Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-14-1997 PC AgendaPLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting - Dublin Civic Center Tuesday - 7:00 p.m. 100 Civic Plaza, Council Chambers October 14, 1997 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG 4. ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA 5. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS - September 23, 1997 ORAL COMMUNICATION - At this time, members of the audience are permitted to address the Planning Commission on any item(s) of interest to the public; however, no ACTION or DISCUSSION shall take place on any item which is NOT on the Planning Commission Agenda. The Commission may respond briefly to statements made or questions posed, or may request Staff to report back at a future meeting concerning the matter. Furthermore, a member of the Planning Commission may direct Staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda. Any person may arrange with the Community Development Director (no later than 11:00 a.m., on the Tuesday preceding a regular meeting) to have an item of concern placed on the agenda for the next regular meeting. 7. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS 8.1 97-023 Turan Residential Care Facility Conditional Use Permit. A request for a Conditional Use Permit for a residential care facility located at 8521 Valencia Street in a remodeled single family home that will have a maximum of 12 elderly adults. The residential care facility currently being operated in this residence by the applicants houses 6 elderly adults. The Center will operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. 8.2 PA 97-019, Park Sierra Apartments A request for a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from "Medium Density Residential" to Medium-High Density Residential," a zone change to "Planned Development-Medium High Density Residential," and Site Development Review for a 209 unit apartment project on 8.9 acres of land located on the west side of Dougherty Road, south of the future Iron Horse Trail (former SP railroad tracks). A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. 9. NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS 10. OTHER BUSINESS (Commission/Staff Informational Only Reports) 11. ADJOURNMENT (OVER FOR PROCEDURE SUMMARY) o6-t�� OyLA- K., CITY OF DUBLIN MEMORANDUM October 13,1997 To: Planning Commission From: Community Development Department Subject: Park Sierra Apartments,Shea Properties PA-97-019 Following is alternative language for conditions of approval for the Park Sierra Apartment proposal,PA 97-019,Site Development Review. These minor changes are based on discussions between the applicant and staff after distribution of the Planning Commission agenda packets last Thursday.New changes are indicated in bold lettering. With the exception of these four conditions,the applicant concurs with all other conditions: 31 The Developer shall dedicate an access easement to the PW GR City of D: ubl�l n Dublin Housing Authority a minimum 175'long by 2S=32'wide street extension of Scarlett Drive from Dougherty Road that will provide adequate access to the site and accommodate potential joint use with the existing future development to the north.The layout and design of street improvements shall align with future Scarlett Drive extension to the east and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to street dedication and grading permit issuance.The Developer shall provide a layout plan of the ultimate design of the intersection. 32 No parking shall be allowed along both sides of PW OCC Dougherty Road and the puHlie entrance road to the site. The Developer shall prepare a detailed signage plan of improved portions of Dougherty Road for review and approval of the City Engineer. 33 The Developer shall widen Dougherty Road for a right PW OCC turn lane and left turn pocket into the project.The applicant shall construct a roadway shoulder along the easterly side of Dougherty Road from the entrance to Camp Parks to Houston Plane extended southerly lot line of the project to the easterly face of curb.These improvements shall extend to the existing eastern right- of-way line.They shall be constructed as part of this project and shall be approved by the City Engineer.In addition,the northbound lanes of Dougherty Road shall be overlaid with asphalt concrete.Any additional ultimate improvement shall be subject to offset credits to the Traffic Impact Fee of the cost of those fees,subject to the approval of the Public Works Director. 35 The developer shall improve and install a 20'wide PW OCC roadway and dedicate a 22'private and emergency vehicle access easement from Sierra Court into the project site. Street improvements shall be designed to City standards and include curb and gutter 3'valley gutters on both sides of the roadway. Access shall be restricted by means of an electronic-sensored gate or alternative gate approved by the Fire department and Public Works Director.The gate shall allow residents to exit the site with emergency vehicles capable of entering and exiting the site.The developer shall provide all necessary rights and agreements to secure this easement from any and all adjacent property owners and submit such easement to the City for approval prior to issuance of a building permit. CITY OF DUBLIN PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT/STAFF REPORT for October 14, 1995 PROJECT: PA 97-023 Turan Residential Care Facility Conditional Use Permit PREPARED BY: Dennis Carrington, Senior Planner/Zoning Administrator DESCRIPTION: A Conditional Use Permit for a residential care facility in a remodeled single family home at 8521 Valencia Street that will have a maximum of 12 elderly adults. The residential care facility currently being operated in this residence by the applicants houses 6 elderly adults. The Center will operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution approving the Conditional use Permit. BACKGROUND: The Applicants are requesting a Conditional Use Permit to operate a Residential Care Facility for up to 12 elderly adults in a remodeled single family home. A Conditional Use Permit is required for the operation of a residential care facility for more than 6 individuals. There is an existing Residential Care Facility for up to 6 elderly adults in the same home. Four bedrooms and one and one-half bathrooms would be added to the rear of the residence to accommodate the six additional individuals. The proposed addition is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and the General Plan. COMPATIBILITY WITH SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD The proposed facility would be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood because it would generate little traffic or noise. There have been no complaints received regarding the operation of the existing residential care facility on this property. ITEM NO. COPIES TO: Applicants/Owners PA/Address File PAGE_I OF 4'J ' PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT PA 97-023, Turan Residential Care Facility Conditional Use Permit HOME OCCUPATIONS The Turans have operated a dental laboratory in the garage of this residence since August of 1996. The home occupation is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance (1967 Ordinance) in affect at the time the application was found to be complete. The Alameda County Fire Department has determined that the operation of a dental laboratory in the same structure used as a residential care facility is a violation of the Fire Code. The Turans have indicated that the dental laboratory is no longer in operation. A condition is included in the Resolution approving this project that would prohibit other home occupations in this residence. TRAFFIC/CIRCULATION It is not anticipated that the residential care facility would generate much traffic. These facilities receive few visitors and is otherwise functioning as a single family home. DESIGN The facility is a single family residence and the additions will not change its appearance. There should be no visual impacts on the neighborhood. FIRE The Alameda County Fire Department has determined that a Residential Care Facility for 12 or fewer elderly persons must comply with several requirements which are included in the Resolution as conditions of approval: Prior to receiving final occupancy,the applicant shall: a. Install for the entire building a State Fire Marshall approved fully automatic fire extinguishing system, designed and installed in accordance with Section 2-3801 (d) of Chapter 2-38 of Part 2 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations; b. Ensure that the entire building shall be of at least Type V one-hour fire resistive construction, as described in Chapter 2-22 of Part 2 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations; c. Ensure that the entire building shall have a State Fire Marshal approved and listed manual fire alarm; and d. Ensure that two means of egress from the remodeled residence shall be provided to the Satisfaction of the Fire Marshall of the Alameda County Fire Department. [F] 2 PAGE "Z OF • PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT PA 97-023, Turan Residential Care Facility Conditional Use Permit CONCLUSION The proposed residential care facility is consistent with the R-1, Single Family Residential, zoning district and the Single Family Residential designation of the General Plan. It would be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood, generate little traffic, and have no visual impacts. This type of facility would be beneficial to the City of Dublin because such facilities are necessary for the provision of care to our seniors. Staff recommends approval of Resolution (Exhibit C) approving the Negative Declaration for the Turan Residential Care Facility, and of Resolution (Exhibit D) approving a Conditional Use Permit for the Turan Residential Care Facility subject to conditions of approval. GENERAL INFORMATION: APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: Sandor and Anna Turan 8521 Valencia Street, Dublin, CA 94568 LOCATION: 8521 Valencia Street ASSESSOR PARCEL: 941-165-100 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential EXISTING ZONING/ LAND USE: R-1, Single Family Residential SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: Single family residences and R-1, Single Family Residential zoning to North, South, East and West. