coyote Creek Elementary School. The presence of a second school would increase school traffic in the area by a least 100% and likely result in significant traffic congestion along Lilac Ridge Road and North Gale Ridge Road and at its intersections with Bollinger Canyon Road and Dougherty Road. In addition, conflicts between pedestrians, bicyclists and motorized vehicles would increase, which could negatively affect traffic safety. Parking problems are also likely to occur in neighborhood streets to accommodate the anticipated excess in parking demand on typical schooldays and/or during special events. Proposed Relocation of Middle School and Residential Uses The proposed new school site is centrally located within Gale Ranch in close proximity to Bollinger Canyon Road, one of Gale Ranch's main thoroughfares. The New School Site's central location and proximity to Bollinger Canyon Road will provide multiple access points to the middle school and will alleviate many of the traffic challenges associated with schools as discussed above. The Original School Site is not centrally located and provides a single access route. Vehicular connections in the Gale Ranch project-will remain unchanged with the exception of relatively minor changes to the design of Main Branch road near the New School Site as discussed below. Access to the middle school at the New School Site will be provided via a one-way driveway running between Main Branch Road and South Monarch Road. The front of the school would face this driveway. 23 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum—September 2006 Access to.the single-family homes that will be constructed on the Original School Site will be provided by the same roads and intersections that would have provided access to the middle school. Similarly, access to the Residential Site will be provided as originally planned. Relocation of the middle school will not require the realignment or relocation of any streets or intersections contemplated by the 1992 EIR and the 1996 SEIR. 2. June 21, 2006 Traffic Study Hexagon Transportation Consultants prepared a traffic analysis for the middle school relocation (Hexagon Report) by under contract with Shapell Homes a copy of which is attached. The purposes of the Hexagon Report were: 1. To evaluate the middle school relocation plan for compliance with the traffic level of service standards of the Contra Costa Transportation Improvement and Growth Management Program (Measure C). The traffic study followed, and adhered to the guidelines set forth in CCTA's Technical Procedures Manual. 2. To evaluate the middle school relocation plan for its consistency with the traffic and transportation policies of the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan. 3. To analyze the traffic level-of-service and internal circulation effects of the proposed development at "local" intersections in the immediate vicinity of the affected development areas. The Hexagon Report Study is based on an enrollment assumption of 900 students, and analyzes the estimated trip generation of the school and the required pick-up and drop-off areas. The trip generation rates and vehicle estimates for the middle school at the New School Site are determined to be as follows: Trip Generation Estimates for Gale Ranch Middle School AM Peak Hour School PM Peak Hour Peak-Hr. Peak-Hr. Land Use Size Rate In Out Total Rate In Out Total Proposed Use Middle School 900 students 1 0.97 478 391 1 869 0.50 210 237 447 The table shows an estimate of 900 AM peak hour trips, with 478 inbound and 391 outbound (vehicles dropping off students) and reflects the likelihood that 24 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum—September 2006 some students will carpool, wall: or bicycle to school. some are absent as-id some will arrive later in the day. The difference in inbound trips. 87 trips (478 — 391 = 87), represents primarily staff arriving at the school. At the end of the school day, the trip estimates show 210 inbound vehicle trips., to pick up students, and 237 outbound trips. AM peak hour trips exceed afternoon trips as more students wall; home. carpool or stay after school and leave at a later time. as do staff. A total of approximately 1.022 feet of drop-off space will be required to accommodate the drop-off activities. The study assumes two lanes will be used for drop-off and pick-up along the school access driveway, which will run though the New School Site from the existing Main Branch Road to South Monarch Road as depicted on Figure 2 of the Relocation Traffic Study attached as Exhibit B. This will provide the necessary 1,022 feet of drop-off area. A third lane will be constructed on the access driveway so that vehicles can bypass the drop-off/pick- up area and can access the parking lot. During the after-school pick-up time, fewer trips will occur but each pick-up takes longer than a drop-off. To avoid excess conflicts along South Monarch and Main Branch roads, the school access driveway will be one-way (entering at Main Branch Road an exiting at South Monarch Road). To facilitate entry into the school access driveway, a right turn lane will be provided on southbound Main Branch Road and a ]eft turn pocket provided on vehicles entering from northbound Main Branch Road_ Development Areas Intersection Level of Service Analysis The most recent and up-to-date peak-hour traffic volumes for the Dougherty Valley intersections are contained in the Gale Ranch Phase 4 Traf c Analysis, Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc., dated January 17, 2005. The Hexagon Report analyses traffic conditions at all major Dougherty Valley intersections that are likely to be impacted by the school site relocation. It assumes build-out of the Dougherty Valley and provides traffic volumes at a total of 14 intersections. These intersections were selected based on their proximity to the development areas that are subject to change. The Tri-Valley Travel Demand Model (TVTDM) was used to conduct a series of select link analyses to determine the traffic changes associated with the middle school relocation. The model was adjusted as follows: Site A Subtract middle school (model estimated)traffic from site A Add traffic from 63 residential units on site A 25 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum—September 2006 Site B/C Subtract traffic from 365 apartment units currently planned on sites B and C Add traffic from 165 apartments proposed.on site C Add middle school traffic from site B Site D Subtract traffic from 47 single family units generated by the added development on site D Add traffic generated by 197 