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: A Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Dublin Environmental Guidelines. The Initial Study evaluated issues relating to noise, parking, land use and traffic, among others. It was determined that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment. A copy of the proposed Negative Declaration is attached to this report as Exhibit B. NOTIFICATION: Public Notice of the public review period of the Negative Declaration and the October 14, 1997, public hearing was published in the local newspaper, mailed to adjacent property owners, and posted in public buildings. 3 PAGE OF -1 - PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT PA 97-023.Turan Residential Care Facility Conditional Use Permit RECOMMENDATIONS: FORMAT: 1) Open public hearing and hear staff presentation. 2) Take testimony from the Applicant and the public. 3) Question Staff,Applicant and the public. 4) Close public hearing and deliberate. 5) Adopt Resolution(Exhibit C)approving the Negative Declaration for PA 97-023,Turan Residential Care Facility 6) Adopt Resolution(Exhibit D)approving PA 97-023,Turan Residential Care Facility Conditional Use Permit,or give Staff and Applicant direction and continue the matter. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Project Plans Exhibit B: Negative Declaration Exhibit C: Resolution Approving Negative Declaration Exhibit D: Resolution Approving Conditional Use Permit Background Attachments: Attachment 1: Area Location Map Attachment 2: Applicant's Written Statement G:\PA97023\pcstfrpt 4 PAGE 1 OF c 9 - 22i I 11' a , i 1 —4_ c i al i + : 1.1 L 0 0 a! i6 �i 6 ' {+ :I_( I_ o 0 o -6 eq 5 . I ,4, s i It -I< ra Is ,47 91 In r ,�_ X —� s .S X 3 • RECEnt,g • DUBtlN INNING EXHIBIT APAGE OF_. DEPRR LENT O SOCIAL Sc-RSSCCS COYM NRY CAGE LCERSNC FACILITY SKETCH (Yard) ee Yard Sketch should show all buildings in the yard including the home(with no detail),garage and storage building. lude walks,driveways,play area,fences,gates. Show any potential hazardous area such as pools,garbage storage, animal pens.etc. Show the overall yard size. Try to keep the sizes close to scale. Use the space below. Al:C ESS: SOIVid 1lv!oci i ()raty 85N1 l I01leinc;a Srt.7Ublj,,,,_09 q1-1568 Eliili . ! : ii • Elii l i i I : ` I i i ! : I i i i i <_i i f I t i -:•. . ; 1 6 l i i l ? i ! i i i i : 1 E - - i l i I i E 1 i 1 E 1 i i jii 333 .,3 ; 33333331331i3iiii31333 I I i i . iiiiiili ! iiIiiiii , i ; iii l i i i i I 1 I - I i i i - i-! . i i I ` ` I t : � ui4 1 . - t 1 —,-i 1_ I 11 • it ' 1 ? `,....k 4i: ' i 1 I i 3 ' I . i 1 : . i • I E i i - 1 { i i 1 i 1 p i I I i i • . , :®sus . 1ri1.S 0) , t I . . I . I - r. . I . . t : I . . , . . . I I t i ! i l ?-)eCtorI I _ : : : !__.. : . . 1 i 1 ii I I . . i : . . . I I i . i I i I i 333333333i13333E 33 I s I [ s l '. , -�/l 1 i E i f I I ! 'Y G��i ' 1 i I — : ! --*C E 1 V.E D . q1 op DUBUN PLA PAGE.. OF 6249. 12aF- Property L.L:‘,-,e, A 0 v I a) Proposed a1 S i Ad.,=1 LtLor1 -3 31 W ) 11 v A. O al i V °J €.X C. 5L C,v1 q B u I.L c1 (.,vl Q 1 6 142< , c0 RECEIE 97- C) _AIL�v i ass v ` Tlof Fla-, 3 „ PA3EJ_(Y- 31 • • '1'.;.:•:: ...-... . , / • Hi / i . C 1 ' 0 ...) -r- -1,!______-] //t— /a _----1 1-.1-6C°5) 23 .L.0 a) -6 -3 o.) U) •i Eli 13 _. 0 0 ..... 4:,) _it.... 9 ._ RECEIVED Pft-cr7-593 gJUL 2 8 1987;a 1 Va lenc,i a ck LIN PLA;•1•I'ANG PAGE_l_. or_.._. CITY OF DUBLIN •\ .,- �� P0.Box 2340,Dublin,California 94569 • City Offices, 100 Civic Plaza,Dublin,California 94568 NEGATIVE DECLARATION NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR: Turan Residential Care Facility (Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21000,et seq.) LOCATION: 8521 Valencia Street,Dublin,CA 94568 DESCRIPTION: A residential care facility for twelve elderly persons in a remodeled single family residence in a developed urban area. NAME OF PROJECT PROPONENT Sandor and Anna Turan. FINDINGS: The project will not have a significant impact on the environment. PREPARATION: This N ative Declaration was prepared by the City of Dublin Plan Staff, (510) 33-6610. SIGNATURE: • Eddie Peabod Jr. Director of Community D velopment DATE: September 15, 1997 DC EXHIBIT13 d PAGE I OF.;.) )) Administration (510)833-6650 •City Council (510)833-6605 • Finance (510)833-6640• Building Inspection (510)833-6620 Code Enforcement (510)833-6620• Engineering (510)833-6630 • Parks 8 Community Services (510)833-6645 Economic Development (510)833-6650• Police (510)833-6670 • Public Works (510)833-6630• Planning (510)833-6610 • INITIAL STUDY (ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM) (Completed pursuant to City of Dublin Environmental Guidelines, Section 1.6) APPLICATION NO. : PA 97-023 Turan Residential Care Facility I. BACKGROUND 1. Name, Address and Phone Number of Proponent:_ Sandor and Anna Turan, 8521 Valencia Street, Dublin, CA 94568 (510) 556-0152 2. Agency Requiring Checklist: City of Dublin 3. Name of Proposal, if applicable: Turan Residential Care Facility 4. Description of Project: Licensed Residential Care Facility providing 24 hour a day, seven days a week care, for up to twelve (12) elderly persons. PAGES OF II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (See Part III for discussion of environmental topics) YES MAYBE NO SOURCE2 1. EARTH. Will the proposal result in: X 1,3 a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes of geologic substructures? X 1,3 b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or over covering of the soil? X 1,3 c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? X 1,3 d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? X 1,3 e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? X 1,3 f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition, or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? X 1,3 g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? 2. AIR. Will the proposal result in: X 1,3 a. Substantial air emissions of deterioration of ambient air quality? X 1,3 b. The creation of objectionable odors? X 1,3 c. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? X 1,3 d. Construction or alteration of a facility within one-fourth of a mile of a school which might emit hazardous air emissions? If Yes, school district must be consulted and must be given written notification of the project 'Refer to appropriate note on page 8 -2- • II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (See Part III for discussion of environmental topics) YES MAYBE NO SOURCE2 not less than 30 days prior to approval of EIR or Negative Declaration (Pub. Res. Code 21151.4) . 3. WATER. Will the proposal result in: X 1,3 a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? X 1,3 b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? X 1,3 c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? X 1,3 d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? X 1,3 e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X 1,3 f. Alteration of the direction of rate of flow of ground waters? X 1,3 g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? X 1,3 h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? X 1,3 i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? 4. PLANT LIFE. Will the proposal result in: 2Refer to appropriate note on page 8 PAGE P- OF(23 -3- II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (See Part III for discussion of environmental topics) YES MAYBE NO SOURCE2 X 1,2,3 a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? X 1,2,3 b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? X 1,2,3 c. Introduction of new species of plants in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? X 1,2,3 d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? 5. ANIMAL LIFE. Will the proposal result in: X 1,2,3 a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? X 1,2,3 b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? X 1,2,3 c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? X 1,2,3 d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? 6. NOISE. Will the proposal result in: X 1,2 a. Increases in existing noise levels? X 1,2,3 b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X 1,2,37. LIGHT AND GLARE. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? X 1,2,38. LAND USE. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? 2Refer to appropriate note on page 8 PAGE L3 OF -4- II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (See Part III for discussion of environmental topics) YES MAYBE NO SOURCE2 9. NATURAL RESOURCES. Will the proposal result in: X 1,2,3 a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? X 1,2,3 b. Substantial depletion of any non-renewable natural resource? 10. RISK OF UPSET. Will the proposal involve: X 1,2,3 a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? X 1,2,3 b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? X 2 11. POPULATION. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? X 1,2,312. HOUSING. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 13. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Will the proposal result in: X 1,2,3 a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? X 1,2,3 b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? X 1,3 c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation and traffic systems? X 1,2,3 d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? ` 2Refer to appropriate note on page 8 PAGE l OF -5- II. $NVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (See Part III for discussion of environmental topics) YES MAYBE NO SOURCE2 X 1,2,3 e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? X 1,3 f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas? X 1,2,3 a. Fire protection? X 1,2,3 b. Police protection? X 1,2,3 c. Schools? X 1,2,3 d. Parks or other recreational facilities? X 1,2,3 e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? X 1,2,3 f. Other governmental services? 15. ENERGY. Will the proposal result in: X 1,2,3 a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? X 1,2,3 b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy or require the development of new sources of energy? 2Refer to appropriate note on page 8 f� PAGE ICJ OF?t l -6- II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (See Part III for discussion of environmental topics) YES MAYBE NO SOURCE2 16. UTILITIES. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to the following utilities: X 1,2,3 a. Power or natural gas? X 1,2,3 b. Communications systems? X 1,2,3 c. Water? X 1,2,3 d. Sewer or septic tanks? X 1,2,3 e. Storm water drainage? X 1,2,3 f. Solid waste and disposal? 17. HUMAN HEALTH. Will the proposal result in: X 1,3 a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? X 1,3 b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? X 1,3 18. AESTHETICS. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? X 2,3 19. RECREATION. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 20. CULTURAL RESOURCES. X 1,2,3 a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? X 1,2,3 b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric,� 2Refer to appropriate note on page 8 PAGE'`/J OF1 -7- II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (See Part III for discussion of environmental topics) YES MAYBE NO SOURCE2 historic, or architecturally significant building, structure, or object? X 1,2,3 c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? X 1,2,3 d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? 21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. X 1,2,3 a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? X 1,2,3 b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short- term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future) . X 1,2,3 c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant) . X 1,2,3 d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse 2Refer to appropriate note on page 8 PAGE -8- II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (See Part III for discussion of environmental topics) YES MAYBE NO SOURCE2 effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X 1,2,3 22. EIR REQUIRED BY STATUTE. Does the project involve construction of any facility which burns municipal waste or refuse-derived fuel? NOTE: If the answer is yes, then an EIR must be prepared and certified under Public Resources Code Section 21151.2(a) unless subsections (b) and (c) make that section inapplicable. 2Refer to appropriate note on page 8 PAGE Jl1. .�t! -9- II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (See Part III for discussion of environmental topics) YES MAYBE NO SOURCE2 III. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (See attached statement) IV. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: X I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that State statute requires that an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT be prepared and certified. Senior Planner/Zoning Administrator Signature Title Dennis Carrington September 15, 1997 Printed Name Date (1) Determination based on location of project. (2) Determination based on staff office review. (3) Determination based on field review. (4) Determination based on the City of Dublin General Plan. (5) Determination based on the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance. (6) Determination based on Specific Plan. (7) Not applicable. (8) /pa97-023/initial 2Refer to appropriate note on page 8 r�, PAGE ofJ -10- ISSUES FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT The following issues have been found not to be significant as indicated by a"No"response on the Initial Study checklist. The proposed Residential Care Facility will not produce significant adverse impacts for the following reasons: 1. Earth,Water,Plant and Animal Life,and Natural and Cultural Resources: The project is a residential care facility for twelve elderly persons in a remodeled single family residence in a developed urban area. The remodeling of an existing single family residence is a ministerial permit and is exempt from CEQA. The remodeling of the residence to add four bedrooms and two bathrooms and the addition of six elderly persons to the six persons presently being cared for would not impact the earth,water, plant and animal life,or natural and cultural resources on the project site. Therefore,as noted in the Initial Study Checklist under the topic of Earth,items a through g will not be significantly impacted; under the topic of Water,items a through d will not be significantly impacted;under the topic of Plant Life,items a through d will not be significantly impacted;under the topic of Animal Life,items a through d will not be significantly impacted;under the topic of Natural Resources,items a and b will not be significantly impacted;under the topic of Cultural Resources,items a through d will not be significantly impacted. 2. Air: It is not anticipated that the project will substantially deteriorate ambient air quality due a trip to visit each of the six additional elderly persons on a daily basis. Such traffic would not add significantly to the creation of objectionable odors or the alteration of air movement or the climate regionally or locally. The project would not involve the emission of hazardous materials into the environment. Therefore,as noted in the Initial Study Checklist under the topic of Air,items a through d will not be significantly impacted. 3. Noise: The project will not increase existing noise levels significantly or expose people to severe noise levels. The residential care for elderly generates little noise. The bedrooms being added are in the rear of the residence and noise impacts to neighbors will therefore be minimal. Therefore,as noted in the Initial Study Checklist under the topic of Noise,items a and b will not be significantly impacted. 4. Light and glare: The project will not produce new light or glare. the residence will retain its residential appearance. No additional external lighting is proposed. Therefore,as noted in the Initial Study Checklist under the topic of Light and Glare,the project will not produce new light or glare. 5. Land Use: The proposed residential care facility for twelve elderly persons will be located in an existing single family home that is currently used as a residential care facility for six elderly persons. The exterior of the residential care facility will look like a residential unit. The use will not alter the planned land use of the neighborhood because sufficient conditions of the required Conditional Use Permit will insure compatibility with the area.Therefore,as noted in the Initial Study Checklist under the topic of Land Use,the project will not result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area. 6. Risk of Upset: The project will not involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous materials since no hazardous materials will be stored or used on the project site. In addition,the project will not interfere with emergency response plans or emerge city evacuation plans since the project would PAGE OF2e1 not physically impact adjacent streets in the event of an emergency. Therefore,as noted in the Initial Study Checklist under the topic of Risk of Upset,items a and b will not be significantly impacted. 7. Population: The project will not significantly alter the location,distribution,density,or growth rate of the human population of the area because the project will only add six elderly persons to an existing residential area. 8. Housing: The project will not significantly affect existing housing,or create a demand for additional housing because the elderly persons will be housed in an existing dwelling unit. No new dwelling units will be demanded or created. 9. Transportation/Circulation: The provision of residential care for six additional elderly persons at the residence will not result in significant impacts to the transportation and circulation system from the generation of substantial additional vehicular movement,demand for parking,or existing traffic systems,alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods,alteration to waterborne,rail or air traffic,or an increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,bicyclists or pedestrians because little or no traffic will be generated. Therefore,as noted in the Initial Study Checklist under the topic of Transportation/Circulation,items a and f will not be significantly impacted. 