additional apartment units The above traffic changes reflect land use information that has since been revised slightly to correctly reflect the County's prior planning actions for the affected subdivisions. The revised/corrected number of housing units does not impact the findings,of the Hexagon Report as discussed later in this section. In general, the, traffic volumes at most of the intersections would increase for scenarios A and B. However, volumes at the intersections near site A (Gale Ridge / Bollinger Canyon Road and Gale Ridge / Dougherty Road) would decrease because the 63 single-family units would generate fewer AM peak-hour trips compared to the 900-student middle school.. Intersection Level of Service . The CCTA LOS method was used to compute the level of service for all of the signalized intersections. This method is described in the Contra Costa Transportation Authority's "Technical Procedures"; and identifies the critical conflicting movements at an intersection and computes the ratio of volume to capacity for each conflicting critical movement during the peak hour. The critical movement volume/capacity ratios are summed to obtain the . intersection volume/capacity ratio: The level of service is then keyed to the computed intersection volume/capacity ratio. The levels. of service at signalized intersections were also evaluated using the Year 2000 edition of the Highway Capacity Manual. This method calculates the level of service based on the weighted average vehicular delay during the peak hour. Unsignalized intersections were analyzed using the methodology described in the Year 2000 edition of the Highway Capacity Manual. This method computes the delay for each movement at an unsignalized intersection and reports the level of service for each movement according to the delay during the peak hour. All intersections are projected to operate at acceptable levels of service for the middle school relocation. The analysis shows that the changes in traffic volumes 26 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum—September 2006 resulting for the land use proposed for each development area would not have a significant impact on the traffic operations at the Dougherty Vallee intersections. During discussion of the Hexagon Report County staff was interested in providing more detailed information on potential impacts from the project to the intersection of Camino Tassajara/Crow, Canyon Road in Danville. which was a_ critical intersection in the Dougherty Valley Settlement Agreement. Hexagon reviewed the plots of the traffic forecasts and found the following: The proposed changes in land use types for the areas identified as development sites A through D are not expected to cause significant changes in traffic volumes on the roadway system outside the Dougherty Valley area. Although the magnitude and directional orientation of school traffic and residential traffic differs, the projected changes in traffic volumes outside the Dougherty Valley would be minimal. Traffic volumes on Dougherty Road, north of Gale Ridge Road are projected to decrease slightly with the new plan because the 63 residential units on site A would generate fewer trips on Dougherty Road compared to the traffic volumes the middle school would generate. The first two plots in Appendix B of the Hexagon Report show the AM peak-hour travel patterns for the middle school and for the 63-single family units, respectively. These plots show that the residential units would add six vehicles (three in each direction) to Dougherty Road, north of Gale Ridge Road, which is more than off- set by the 61 vehicles (57 southbound and 4 northbound - these volumes are not depicted on the plot) that the middle school would add to this roadway segment. Therefore, relocating the middle school would slightly reduce traffic volumes on the roadways north of Dougherty Valley. Relocating the middle school would not significantly affect the traffic operations at the intersection of Camino Tassajara Road and Crow Canyon Road. 3. September 22, 2006 Peer Review and Traffic Safety/Circulation Report As requested by the County Community Development Department, Dowling Associates prepared a peer review of the Hexagon June 21, 2006 Report, and a traffic safety/circulation report (Dowling Report). The report consists of peer review of the traffic impact analysis conducted by Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. for the Gale Ranch Middle School relocation (Hexagon Report). The second part included traffic safety and circulation evaluation of the Final Development Plan, Vesting tentative Map, General Plan, and Specific Plan Amendment for Gale ranch Phases, II, III, and IV. The peer review analysis in the Dowling Report determined that the Hexagon Report adequately discloses the impacts of the proposed relocation of school and shift in planning residential units. As described earlier in this section .the 27 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum—September 2006 Hexagon Report was based on earlier land use information prepared by the applicant that has since been corrected. The peer review analysis in the Do11)li7?g Report found that. based on the baseline Levels of Service at the study intersections, it did not appear that further refinements of the study area's trip generation and trip distribution would result in any new significant impacts. The peer review analysis in the Dowling Report agreed with the following recommendations of the Hexagon Report to accommodate or minimize queuing: • prohibit parking on the southbound curbside lanes adjacent to the school on Main Branch Road. and that it be restriped as a right-turn only lane into the school's driveway; • provide a southbound right turn lane and northbound left turn lane from Main Branch Road into the school driveway, with traffic flow on the access,road restricted to the southwest direction (i.e. one-way); and • configure the entrance to the school driveway to allow concurrent northbound left turns and southbound right turns. The peer review analysis of the Dowling Report recommended modification(in italics) to the following recommendations from the Hexagon Report to accommodate or minimize queuing: • Install a four-way stop, or use a crossing guard at the school driveway exit on South Monarch to facilitate student crossings on the south side of this intersection. Crossing guard activity in the south crosswalk would also create gaps in traffic necessary_for traffic exiting the school driveway. • The School District should provide three lanes on the school driveway internal to the school site, with the right lane used