10. Public Services: The project is a residential care facility for twelve elderly persons and,by its nature,will not have a significant affect upon,or result in a need for new or altered governmental services including fire protection,police protection,schools,parks or other recreational facilities, maintenance of public facilities including roads,or for other governmental services. Therefore,as noted in the Initial Study Checklist under the topic of Public Services,items a through f will not be significantly impacted. 11. Energy: Residential care facilities do not use substantial amounts of fuel or energy or result in a substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy or require the development of new sources of energy. Therefore,as noted in the Initial Study Checklist under the topic of Energy,items a and b will not be significantly impacted. 12. Utilities: The addition of six adults to a residential care facility will not result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to power or natural gas facilities,communications systems,water facilities,sewage facilities,storm water drainage facilities and solid waste and disposal facilities. Therefore,as noted in the Initial Study Checklist under the topic of Utilities,items a through f will not be significantly impacted. 13. Human Health:The addition of six adults to a residential care facility will not create any health hazard or potential health hazard or expose people to potential health hazards. Therefore,as noted in the Initial Study Checklist under the topic of Human Health,items a and b will not be significantly impacted. 14. Aesthetics: The project will not result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public,nor will it result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view. 15. Recreation: The project will not result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities. Elderly residents will have minimal impacts on recreational facilities. /pa97-023/initial PAGEL OF��� RESOLUTION NO.97- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR PA 97-023 TURAN RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WHEREAS,Sandor and Anna Turan,submitted an application requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit for the operation of a residential care facility for up to 12 elderly adults in the R-1-B-E,Single Family Residential Combining District,located at 8521 Valencia Street,and WHEREAS,the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA),together with the State guidelines and City environmental regulations require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impact and that environmental documents be prepared;and WHEREAS,an Initial Study was conducted finding that the project,as proposed,would not have a significant effect on the environment;and WHEREAS,a Negative Declaration has been prepared for this application and is on file in the City of Dublin Planning Department;and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission did review and use their independent judgment to consider the Negative Declaration at a public hearing on October 14, 1997;and WHEREAS,proper notice of said public hearing was given in all respects as required by law. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby find that: A. The Turan Residential Care Facility Conditional Use Permit project will not have a significant effect on the environment based on review of the Initial Study and public testimony. B. The Negative Declaration has been prepared and processed in accordance with State and local environmental laws and guideline regulations. C. The Negative Declaration is complete and adequate. E)CH�tT C PAGE OF NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVE THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby adopt the Negative Declaration for PA 97-023, Turan Residential Care Facility Conditional Use Permit Project. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of October, 1997. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Planning Commission Chairperson ATTEST: Community Development Director (g:\pa#\1997\023\NDreso) PAGE&OF a RESOLUTION NO. 97 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING PA 97-023 TURAN RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF A RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY (COMMUNITY CARE FACILITY) IN AN R-1, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT AT 8521 VALENCIA STREET WHEREAS, Sandor and Anna Turan have submitted an application requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit for the operation of a residential care facility, for a maximum of 12 elderly persons as the primary use within an existing single-family residence in an R-1, Single Family Residential Combining District, located at 8521 Valencia Street; and WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Dublin Environmental Guidelines. The Initial Study evaluated issues relating to noise, parking, land use and traffic, among others. It was determined that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment; and WHEREAS the Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing on said application on October 14, 1997; and WHEREAS, the Staff Report was submitted recommending that the application be conditionally approved; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and consider all said reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth and used their independent judgment to make a decision. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby find that: A. The proposed use is in the best interests of the public health, safety and general welfare. B. The proposed use is required by the public need because of the need for residential care facilities for the elderly. C. The proposed use would properly relate to other land uses and transportation and service facilities in the vicinity because it will resemble a single family residence, generate little traffic, and require limited services. D. The approval of the application is consistent with the intent/purpose of Section 8-94.0 Conditional Uses. E. The proposed use will not materially adversely affect the health of safety of persons residing or working the vicinity, or be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood, as all applicable regulations will be met. pA3E x)__` O 1 1 EXHIBIT D F. The proposed use will not be contrary to the specific intent clauses or performance standards established for the District in which it is to be located. G. The approval of the Conditional Use Permit will be consistent with the Dublin General Plan. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby conditionally approve PA 97-023 Turan Residential Care Facility Conditional Use Permit as generally depicted by the staff report and the materials labeled Exhibits A to the Staff Report, stamped approved and on file with the Dublin Planning Department, subject to compliance with the following conditions: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Unless stated otherwise, all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with prior to final parcel map approval, and shall be subject to Planning Department review and approval. The following codes represent those departments/agencies responsible for monitoring compliance of the conditions of approval. [PL1 Planning, [Ill Building, [PO] Police, [PW1 Public Works, [PR] Parks and Recreation, [ADM] Administration/City Attorney, [FIN] Finance, [F] Alameda County Fire Department, [DSR] Dublin San Ramon Services District, [CO] Alameda County Flood Control & Water Conservation District (Zone 7). Community Development 1. The Applicant shall comply with applicable Alameda County Fire Department, Dublin Public Works Department, Dublin Building Department, Dublin Police Service, Alameda County Flood Control District Zone 7, Alameda County Public Health, and Dublin San Ramon Services District requirements. Prior to issuance of building permits or the installation of any improvements related to this project. [F, PW, PO, Z7, DSR, PL] 2. This approval is for the operation of a Residential Care Facility for 12 or fewer elderly persons at 8521 Valencia Street as shown on the site plan, floor plans, and elevations, dated received July 28, 1997. [PL] 3. The maximum number of elderly residents at the Residential Care Facility at any one time shall not exceed 12. [PL] 4. This approval shall become null and void, in the event the approved use fails to be established or ceases to operate for a continuous one year period. [PL] 5. Prior to the issuance of building permit all applicable fees shall be paid. [PL] 6. The Applicant shall not operate a Home Occupation at 8521 Valencia Street. [PL] 7. Prior to receiving a business license,the applicant shall make all improvements indicated on the site plan and floor plan. [PL] 8. Prior to receiving a business license, the applicant shall make all necessary improvements for an"E" Occupancy in conformance with the Uniform Building Code. [PL] 9. Prior to receiving final occupancy, the applicant shall: 2 PACIEG15 OFjed a. Install for the entire building a State Fire Marshall approved fully automatic fire extinguishing system, designed and installed in accordance with Section 2-3801 (d) of Chapter 2-38 of Part 2 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations; b. Ensure that the entire building shall be of at least Type V one-hour fire resistive construction, as described in Chapter 2-22 of Part 2 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations; c. Ensure that the entire building shall have a State Fire Marshal approved and listed manual fire alarm; and d. Ensure that two means of egress from the remodeled residence shall be provided to the Satisfaction of the Fire Marshall of the Alameda County Fire Department. [F] 10. Prior to the establishment of this use, the operator shall submit a copy of the State Department of Social Services License Permit for the operation of the residential care facility. [PL] 11. On a continuous basis, the Applicant shall provide the City of Dublin Planning Department with a current residential care facility operating license issued by the State of California Department of Social Services. [PL] 12. There shall be no signs displayed on the site advertising the Center. [PL] 13. The Applicant shall be responsible for cleanup and disposal of project related trash in order to maintain a clean and litter free site. [PL] 14. This permit shall be revocable for cause in accordance with Section 8-90.3 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. Any violation of the terms or conditions of this permit shall be subject to citation. [PL] PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of October, 1997. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Planning Commission Chairperson ATTEST: Eddie Peabody, Jr. Community Development Director g:\pa97023\cupres 3 PACE ) (°OF�1J Code Area No5.2 ASSESSOR' S MAP 941 165 TRACT 2250 (23,44 Pg 4) w Parcels on this block j TRACT 2249 (Bk 42 Pg 82-86) are within a "special _ Zane" as defined by the ' " tJ�85A Alqust-Priolo Act. Sco1e.I"=100' 1 6�'C.SI�Ihp,vJ * •• x` d is 210' 24,1S`i v/ '64 �- 11 // w [e2© - ro h 3 1 is c Y_ r> 17 L..15 r1.. Y CC / - Vita, .ylf4 Xo `•:•.�z �4 :F '•. .^••: i N—N / c..� I••C tiv� , •/9 Vt Q _ •'fir �Y M f :: /• II , . . ▪ C �"'' • r © Izn t‘ @ \ .4 y125 �/ Tjtirl a=eIs 14 L O 6� ® `t (zee 1, N/a c, 10 N % s-- w I I ek „/� 76 17 " 5' •`° ti • 2757 ,©161. 9 Sr `.a 8�n1 O fix'• h ,r. O e, "t„�: _-. - ... 8"8,\ - C9 alQIIl1' :.� Rg4-� T L B � Aes I______„!:(1! Q g t; ;:::',:::.:•:.;......:::: "..,::a tii,..v....."— n ,7 r Oti .1/621= IC. !--1 45 O 211 ,�J 12 r e .-II 1 ? _':;:.:`Y:'':i 1. e . c �` - : _: : :: 0 22 5 I'04) • 5 a. 13—� .. j� • ! - . }5 , 1t t23 a G a3 14 r r' � ;4 � :—` 1c i .Ji� ,° �t3 '/n ' 6 -r 0 ' s•• LJ 5C, 1 ^ I Qom 3 Fe-%, -'.. .Z, pi v i 168 c5 2 .' 16 U ar_R✓A_c :... ::..,.:'- <: - — _2 O / //;,, 17 ter: `. .s ' LL a > I I.1 r c 5 •� :c-14-11/51.14,3,;? , Y•_::::: ti . 1 5 tss" oj ? :.:..''...i..:':•::::::::...:::..*:. I 65 I u ® O . ,.[ +(r��� �- ' e, u�"E I 6 try •. �'�116 a✓1� i :It I \J T Ff ` LAN _^' ' r lcyrro gt7 xitijs ......„ • 1 01 _.,.... • .,,,.., __. ,, _. ' �>I (96 r e ., ;Airirm •5 I `, ......... h "a ' O -� Q RE 1VE •.... Written Statement, a. 8521 Valencia Street is our residence. We are operating a Boarding Home Care for the elderly from our home. At this point we are licensed for six elderly persons, but would like to expand our home by adding more rooms. This would allow us to bring more elderly in specifically six more persons. b. This is a family - operated business and our family will provide the care. c. This is a 24-hour operated business. d. This business targets to help the elderly (65 and older). e. Providing assisted-living to the elderly which is a need in our community, is the main goal of this business. f. It very unlikely this business will disrupt the surranding residents. This is a very low activity business. g. This business will have no negative effects on the health or safety of people residing/working in the vicinity. On the contrary the business offers positive effects on health and safety. h. For transportation, a personal vehicle will be used for doctor checkups. j. There are no hazardous waste and substances site. ATTACHMENT RECEIVED 97-0a3 �2 NG S PAGE_Of NING CITY OF DUBLIN PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT/STAFF REPORT for October 14, 1997 PROJECT: PA 97-019, Park Sierra Apartments, including:General Plan Amendment Rezoning Site Development Review PREPARED BY: Jerry Haag, Consulting Planner DESCRIPTION: Proposed General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and Site Development Review of a 3-story rental apartment project on 8.9 acres of land, generally located on the west side of Dougherty Road at the former Southern Pacific Railroad tracks, submitted by Shea Properties RECOMMENDATION: Adopt appropriate resolutions and ordinances approving the General Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Site Development Review. BACKGROUND The applicant for the proposed Park Sierra apartment project, Shea Properties, has requested approvals of City entitlements to construct an apartment project on the west side of Dougherty Road at the former Southern Pacific Railroad tracks. The requests consist of: • A General Plan Amendment, changing the General Plan Land Use designation from "Medium Density Residential (6.01 to 14.0 dwellings per acre)to "Medium-High Density Residential (14.01 to 25.0 dwellings per acre); • A Rezoning to the PD-Planned Development District to accommodate the proposed project; and COPIES TO: Shea Properties Q PA File 97-019 ITEM NO. 7i PAGE OF • Site Development Review approval to construct 209 apartment units, parking and landscaping and associated site improvements. A workshop was held with the Planning Commission on September 23, 1997 for the purpose of reviewing the proposed project on a conceptual level and providing direction to the applicant. Briefly, the Commission found the project to be heading in the right direction, with specific concerns raised regarding the proposed color palette, ingress and egress for residents through the secondary site entrance along the southerly property line and width and amount of landscaping to be provided adjacent to buildings. In 1996, the City Council approved a Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment, zone change, tentative subdivision map and Site Development Plan review for a 92-unit housing project on the same 8.9-acre site as the current proposal (File PA 95-029). The applicant was Trumark Homes. Trumark Homes has since elected not to proceed with their project and the site has been sold to Shea Properties. The project site is vacant and was previously owned by the Southern Pacific Railroad. It has a long, linear configuration parallel with the alignment of the former railroad tracks immediately north of the site. The former railroad right-of-way has since been purchased by Alameda County and is planned to be developed as the Iron Horse trail, a multi-purpose recreational trail stretching between Pleasanton and Martinez. Surrounding land uses include the Arroyo Vista housing complex to the north, Alamo Creek to the west, Sierra Business Park to the south and industrial lands to the east, across Dougherty Road. PROJECT DESCRIPTION General Plan Amendment The site has been designated for Medium Density Residential development under the Land Use Element of the General Plan. This designation was applied in 1996 as part of the Trumark application. The current owners desire to construct a different development program which would require amending the Land Use Map from Medium Density Residential to Medium-High Density Residential. The Medium-High Density Residential designation is intended to accommodate higher densities and with under structure parking allowed. The Medium-High Density designation allows residential densities ranging from 14.1 to 25.0 dwellings per acre. 2 PAGE OF Rezoning A revised Planned Development(PD)Rezone also needs to be adopted to establish General Provisions and Development Regulations for the project and which would also implement the Medium-High Density Residential General Plan designation for the site. Similar Standards were adopted for the Trumark project,however,these were tailored specifically for the development project proposed by Trumark and would therefore not be applicable to the current proposal. The General Provisions and Development Regulations and Conditions of Approval are set forth in full in Exhibit D. The proposed permitted and conditional uses are generally the same as permitted in the City's R-4 Zoning District with the exception of agricultural uses, which have now been prohibited under the PD. Since the project was submitted and deemed complete under the previous Zoning Ordinance,the old Ordinance has been used for comparison purposes. Development Standard PD Multi-family District R-4 District Standard Building Site Per Land Use and 6,000 square feet Development Plan Yards/Setbacks Front 20 feet(may include required 20 feet noise barrier) Rear 20 feet 20 feet Side 12 feet 10 feet+ 1 foot per each 10 feet lot frontage exceeds 50 feet Building Height 40 feet 45 feet Lot Coverage Per Land Use and 40% Development Plan Site Development Review The purpose of the site development review process is to promote orderly, attractive and harmonious site and structural development. Elements of the project to be reviewed include building location, architectural and landscape design and theme,vehicular and pedestrian access, on-site circulation,parking and traffic impacts. Following is a summary of these items. 3 PAGE OF Site Plan The complex would be of three story construction, with the dwellings arranged in 9 separate buildings in a linear fashion along the site. Open parking areas are proposed to be sited along the southerly portion of the site, also configured in a linear fashion. Each individual building would be centered around a ground-level parking area and open court yard, with many of the units opening onto the court. The building closest to Dougherty Road would front onto Dougherty, with balconies, a low (six foot) sound wall and landscaping adjacent to the street. The building on the westerly side of the site would face Alamo Creek. Buildings within the center of the project would be arranged with four of the buildings facing the Iron Horse Trail to the north and the remaining three buildings facing internally. Larger buildings would have between 23 and 26 dwellings and the smallest building would contain 10 dwellings. Dwelling units would be a mixture of one and two bedrooms with a variety of alternative floor plans provided. Each building would have a mix of unit types and sizes. Following is a summary of the types of dwellings which would compose the project Unit Type No. of Units Bedroom/Bathrooms Square footage A 36 1 BR, 1 BA 710 sq. ft. B1 16 2 BR, 2 BA 963 sq. ft. B2 16 2 BR, 2 BA 977 sq. ft. C 54 2 BR, 2 BA 997 sq. ft. D 33 2 BR, 2 BA 1023 sq. ft. E 54 1 BR, 1 BA 723 sq. ft. Total 209 Architecture and Design The architectural design of the Park Sierra project would be of a "contemporary Craftsman" theme, characterized by strong vertical elements, roof overhangs and wood architectural articulation. Primary building materials would consist of stucco walls with heavy architectural composition shingle roofs. Aluminum framed windows and sliding glass doors would be employed. Design interest would come from a variable roof line, using multiple gables and roof pitches to provide relief. End gables would project from buildings a distance of up to three feet and would be further accented with wooden corbels (wooden supports between the roof structure and wall). A number of reveals would be included into larger flat expanses of wall area to provide additional relief. Windows are proposed to be accented 4 PAGE OF with bands of complementary colored stucco. Building entrances would be demarcated by gable-topped entry features. Inset patios would be constructed for a majority of the dwelling units. Third floor units would have open patios; first and second floor patios would be covered from the unit above. Exterior colors are proposed to include a range of warm earth tones, such as beiges, tans and taupes. Accent colors would include blues for use on guard railings. Window and door frames would be white. The highest point of the roof is will be approximately 40 feet. Landscaping, Recreation and Walls Major landscaping features would include: • A formal landscape treatment along the project's Dougherty Road frontage to match the streetscape of Arroyo Vista project to the north. Canopy type deciduous trees would be used, such as Pistache or Raywood Ash trees, along with foundation shrubs and ground cover. • Intensive landscaping near the main entrance off of Dougherty Road and adjacent to the, to consist of a mix of accent trees with shrubs. Accent plantings of color annuals and turf will be used to provide an enhanced main entry theme • A landscape screen adjacent to the noise barrier wall along the southerly property line. Screen elements are proposed to consist of tall, upright columnar- type trees, such as cedar, redwood and Canary Island Pine. Vines would also be planted to assist in screening the wall. • Treatment adjacent to the Iron Horse Trail would include columnar evergreen trees interspersed with accent trees to provide filtered vies of the trail. • Landscaping would also be planted within the parking lot within planter islands and the main driveway This would include a mix of canopy type trees for shading as well as to accent the ends of buildings. • Landscaping would be installed adjacent to the main buildings and within building courtyard areas. The acoustic report prepared for the project has required the construction of a 12-foot tall noise barrier wall to be placed along the southerly property line. This will be a precast concrete wall to be covered with fast-growing vines and trees. Six and one-half( 6.5) foot 5 PAGE 0� tall patio walls have also been required for dwellings fronting Dougherty Road. These are proposed to be built of stucco to match the main building. Finally, a six foot wrought iron fence is proposed along the northerly property line, to separate the proposed project from the future Iron Horse Trail. This will be constructed of an open wrought iron material to allow views between the proposed housing development and the trail. Recreational amenities are proposed to include a main recreational building near the site entrance, which the applicant states will include a large screen television, weight room, pool/spa and other amenities for use by residents. This building will also house leasing and complex management functions. Other recreational facilities are proposed to include a tot lot near the rear of the complex. Each ground floor dwelling unit would also have a private yard area separated from common walkways by a low hedge. Upper floor areas would have private balconies. Parking and Access The main site entrance would consist of a 36-foot wide drive approach intersecting Dougherty Road turning immediately to the south and into the project. An electronic gate would be limit access into the site to residents and visitors through use of a key pad device. Prospective tenants could park in a separate lot in front of the gated entrance. A new traffic signal would be constructed at the future intersection of Dougherty Road and the project driveway, to be partially funded by the project builder. Working with the Police and Fire Departments, the applicant has planned emergency access points on the southerly side of the site, linking with Sierra Court, and at the rear of the project, linking with an existing service road paralleling Alamo Creek. The emergency access at Sierra Court will be gated, but would allow full access by emergency vehicles and would also allow exiting of the site by residents actuated by a key pad or similar mechanism. Four hundred and twenty (420) parking spaces would be provided, with one space located within a garage and one uncovered space per unit. Approximately one quarter of the parking spaces would be for compact vehicles. Environmental Review A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project, which focuses on land use compatibility, hazards, noise, traffic, and schools in addition to all other items normally considered in a Negative Declaration. A number of measures have been included within the document to ensure that identified environmental impacts can be mitigated to levels of 6 PAGE r OF insignificance. The Mitigated Negative Declaration is presently being circulated for public review. The review period is scheduled to end October 31, 1997. A copy of the Initial Study on which the Mitigated Negative Declaration is based, is attached as Attachment 2. ANALYSIS General Plan Issues The Land Use Element contains the following polices which deal with this application: 2.1.1. Housing Availability Guiding Policy A: Encourage housing of varied types, sizes and prices to meet current and future needs of all Dublin residents; Implementing Policy B: Designates sites available for residential development in the primary planning area for medium to medium-high density where site capacity and access are suitable and where the higher density are compatible with existing residential neighborhoods nearby. 2.1.2 Neighborhood Diversity Guiding Policy A: Avoid economic segregation by city sector Implementing Policy B: Allocate medium and medium-high residential densities to development sites in all sectors of the primary planning area. The Circulation Element of the General Plan notes that Contra Costa and Alameda Counties are considering the preservation of the Southern pacific right-of-way for possible future light rail transit or as a busway. Guiding circulation polices include: A. Support preservation of the Southern Pacific right-of-way as a potential transportation corridor; B. Consider potential recreational use in conjunction with transportation use. 7 n / PAGE 1 Or The Circulation Element also notes that the railroad right-of-way should be incorporated into a jogging and bike path. The Housing Element notes that the City presently falls below production goals set for the City by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). This situation could change in the near future however, as residential projects are proposed in the east Dublin planning area. Although a large pressurized underground gas line exists near the site, there are no policies in the Safety Element which would address this application. The Noise element notes that portions of the site are subject to excessive noise generated by vehicles along Dougherty Valley Road. Mitigation will be needed to reduce exterior noise to 65 dB and interior noise to 45 dB. Staff believes that the requested General Plan designation and associated density range is appropriate for the site, give the pattern of existing land uses to the north and south, and the relatively difficult linear configuration of the site. The proposed Park Sierra project would have a density of 23.5 dwellings per acre and would comply with the upper range of the Medium-High Density Land Use category. PD Rezoning Issues Approval of the Site Development Review application is dependent on the approval of the Planned development Rezone. Staff therefore recommends a condition of approval of the Site Development Review be contingent upon the approval of the Rezoning. Site Development Review Issues Site Plan The site plan has been designed to provide as much land area buffer as possible between residential living units and industrial uses to the south. This was done by placing buildings along the northerly portion of the site with open parking to the south nearest industrial uses. Residential units are also closer to the future recreational trail. The proposed Trumark project was similarly configured. Staff believes that this is the optimum site planning solution for the property, given the layout of the site and nature of surrounding uses. A number of minor site planning issues are reviewed under the Parking discussion, below. 