for passenger drop-off/pick and the center lane and left lane be used as through lanes. Inn addition the School District should allow use of the 190-space school parking lot for passenger drop-offipick-up. The peer review analysis of the Dowling Report reiterated the need identified in the Hexagon Report for the School District to provide active traffic :control by school personnel during student arrival and departure times. School personnel ,should direct the lead vehicles to pull all the way forward in the curbside drop-off lane to maximize the efficiency of this lane. The traffic safety and circulation section of the Dowling Report evaluated the existing access problem of the Coyote Elementary School. The existing access problem is caused,primarily by a school site design that causes many parents to prefer to drop off and pick up their children on the public streets in front of the school, rather than on the school site itself. The result is many pedestrians crossing North Gale Ridge Road and many on-street parking maneuvers at these 28 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum—September 2006 times. The existing exit of the schools one-way loop driveway has limited visibility due to on-street parking and the curvature of the road. The Dowling Report provides a number of recommendations for the School District to consider, in cooperation with the City of San Ramon, should the School District seek to improve the accessibility of the entrance to Covote Elementary School. The Dowling Report also determined that motor vehicle traffic safety and circulation were adequately addressed and consistent with applicable County goals, policies and standards. The recommendations affecting the School District should be addressed as part of the District's projects. The remaining recommendations from the Hexagon Report and Dowling Report address the Project and are consistent with or represent minor refinements to tnitigat:ion measures described in the 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR. Accordingly, the proposed amendments will have no additional significant new changes or substantially change the already identified impacts analyzed in the 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR; therefore, no additional mitigation measures will be required. 4. Transit Detailed transit information was not incorporated into the 1992 EIR and was not fully defined in the Country Club at Gale Ranch EIR. The 1996 SEIR provided information regarding the location of bus stops, bicycle routes, park and ride lots, and trip reduction strategies. Additionally, Mitigation Measures 4.6-5 from the 1996 SEIR required the DVSP be revised to include a collector road system to ensure that 80 percent of the housing in Dougherty Valley is located within one quarter mile of a designated transit route. The middle school relocation will not affect the transit information provided in the 1996 SEIR. Therefore, the proposed amendments will have no additional significant new changes or substantially change the already identified impacts analyzed in the 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR; therefore, no additional mitigation measures will be required. 5. Non-Motorized Facilities Trails and other pedestrian facilities run throughout the Gale Ranch project and connect each of its neighborhoods and with the surrounding open space and active public areas. 29 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum— September 2006 Because no bikelane can be accommodated on southbound Main Branch Road adjacent to the school. the Hexagon Report stated that the Project proposes to construct an 8-foot wide combined off-street bike path and sidewalk on the west side of Main Branch. The peer review analysis of the DowlinOr Report recommended that this path be 10-feet wide given its proximity to the school and anticipated usage. To meet Caltrans standards. a minimum five-footseparation between the path and the edge of pavement of the adjacent roadway should be provided, unless a physical barrier is provided to prevent bicyclists from encroachinL, on the road. The traffic safety and circulation section of the Dowling Report found that the relocation of the middle school site to this neighborhood suggests a re-thinking of existing plan for the trail system, with the intent to improve the connectivity of trails to this major new activity center. The following improvements are recommended to provide better connections between the trails with the school: • The Basswood Trail terminates at South Monarch Road opposite the proposed school site. Relocating the middle school to the proposed site will create significant demand by trail users to cross South Monarch Road to access the school site at this intersection. The County should consider and evaluate various design features to facilitate pedestrian ,crossings of South Monarch Road for this trail at an appropriate location. The traffic study forecasts over 850 motor vehicles could potentially conflict with pedestrians and bicyclists that would cross South Monarch Road. Design features could include signing and widening connecting sidewalks to trail standards to guide trail users to an alternate crossing location and/or enhanced crosswalk signing such as a solar powered, actuated, wireless flashing yellow beacon. • The County should consider and evaluate various design solutions for providing a paved trail connecting the Basswood Trail (48 on the Gale Ranch/Windemere Trail Exhibit, dated 12/01/04) to the Middle School site, and to the Village Center Trail that passes through the center of Development Area "D", via South Monarch Road. Consistent with Count} goals, policies and standards, the Dowling Report also recommended that a sidewalk be constructed on at least one side of the semi- circular street running through the apartment complex in Development Area D. The above recommendations for non-motorized facilities are consistent with or represent minor changes to the' 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR. 30 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum—September 2006 Accordinalv. there will be no new additional significant impacts Frith the proposed middle school and residential relocation, and the already identified mitigation measures will be sufficient to bring significant impacts to a less than sio-nificant level. NAI. Soils and Geology A complete geotechnical exploration was undertaken of the developmF-nt areas included in the middle school relocation pursuant to the 1992 EIR and the 1996 SEIR. Discussion: The 1992 EIR identified 10 construction related impacts, 9 of which