8 PA l OF Architecture and Design The proposed contemporary Craftsman design offers a fresh design for multi-family projects, one that has not yet been implemented in Dublin. The proposed use of heavy architectural shingles will provide a high degree of roof shadow and variation. Shingles will complement the variability of roof line offered by the multiple gables and roof overhangs. The Planning Commission has expressed concern over the exterior color palette at the September 23, 1997 workshop. The applicant has since indicated that warm earth tones would be used in lieu of the original submittal. A revised color palette will be provided on a color board at the Commission hearing. The applicant has also proposed to frame windows through the use of alternative color banding around the windows,within the base stucco. Typically, windows are framed with painted or stained wood. In this instance, the applicant believes successful window trimming can be accomplished which will also provide for minimal maintenance. Landscaping, Recreation and Walls The conceptual landscape plan allows for a range of trees, shrubs and groundcovers to be provided for the various landscaping conditions on the site. The applicant proposes to use landscape elements to screen the 12-foot noise barrier wall proposed for the southerly property line. Screening will be accomplished by planting fast-growing vines on the wall with additional buffering provided by a number of tall, columnar trees within tree wells. The project landscape architect has supplied a letter indicating that sufficiently wide planter areas can be provided adjacent to the noise wall to ensure that trees will be able to thrive in the planters, assuming normal watering and maintenance. The project streetscape adjacent to Dougherty Road will be 10 feet in width and has been planned to generally match the streetscape treatment along the Arroyo Vista frontage. Revised landscaping plans have been submitted to ensure that sufficient trees and shrubs will be planted adjacent to buildings. Such plantings were not included in original landscaping plans. The revised plans indicate that 8-10 foot planters would be provided at the ends of the buildings and additional landscaping provided in courtyards between buildings. Staff believes that a comprehensive, integrated landscaping plan has been developed, one that will provide an attractive streetscape appearance along Dougherty Road, ensure a quality entry to the project, provide for adequate buffering for potentially negative elements (noise walls), and disperse other landscape elements throughout the remainder of the site. The site plan indicates that approximately 33%of the site would be devoted to common and private open spaces and related amenities on the site. This includes both common ii 9 PAGE J OF open spaces with a minimum 10-foot dimension as well as private patios and decks. This complies with City standard. Parking and Access Plans indicate that 2.0 spaces per unit would be provided, one of which would be within a garage and the other an uncovered space. This would comply with City on-site parking requirements. Staff notes that inadequate back-up spaces for 90-degree parking have been shown on the latest site plan. Minimum City standard for back-up spaces is 25 feet, whereas 24 feet is indicated on a number of locations. Similarly,the minimum two-way drive aisle width is 24 feet and 20 feet has been indicated on the site plans. Conditions of approval have been included as part of the Site Development Review Condition of Approval to comply with City standard. An enlarged drawing of the proposed project entry at Dougherty Road is attached for Commission review. The development proposal also includes improved vehicular access from Dougherty Road to DSRSD's Turnout 1 in the southeast corner of the site. Inclusionary Housing Consistency The City of Dublin recently enacted an Ordinance requiring that all new residential development projects over 20 units ensure that a minimum of 5% of the units be affordable to households of very low, low and moderate incomes. This inclusionary requirement applies to the proposed Park Sierra project. A condition of approval would require that the project meet inclusionary standards through either providing 5% of the units to be income-restricted for a 30-year period to comply with the ordinance or that in-lieu fees be paid to the City. Conclusion Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the resolution recommending City Council approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the General Plan Amendment and the Planned Development (PD) Rezone for Shea Properties, PA 97-019. Planning Commission approval of the Site Development Review for this project is also recommended. 10 CAGE /0 OF GENERAL INFORMATION PROPERTY OWNER: Shea Properties 667 Brea Canyon Road, Suite 30 Walnut CA 91789 LOCATION: West side of Dougherty Road, south of the future Iron Horse Trail (former SP railroad tracks) (APN 941-0205- 006-10) EXITING ZONING: Planned Development GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Medium Density Residential ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: A Mitigated Negative Declaration is being prepared ATTACHMENTS Exhibit A Project Plans(site plan, building elevations, conceptual landscape plans) Exhibit B Resolution recommending approval of Mitigated Negative Declaration Exhibit C Resolution recommending approval of General Plan Amendment Exhibit D Resolution recommending approval of PD Ordinance Rezoning Exhibit E Resolution approving Site Development Review Exhibit F Draft Rezoning Ordinance Attachment 1: Site Vicinity map Attachment 2: Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Attachment 3: Public Works Standard Conditions 11 'I NAGE IL OF 2� i 74 k Z 4i J N N N � t C, Q � J i i 4 9U- o� Q� T 04 W 2 t z Z i O U / o � z D / O / O ' / J QJ QJQ QJ QqJ qJ 4J qJ qJ qJ Jg to to to to r r r m _ � n m c m H t c m >- oFrnIr►Limow o U ass® Z E m m o � c E m a t a 0 C o 0 U O 2 co QJ QJQ J J C7 C7 C� C7 0 7 eo ! W ! n a L E ,am cc Q¢ cm E m `� o E�mg "' o $ o c Y c° E w cc uo .� _ o c m ®� m ►-' > o u" p z 0 cal Y m 0 cr,� v - t C c � t ? x L z g E 5 g 3c 4 o Q W > ec o o z g o N f 2 E NLm c7 n .� m o m° r a_ � o E E c° qJ J QJ QJ QQJ J QJ J J J QJ J J J J QQJ C7 c7 C7 c7 C7 C7 C7 0 0 0 C7 C7 C7 0 0 c7 (n t!I to to to to LO 0 to o to o to to to Lo to E 8 m L C m ~ _ 0 0 m t D z m m ai o �_ m p cc e 3 c ; 1] > N 0 4 tO c H x > m' N m= 0 o rl m p c� j C O 3 C U 0 lJ 1-° d (n L 0 O Z Cl Z W ° n c o Q 0 c c E w m '2 a o n E U -� ELi r- N y o _ S a o m Y m E m s E �° m U b Zq o e z Q - a m E � c- U czn Q N 2- z 5 o E E E _ ° 2 2 H CW7 s m c E E o v 4 m c g Q m .0 nL >�- > x i < © C7 � z a_ a_ cr QJ O QJ QJQ QJQ J QJQ J J QJ O J 0 C7 In C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 (� C7 © (7 to t to Un to LO LO to LA to v u� v N N m E c :3 M W E V c m ° 2 u Z`O V N Q1 z o r� c m 9c = c m m U I!,C) i - Q hca F J OU U Q d O D U U cr m U j V) Z WCD Y a m > c 0)a g b c 7 �= L m O o0 2 cc W h W U L W � .� � d Y W o a: © z E E V It F- w w -mmJ Zc ~ Q z O w J c o t E Q Q u w e9 >-u cc c - _ z a U 4 2 0 n- a v v a s opo C. om Un ~ m Oz J �7- Cr F- Q = O W CO CO Z = O O • •• ru (U I z U w z 3 Q ,o a_ a J4 Q U a N N O U N z z O Q v , W W a o ; a Z cc C/) LL O uj J ? Q an y U �w QLU J :t Q G1 k EVERGREEN SCREEN TREE REVISIONS I BY • • CANOPY TREE - N r�r VINES ACCENT TREE ACCENT SHRUBS V l� 1 ^� Xj ACCENT TREE T all ;, � .•• ��� •, • ,,,♦ � -., ` � �•'•, a •, , � �� ,.,.�• • • i. • �• •'' • 'a ' '�\ , .,tfl li lz FOUNDATION SHRUBS CANOPY TREE 1� i Y M 1 � ACCENT (SHRUBS VINES GOUNDCOVER --PARKING LOT TREE I Hc PARKING LOT TREE 0 TURF •a° 17 may.: T yy �I • T Date: 10- 01-97 Scale: 1':8' Design Drawn: Job: Sheet Of Sheets 00£6--LU (OVO :Xd3 • OM-LZZ (OLS) :3NOHd 88Sb6 V.0 'NOlNVSV31d • gSL 311(1S '3AI8(J SN3MO L099 sa L�Iaoss '4 .IE'7 uasua «a�n� S31 OdONd SS3NIS(18 d3HS :803 sI3 a0w 'road VINHOd11VO `AiNnoo d03V4d-ld •Niiano d0 Ally sy3 a3NO3HO 8831S N8dd ,�d'v��S\NSW\Hddd dNMb2ia 31`d0 NV'1A i III I n �d nNICl1 HF) A8VNIWll3ad ,or d N l S NOIS LA 38 133HS �Q w w N M zLi M r w z m AN , 31vCC] 1 6 ° z Q J 4 j� v 7 U QO I O O O O I O ti) V) �aJ J 4d WT ti 0 i �2 O ti z U Q 0 W O ago~ m ZZ�W! Q Q Q ! m �L�� 0 1 0 R O Q zQOQe z Q Q lK V z Lf 7701 ON1017 U w z I) Q � 3 z 3 O~ — z V) z 2 W � ti k 20 � J 0 U ti m W oho ~I a � Z J U v' co ° 77dM ON1471R8 W� a 2 ti 77Y� b �i 1 � a o U z Q 0 Z � N a U v W co 4 o� w ,z N t W 2 2 W N� n, 1 1 o z z O a U U W Q i I I I I ( I Z it 1 0 o�� 0 o g p o I x i I W 11 i 2 -� W ? cliff ►� (Cam.) L'J 2 V Q W Q w_ Q l� 2 = �' ~ ti W Q V O W Q °� aC c� lU ~ J p W V J V V J 2 V~ W J Q- Ci J 3 Z 2 Q �p �. 3 W i W ? 2 p p J p a? w m 3 3 ., Q p U ti V o tY 2 W W Q p� '' W U Q W 0 ( x W I I U 0 ,� k 2 m a- Q-� Q Q O i�•Y'♦I oz Fo\\U�.,m�4.22 a ' I O I x a I a Z �I il< i _ I O'lff AM t za of I I b0"lff ANI I [ff .?1 It ^I, i I I I . NI 91ff ANI ' (A1 L '6Zf ANI � l •8f f .