were found to be significant and all significant impacts were found to be less than significant after adoption of mitigations measures. The 1996 SEIR identified 11 significant impacts, and all were found that mitigations measures would bring all of those significant impacts to a less than significant level. Because the relocation of the middle school and the concomitant relocation of residential uses will be accomplished by shifting uses to areas previously identified and evaluated for urban development, these changes will not result in any additional significant new changes and will not substantially change the already identified agricultural resources impacts analyzed in the 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR; therefore, no additional mitigation measures will be required. X. Hydrology and Water Quality The Dougherty Valley Specific Plan envisioned preserving the West and Main branches of Alamo Creek by enhancing them and adding flood control mechanisms that result in not net flow beyond the southern project boundary. Gale Ranch Phase TV lies in the Alamo Creek watershed. All of the drainages in the valley except the main and west branches are ephemeral. They drain by overland flow, channelized flow and shallow groundwater flow which ultimately discharges into the main channels or is lost to evaporation, or underlying shallow groundwater systems. Many of the drainage channels are deeply incised with erosive banks. Upstream of the project lies a watershed area of 2,44') acres in which extensive development is occurring. Downstream, Alamo Creek has been modified into a large flood control channel. OveTbank flooding occurs in some portions of the planning area along the West and Main branches of Alamo Creek in the 104-year flood event. 31 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum—September 2006 Storm Drainage Storm drainage will be collected in underground pipes in the streets and will be, discharged to the West Branch of Alamo Creek and the Main Branch of Alamo Creek at various locations. Where feasible, drainage will be discharged into water quality ponds before entering the creek systems. A program of-conceptual Best Management Practices (BMP) will be submitted in order to address water quality issues. Final BMP and hydrology analysis will be addressed with final ,grading plans. Discussion: The 1992 EIR identified 8 significant impact (including 3 cumulative) and all were found to be less than significant after adoption of mitigation measures. The 1996 SEIR identified 4 new significant, impacts all considered less than significant after adoption of mitigation measures. Because the relocation of the middle school and the residential units relocation will be accomplished by shifting uses to areas previously identified and evaluated for urban development, these changes will not result in any additional significant new changes and will not substantially change the already identified agricultural resources impacts analyzed in the 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR; therefore, no additional mitigation measures will be required. IV. REQUIRED CEQA FINDINGS Pursuant'to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 guidelines: (a) the lead agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously-certified EIR if some changes or additions to the EIR are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR has-occurred. (b) An addendum to an adopted negative declaration may be prepared if only minor technical echnical chanaes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred. (c) An addendum to an adopted negative declaration may not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the final EIR or adopted negative declaration. _12 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum-September 2006 (d) The declision-making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR or adopted negative declaration prior to making a decision on the project. (e) A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 1562 should be included in the addendum to an EIR. the lead aaencys required findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence. Pursuant to Section 15162. a subsequent EIR would be required if: (a) When an EIR has been certified Or negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following: (1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will which require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration. due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in. the severity of previously-identified significant effects. (2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously-identified significant effects. (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete, or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following: (A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration; (B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; (C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant 33 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum-September 2006 effects on the environment.. but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. (b) If changes to a project or its circumstances occur or the information becomes available after the adoption of a negative declaration. The lead agency shall prepare a subsequent EIR if required under subsection (a). Otherwise the lead agency shall determine whether to prepare a-subsequent negative declaration. an addendum, or no further documentation. (c) Once a project has been approved, the lead agency's role in project approval is complete, unless further discretionary approval on that project is required. Information appearing after an approval does not require reopening of that approval. If after the project is approved, any of the conditions described in subsection (a) occurs. a subsequent EIR or negative declaration shall be prepared by the lead agency which grants the next discretionary approval for the project, if any. In this situation no other responsible agency shall grant an approval for the project until the subsequent EIR has been certified or subsequent negative declaration adopted. (d) A subsequent EIR or subsequent negative declaration will be given the same notice and public review as required under Section 15087 or Section 15072. A subsequent EIR or negative declaration shall state where the previous document is available and can be reviewed. V. CONCLUSION The relocation of the Middle School and relocation of housing units will not result in new significant environmental effects not previously considered, nor will it increase the severity of previously-identified significant effects. For each environmental factor, the Addendum establishes that there will be .no significant environmental effect not already considered in the 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR. Based on the environmental analysis in the Addendum, the Community Development Department has determined that the proposed project is also consistent with the approved Dougherty Valley Preliminary Development Plan and it does not require a subsequent EIR, and, thus, an addendum to the 1992 EIR and 1996 SEIR is the appropriate document for the development of the proposed project. VI. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Gale Ranch Middle School Relocation Traffic Analysis prepared by Hexagon transportation Consultants, Inc, June 21, 2006 34 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum—September 2006. Peer Review and Traffic Safety/Circulation prepared by Dowling Associates. inc.. September 22. 2006 Reduced Copy of Tentative Maps and Final Development Plan Amendments. Note- that minor revisions to the Maps have been made and a large size revised copy with the revised unit count will be provided at the October 10, 2006 package N711. SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES The Following documents are available at Contra Costa County Community Development Department at regular business hours (7:30 am -5:00 p.m. M-F, closed 1".3rd, and 5"' Fridays of the month) 651 Pine Street, Martinez, California. Contra Costa County. 1992. Final Environmental Impact Report, Dougherty Valley General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan and Related Actions, County File 42-91- SR/SCH 491053014. November 1992. Contra Costa County. 1996. Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report, Dougherty Valley General Plan Amendment GPA 4 96-0001, Dougherty Valley Specific Plan Amendment SP#96-0001. August 1996, C� Contra Costa County. 1996. Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report, Dougherty Valley General Plan Amendment GPA# 96-0001, Dougherty Valley Specific Plan Amendment SP 496-0001. November 1996. Contra Costa County. 1996. Development Agreement Between Contra Costa County and Shapell Industries, Inc. Relating to the Development of Gale Ranch. April 8, 1996. Contra Costa County. June 2005. Dougherty Valley Specific Plan. Contra Costa Count), Superior Court- 1994, Agreement to Settle Litigation Relating to the Dougherty Valley General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan and Environmental L-h � Impact Report. Town of Danville,, et al. v. County of contra Costa, et al. Case No, C 93-00231. May 11, 1994. Contra Costa County General Plan 2005-2020 Dowling Associates, Inc. Peer Review and Traffic Safety/Circulation- September 27, 2006 Hexagon Transportation Consultants'. Inc. Gale Ranch Middle School Relocation Traffic Analysis - June 21, 2006 35 of 35 Gale Ranch Middle School and Residential Relocation Addendum-September 2006 a5 4!?.,- NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE ii CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS )&I ON PLANNING MATTERS DOUGHERTY VALLEY/SAN RAMON AREA You are hereby notified that on TUESDAY,NOVEMBER 14,2006, AT 1:00 P.M. in Room 107,McBrien Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, California,the County Board of Supervisors will consider a GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT,AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS described as follows: SHAPELL HOMES (Applicant and Owner): The applicant requests approval of a General Plan Amendment#GP06-0003, Specific Plan Amendment #SP06-0001, and Final Development Plan Amendments#DP06-3050,#DP06-3051, and#DP06-3052. There is no net gain or loss of units. A. General Plan Amendment#GP06-0003: An amendment to the County General Plan (2005-2020) Land Use Element to allow the relocation of the Middle School originally approved for the Gale Ranch Phase R development which is now under the jurisdiction of the City of San Ramon. The request also includes the replacement of the Multi-Family Residential Low Density(ML) land use designation with Pubiic and Semi-Public (PS) and Parks and Recreation (PR) along the north eastern portion of Gale Ranch Phase III, in order to accommodate the Middle School. B. Specific Plan Amendment#SP06-0001: An amendment to the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan to allow modification of the Public and Semi-Public (PS) and Parks and Recreation(PR)land use designation for the previously approved Middle School site to Single-Family Residential-Medium Density(SM), and to allow modification of the Multi-Family Residential Low-Density (ML) land use designation to Public and Semi-Public (PS) and Parks and Recreation (PR). Several figures in the do Specific Plan will be revised in order to reflect the relocation of the Middle School and the corresponding use modifications to land use designations of the Gale Ranch development. Proposed changes are depicted in the Errata to the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan. C. Final Development Plan #DP06-3050 (Portion of Gale Ranch Phase In: This a Final Development Plan modification to approved County File #DP95-3086 to allow relocation of Middle School with 63 detached single family residentia:units. D. Final Development Plan #DP06-3051 (Portion of Gale Ranch Phase 111): This is a Final Development Plan modification to approved County File #DP99-3006 to reduce the number of apartment units from 381 to 165 and allow location of Middle School. E. Final Development Plan #DP06-3052 (Portion of Gale Ranch Phase IV): This is a Final Development Plan modification to approved County File #DP04-3070 and to allow a reduction of detached single-family residential units (less 60 units) and an increase of apartment units (plus 213 units). The portion of the Gale Ranch, Phase II to be modified is located west of Dougherty Road, at the corner of Lilac Ridge Road and North Gale Ridge Road. The portion of Gale Ranch Phase III to be modified is located south of Bollinger Canyon between South Monarch Road and Main Branch Road. The portion of Gale Ranch Phase IV to be modified is located south of Ivyleaf Springs Road between South Monarch Road and Stoneleaf Road in the Dougherty Valley San Ramon area. (Zoning: P-1) (Zoning Atlas Page: W-16) (Census Tract 3551.03 ) (APNs for Phase II: 222-240-008 and 222-240-009 and APN for Phase III and Phase IV: 222- 270-001). For purposes of compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Addendum to the 1992 EIR and the 1996 Supplemental EIR was prepared for this project in September of 2006. The proposed project modifications are consistent with the previously approved environmental documents and there are no additional significant impazts. If you challenge the project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the County at, or prior to, the public hearing. Prior to the hearing, Community Development Department staff will be available on Tuesday, November 14, 2006, in Room 108, Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, to meet with any interested parties in order to (1) answer questions; (2)review the hearing procedures used. by the Board; (3) clarify the issues being considered by the Board; and(4)provide an opportunity to identify,resolve, or narrow any differences which remain in dispute. If you wish to attend this meeting with staff,please call Telma Moreira, Community Development Department, at(925) 335-1217 by 3:00 p.m. on Monday,November 13, 2006 to confirm your participation. Date: November 1, 2006 John Cullen, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator By ) Katherine Sinclair,Deputy Clerk BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING IN THE MATTER OF: SHAPELL HOMES (Applicant and Owner): The applicant requests approval of a.General Plan Amendment#GP06-0003, Specific Plan Amendment #SP06-0001, and Final Development Plan Amendments#DP06-3050, #DP06-3051, and#DP06-3052. There is no net gain or loss of units. I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned have been, a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today1 deposited Certified Mail with Contra Costa County Central Service for mailing by the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, first class postage fully prepaid, a copy of the hearing notice, on the above entitled matter to the following: Please See Attached List I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct, at Martinez, California. Dated: November 2, 2006 Kat Brine Sinclair, Deputy Clerk EDMUD EDMUD Shapell Homes Attn: Joseph M. Callahan Attn: Guendolyn Alie Attn: Marshall Tone 375 11"' Street, MS 701 375 1 11 Street,MS 701 2678 Bishop Drive, Ste. 110 Oakland, CA 94607-4240 Oakland, CA 94607-4240 San Ramon, CA 94583 Francisco &Associates City of San Ramon Town of Danville Attn: Jennfer White Attn: Phil Wong Attn: Kevin Gailey 2678 Bishop Drive, Ste. 225 2222 Camino Ramon Chief of Planning and Building San Ramon, CA 94583 San Ramon, CA 94583 510 La Gonda Way Danville, CA 94526 Town of Danville San Ramon Unified School District San Ramon Valley Fire Protection Attn: Tai Williams Attn: Tina Peralta District Transportation 699 Old Orchard Drive 1500 Bollinger Canyon Rd. 510 La Gonda Way Danville, CA 94526 San Ramon, CA 94583 Danville, CA 94526 Central Contra Costa Sanitary Dist. Dublin- San Ramon Services PUBLIC WORKS 5019 Imhoff Place District ENGINEERING martinez CA 94553 7051 Dublin Boulevard Attn: Teri Ric ' Dublin, CA 94566 ***Interoffice*** NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON PLANNING MATTERS DOUGHERTY VALLEY/SAN RAMON AREA You are hereby notified that on TUESDAY,NOVEMBER 14,2006,AT 1:00 P.M. in Room 107, McBrien Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, California, the County Board of Supervisors will consider a GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT, AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS described as follows: SHAPELL HOMES (Applicant and Owner): The applicant requests approval of a General Plan Amendment#GP06-0003, Specific Plan Amendment #SP06-0001, and Final Development Plan Amendments#DP06-3050,#DP06-305 1, and#DP06-3052. There is no net gain or loss of units. A. General Plan Amendment#GP06-0003: An amendment to the County General Plan (2005-2020)Land Use Element to allow the relocation of the Middle School originally approved for the Gale Ranch Phase 11 development which is now under the jurisdiction of the City of San Ramon. The request also includes the replacement of the Multi-Family Residential Low Density(ML) land use designation with Pubiic and Semi-Public (PS) and Parks and Recreation(PR) along the north eastern portion of Gale Ranch Phase III, in order to accommodate the Middle School. B. Specific Plan Amendment#SP06-0001: An amendment to the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan to allow modification of the Public and Semi-Public(PS)and Parks and Recreation(PR) land use designation for the previously approved Middle School site to Single-Family Residential-Medium Density(SM), and to allow modification of the Multi-Family Residential Low-Density(ML) land use designation to Public and Semi-Public (PS) and Parks and Recreation(PR). Several figures in the do Specific Plan will be revised in order to reflect the relocation of the Middle School and the corresponding use modifications to land use designations of the Gale Ranch development. Proposed changes are depicted in the Errata to the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan. C. Final Development Plan#DP06-3050 (Portion of Gale Ranch Phase II): This a Final Development Plan modification to approved County File #DP95-3086 to allow relocation of Middle School with 63 detached single family residential units. D. Final Development Plan #DP06-3051 (Portion of Gale Ranch Phase 111): This is a Final Development Plan modification to approved County File #DP99-3006 to reduce the number of apartment units from 381 to 165 and allow location of Middle School. E. Final Development Plan #DP06-3052 (Portion of Gale Ranch Phase IV): This is a Final Development Plan modification to approved County File #DP04-3070 and to allow a reduction of detached single-family residential units (less 60 units) and an increase of apartment units(plus 213 units). The portion of the Gale Ranch, Phase II to be modified is located west of Dougherty Road, at the comer of Lilac Ridge Road and North Gale Ridge Road. The portion of Gale Ranch Phase III to be modified is located south of Bollinger Canyon between South Monarch Road and Main Branch Road. The portion of Gale Ranch Phase IV to be modified is located south of Ivyleaf Springs Road between South Monarch Road and Stoneleaf Road in the Dougherty Valley San Ramon area. (Zoning: P-1) (Zoning Atlas Page: W-16) (Census Tract 3551.03 ) (APNs for Phase II: 222-240-008 and 222-240-009 and APN for Phase III and Phase IV: 222- 270-001). For purposes of compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Addendum to the 1992 EIR and the 1996 Supplemental EIR was prepared for this project in September of 2006. The proposed project modifications are consistent with the previously approved environmental documents and there are no additional significant impazts. If you challenge the project in court, you maybe limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the County at, or prior to, the public hearing. Prior to the hearing, Community Development Department staff will be available on Tuesday, November 14, 2006, in Room 108, Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, to meet with any interested parties in order to (1) answer questions; (2)review the hearing procedures used by the Board; (3) clarify the issues being considered by the Board; and(4)provide an opportunity to identify, resolve, or narrow any differences which remain in dispute. If you wish to attend this meeting with staff, please call Telma Moreira, Community Development Department, at (925) 335-1217 by 3:00 p.m. on Monday,November 13, 2006 to confirm your participation. Date: November 1,2006 John Cullen, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator ciat KaGe-rine Sinclair,Deputy Clerk BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING IN THE MATTER OF: SHAPELL HOMES (Applicant and Owner): The applicant requests approval of a General Plan Amendment#GP06-0003, Specific Plan Amendment #SP06-0001, and Final Development Plan Amendments#DP06-3050, #DP06-3051, and#DP06-3052. There is no net gain or loss of units. I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned have been, a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited Certified Mail with Contra Costa County Central Service for mailing by the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, first class postage fully prepaid, a copy of the hearing notice, on the above entitled matter to the following: Please See Attached List I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct, at Martinez, California. Dated: November 2, 2006 , Ka'tlierine Sinclair, Deputy Clerk EDMUD EDMUD Shapell Homes Attn: Joseph M. Callahan Attn: Guendolyn Alie Attn: Marshall Torre 375 11th Street, MS 701 375 11th Street,MS 701 2678 Bishop Drive, Ste. 110 Oakland, CA 94607-4240 Oakland, CA 94607-4240 San Ramon, CA 94583 Francisco &Associates City of San Ramon Town of Danville Attn: Jennfer White Attn: Phil Wong Attn: Kevin Gailey 2678 Bishop Drive, Ste. 225 2222 Camino Ramon Chief of Planning and Building San Ramon, CA 94583 San Ramon, CA 94583 510 La Gonda WayDanville, CA 94526 Town of Danville Attn: Tai Williams San Ramon Unified School District San Ramon Valley Fire Protection Transportation Attn: Tina Peralta District 510 La Gonda Way 699 Old Orchard Drive 1500 Bollinger Canyon Rd. Danville, CA 94526 Danville, CA 94526 San Ramon, CA 94583 Central Contra Costa Sanitary Dist. Dublin - San Ramon Services PUBLIC IATORKS 5019 Imhoff Place District ENGINEERING martinez, CA 94553 7051 Dublin Boulevard Attn: Teri Rie Dublin, CA 94566 ***Interoffice*** NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING You are hereby notified that on TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2006, AT 1:00 P.M. in Room 107, McBrien Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, California, the County Board of Supervisors will consider a GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT, AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS described as follows: SHAPELL HOMES (Applicant and Owner): The applicant requests approval of a General Plan Amendment#GP06-0003, Specific Plan Amendment #SP06-0001, and Final Development Plan Amendments #DP06-3050, #DP06-3051, and#DP06-3052. There is no net gain or loss of units. A. General Plan Amendment #GP06-0003: An amendment to the County General Plan (2005-2020) Land Use Element to allow the relocation of the Middle School originally approved for the Gale Ranch Phase II development which is now under the jurisdiction of the City of San Ramon. The request also includes the replacement of the Multi-Family Residential Low Density (ML) land use designation with Public and Semi-Public (PS) and Parks and Recreation(PR) along the north eastern portion of Gale Ranch Phase III, in order to accommodate the Middle School. B. Specific Plan Amendment#SP06-0001: An amendment to the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan to allow modification of the Public and Semi-Public (PS) and Parks and Recreation (PR) land use designation for the previously approved Middle School site to Single-Family Residential-Medium Density(SM), and'to allow modification of the Multi-Family Residential Low-Density(ML) land use designation to Public and Semi-Public (PS) and Parks and Recreation (PR). Several figures in the do Specific Plan will be revised in order to reflect the relocation of the Middle School and the corresponding use modifications to land use designations of the Gale Ranch development. Proposed changes are depicted in the Errata to the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan. C. Final Development Plan # DP06-3050 (Portion of Gale Ranch Phase ID: This a Final Development Plan modification to approved County File #DP95-3086 to allow relocation of Middle School with 63 detached single family residential units. D. Final Development Plan #DP06-3051 (Portion of Gale Ranch Phase III):#DP06-3051 (Portion of Gale Ranch Phase III): This is a Final Development Plan modification to approved County File #DP99-3006 to reduce the number of apartment units from 381 to 165 and allow location of Middle School. E. Final Development Plan #DP06-3052 (Portion of Gale Ranch Phase IW This is a Final Development Plan modification to approved County File #DP04-3070 and to allow a reduction of detached single-family residential units (less 60 units) and an increase of apartment units (plus 213 units). The portion of the Gale Ranch, Phase II to be modified is located west of Dougherty Road, at the corner of Lilac Ridge Road and North Gale Ridge Road. The portion of Gale Ranch Phase III to be modified is located south of Bollinger Canyon between South Monarch Road and Main Branch Road. The portion of Gale Ranch Phase IV to be modified is located south of Ivyleaf Springs Road between South Monarch Road and Stoneleaf Road in the Dougherty Valley San Ramon area. (Zoning: P-1) (Zoning Atlas Page: W-16) (Census Tract 3551.03 ) (APNs for Phase II: 222-240-008 and 222-240-009 and APN for Phase III and Phase IV: 222- 270-001). For purposes of compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Addendum to the 1992 EIR and the 1996 Supplemental EIR was prepared for this project in September of 2006. The proposed project modifications are consistent with the previously approved environmental documents and there are no additional significant impacts. If you challenge the project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the County at, or prior to, the public hearing. For further details, contact the Contra Costa County Community Development Department, 651 Pine Street,Martinez, CA, or Telma Moreira at 925-335-1217. Dennis M. Barry,AICP Community Development Director e NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON PLANNING MATTERS DOUGHERTY VALLEY/SAN RAMON AREA You are hereby notified that on TUESDAY,NOVEMBER 14, 2006,AT 1:00 P.M. in Room 107, McBrien Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, California, the County Board of Supervisors will consider a GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT, AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS described as follows: SHAPELL HOMES (Applicant and Owner): The applicant requests approval of a General Plan Amendment#GP06-0003, Specific Plan Amendment #SP06-0001, and Final Development Plan Amendments#DP06-3050, #DP06-3051, and#DP06-3052. There is no net gain or loss of units. A. General Plan Amendment#GP06-0003: An amendment to the County General Plan (2005-2020) Land Use Element to allow the relocation of the Middle School originally approved for the Gale Ranch Phase II development which is now under the jurisdiction of the City of San Ramon. The request also includes the replacement of the Multi-Family Residential Low Density(ML) land use designation with Public and Semi-Public (PS) and Parks and Recreation(PR) along the north eastern portion o Gale Ranch Phase III, in order to accommodate the Middle School. B. Specific Plan Amendment#SP06-0001: An amendment.to the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan to allow modification of the Public and Semi-Public (PS) and Parks and Recreation(PR) land use designation for the previously approved Middle School site to Single-Family Residential-Medium Density(SM), and to allow modification of the Multi-Family Residential Low-Density(ML) land use designation to Public and Semi-Public (PS) and Parks and Recreation(PR). Several figures in the do Specific Plan will be revised in order to reflect the relocation of the Middle School and the corresponding use modifications to land use designations of the Gale Ranch development. Proposed changes are depicted in the Errata to the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan. C. Final Development Plan #DP06-3050 (Portion of Gale Ranch Phase II): This a Final Development Plan modification to approved County File #DP95-3086 to allow relocation of Middle School with 63 detached single family residential units. D. Final Development Plan #DP06-3051 (Portion of Gale Ranch Phase III): This is a Final Development Plan modification to approved County File #DP99-3006 to reduce the number of apartment units from 381 to 165 and allow location of Middle School. E. Final Development Plan #DP06-3052 (Portion of Gale Ranch Phase IV): This is a Final Development Plan modification to approved County File #DP04-3070 and to allow a reduction of detached single-family residential units (less 60 units) and an increase of apartment units (plus 213 units). The portion of the Gale Ranch, Phase II to be modified is located west of Dougherty Road, at the corner of Lilac Ridge Road and North Gale Ridge Road. The portion of Gale Ranch Phase III to be modified is located south of Bollinger Canyon between South Monarch Road and Main Branch Road. The portion of Gale Ranch Phase IV to be modified is located south of Ivyleaf Springs Road between South Monarch Road and Stoneleaf Road in the Dougherty Valley San Ramon area. (Zoning: P-1) (Zoning Atlas Page: W-16) (Census Tract 3551.03 ) (APNs for Phase II: 222-240-008 and 222-240-009 and APN for Phase III and Phase IV: 222- 270-001). For purposes of compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Addendum to the 1992 EIR and the 1996 Supplemental EIR was prepared for this project in September of 2006. The proposed project modifications are consistent with the previously approved environmental documents and there are no additional significant impazts. If you challenge the project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the County at, or prior to, the public hearing. Prior to the hearing, Community Development Department staff will be available on Tuesday, November 14, 2006, in Room 108, Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, to meet with any interested parties in order to (1) answer questions; (2)review the hearing procedures used by the Board; (3) clarify the issues being considered by the Board; and(4)provide an opportunity to identify,resolve, or narrow any differences which remain in dispute. If you wish to attend this meeting with staff,please call Telma Moreira, Community Development Department, at (925) 335-1217 by 3:00 p.m. on Monday,November 13, 2006 to confirm your participation. Date: November 1, 2006 John Cullen,Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator Kathenne Sinclair,Deputy Clerk Kathy Sinclair/COB/CCC To cctlegals@cctimes.com Ok 11/01/2006 09:40 AM cc Maureen Parkes/CD/CCC@CCC,Telma Moreira/CD/CCC@CCC A-•.x,e a a.,,d n � bcc Subject Publication Request-Shapell Hi Anashia, Please publish the attached legal notice in the CCTimes: Shapell--1/4.page DISPLAY Ad One day only, Saturday November 4, 2006 Reference PO#: 2021 Please confirm receipt of request. Should you have any questions, please call me at the number listed below. Thank you, Kathy Sinclair Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Contra Costa County 925.335.1902 Shappell-1 11 406.doc "Contra Costa Times Legals" To KSinc@cob.cccounty.us <cctlegals@cctimes.com> CC mpark@cd.cccounty.us,TMore@cd.cccounty.us 11/01/2006 02:13 PM Please respond to bcc cctlegals@cctimes.com Subject Publication Request-Shapell THIS E-MAIL CONTAINS PERTINENT INFORMATION; PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY IN ITS ENTIRETY. PLEASE NOTE:All of our offices will be closed Thanksgiving Day, Thursday, November 23, 2006. Good Afternoon. If you have any questions regarding the legal notice confirmed below, please reference the LEGAL NUMBER provided. Only e-mail to cctlegals(acctimes.com regarding Contra Costa Times, Concord Transcript, or Contra Costa Sun legal notices. Thanks! ** LEGAL SCHEDULE CONFIRMATION** TYPE: DISPLAY 5 COLUMNS X 10.5", CLASSIFIED SECTION (ACTUAL SIZE: 5 11/1.6" X 10 1/2") LEGAL NUMBER: 7028 PO#: F05508 2021 Publication: CCT Run Date(s): 11/04 Legal Acct#: 200 4197 Total Amount: $1,029.00 Anashia Lloyd Legal Advertising Coordinator (925) 943-8019 (925) 943-8359—fax Contra Costa Times ATTN: Legal Dept. P.O. Box 4718 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 cctlegals@cctimes.com cctlegals.vcf