�1 , �0 N9) c D- 1 LG) O ty Q d 3 I I .000 Sr P M —.. l 'ZA • 1 M Z fff AN! i O'otF 80 Z'Ptf .o1 0 , 9 FEY ANI 64tf 01 M !Ia I XZ 1 T'ff ANI '� •8 , � 94ANI 8 ~ k 9 tff AM I 99 - I 1 2 1W ;7 r lop 1 J � 9ltf O-j 11i7 8 tff ANl 6 ! b Jl ' (D-, o °� M l 'ZtF ?1 6'Ff ANI M (O 9ff 11 N( — � -----J � 31 ,zl � I y I ?' f AN/ J 9 l tf it i' o i I i k� I I ( 0 I 1 O I I N rrI &WU 6'0,ff A j1 --T = o r _ 8•b'f�NI _ t l ?1 _ `-- •` �. ...� ..._ ._ .._ Mr 0 '_' -.- (/(��//� ._tea-• -... I Z I ' Q .� \ J v C`, J I I J 9'tff ANI 'ltf 3f�_ I Q J i I I I I 3 N J .• rn J U I 2 GVd y • ' I S dd L'Zbf .1 ` tJK X - g , ,� - 7 \ , _0 6£00�fZ: ((� u � J -r V 0 M Al 1 0 III Opp "i.tl 1►%'1 / own 0 0 0. OA FORN/Sx/m/w®RP", i POOOMPI f/�iz//!//'// yon _U U f ■I■ �w//m V -.:.:' ,�' III`LIIiIIlI(IIIi R313 I r,I.MVIM/P ;, /" r,//.� �://� /%/�l%%/i/i •�� /%%� ,%/r ////• :jam 'foil ., CiCt- - _._.`` o, --- U :�. .�. ��! !■fi r%.� . ��it �"_�`OM :w �.,►C.-.....»�. �. fir.. _� //,/. ///// AS 0,AFAI OF-IM 0 W, I Wd.V IN r =1 IIIIII IIIIIIIi�� ill MINNPoll or, 4 On/p (Illllll{IIli{{{{ll� - _- 111111111i1111111 !I/I///III/I//� •� •.//// ///IA.'O/I ��■ .� _,.IIII■I■Ii1 ■.�, Illlli:!il I II I II I II A V MAY 21 9 1997 WALNUT, CA 10 ■ '�9l!"9.�fY�YHHy j, I. E1111111HH11111IN111ii . I � t i f (t �jlr / I~ � i l I 1 t f J T1\J ♦ t1 i a r � \ A J\/j r DA C J J N r Y , [�jjj i I ! -LIP OF GUTTER (TYP,) FACE OF CURB (TYP.) B L D G .; 2 --- � � ,- -BACK OF CURB r T 1P � -- I y ti A•i FI( c Ci icicciclr4 i I ; 00 kn d' d� O N? Z 0 20 40 60 tom- r, z c4 ` d N Lli IN FEET a- `t a � 1 inch = 20 ft. vo Q t,,1 �- 0 il�I �w r` ? r� / O_ Qr'1 (h O h. o Z v 00 - --------- FUTURE SCAFLETT DRIVE N \ "-1 Q Z Cr w 0 ZJ � Q C) M z W Z � F— W C) Ca Cr =OCr Q Q W M w a. Q Q 'Q Q � Z W Cl) � D QLL 0 t 1. U V) 0 W lai Lo �! N Y' a 0 SHEET NO. 1� 3F 1 SHEETS 1118 NO. 971033 RESOLUTION NO. 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR PA 97-019, PARK SIERRA APARTMENT PROJECT, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, PD REZONING AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW WHEREAS, Shea Properties has submitted applications to the City of Dublin requesting approval of a General Plan Amendment, Planned Development Rezoning and Site Development Review to allow the construction of 209 apartment units with parking, landscaping, recreational facilities and other associated improvements in a PD Zoning District, generally located on the west side of Dougherty Road at the former Southern Pacific Railroad tracks; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with State guidelines and City environmental regulations require that certain projects be reviewed for potential environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared; and WHEREAS, an Initial Study was conducted for this project with the finding that with the incorporation of mitigation measures into the proposed project, there would be no significant effects on the environment; and WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for this application and is on file in the Dublin Planning Department; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did review and use their independent judgment to consider the Mitigate Negative Declaration at a public hearing held on October 14, 1997; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said hearing was given in all respects as required by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby find that: A. The Park Sierra Apartment project application will not have a significant effect on the environment with the application of identified mitigation measures, based on a review of the Initial Study and public testimony. EXHtar ` PA8E Or B. The Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with State and local environmental laws and guideline regulations. C. The Mitigated Negative Declaration is complete and adequate. NOW,THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby recommend City Council adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for PA 97-019, Park Sierra Apartment Project. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 14th day of October, 1997. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Planning Commission Chairperson ATTEST: Community Development Director 2 PACE OF RESOLUTION NO. 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR PA 97-019, PARK SIERRA APARTMENT PROJECT, SHEA PROPERTIES WHEREAS, Shea Properties has submitted a request to the City of Dublin to amend the Land Use Map of the General Plan, changing the land use designation from "Medium Density Residential" to "Medium-High Density Residential" for an 8.9 acre site generally located on the west side of Dougherty Road at the former Southern Pacific Railroad tracks; and WHEREAS, the Medium-High Density Residential land use category permits apartments, condominiums and higher intensity housing at ranges between 14.1 and 25.0 dwellings per acre; and WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for this application and is on file in the Dublin Planning Department and has been recommended for City Council adoption; and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing on the General Plan Amendment request on October 14, 1997; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and use their independent judgment and considered all said reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby find that: A. Proper environmental documentation has been prepared on the proposed General Plan Amendment in accord with the California Environmental Quality Act. B. The proposed change of land use designation for the site is consistent with all other goals, policies and implementing programs set forth in the Dublin General Plan. EXHIBIT C PAGE....,OF C. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not have a substantial adverse affect on health or safety or be substantially detrimental to the public welfare or be injurious to property or public improvement. NOW,THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby recommend City Council approval of a General Plan Amendment, changing the land use designation for property generally described as APN 941-0205-006-10 from "Medium Density Residential" to "Medium-High Density Residential," as indicated on Exhibit 1, incorporated by reference into this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 14th day of October, 1997. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Planning Commission Chairperson ATTEST: Community Development Director 2 PAGE OF RESOLUTION NO. 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AND ESTABLISHING FINDINGS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) REZONING CONCERNING PA 97-019, PARK SIERRA APARTMENT PROJECT, SHEA PROPERTIES WHEREAS, Shea Properties has requested approval of a Planned Development Rezoning to establish General Provisions and Development Regulations for a residential development consisting of 209 apartment units on approximately 8.9 acres of land generally located on the west side of Dougherty Road at the former Southern Pacific Railroad tracks (APN 941-0205- 006-10); and WHEREAS, a completed application for a Planned Development Rezoning is available and on file in the Dublin Planning Department; and WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project with the finding that with the implementation of mitigation measures contained in the Initial Study, there will be no significant environmental impacts; and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing on said application on October 14, 1997; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the Planning Commission approve the Planned Development Rezone subject to conditions prepared by Staff; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and use their independent judgment and considered all said reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby make the following findings and determinations regarding said proposed Planned Development Rezone: EXHIBIT D PAui. I ur 1. The Planned Development rezone, as conditioned, is consistent with the general provisions, intent and purpose of the PD District Overlay Zone of the Zoning Ordinance and the General Plan. The Planned Development Zone will be appropriate for the subject property in terms of providing General Provisions which set forth the purpose, applicable provisions of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance, range of permitted and conditionally permitted uses and Development Standards, which will be compatible with existing commercial, industrial and residential uses in the immediate vicinity, and will enhance development of the general area; and 2. The Planned Development Rezoning will not have a substantial adverse effect on health or safety or be substantially detrimental to the public welfare or be injurious to property or public improvement as all applicable regulations will be met; and 3. The Planned Development Rezoning will not overburden public services or facilities as all agencies have commented that public services are available; and 4. The Planned Development Rezoning will be consistent with the policies of the Dublin General Plan designation of Medium-High Density Residential since the project would allow development within the density range allowed by this General Plan land use category; and 5. The Planned Development rezoning will create an attractive, efficient and safe environment though Conditions of Approval; and 6. The Planned Development Rezoning will benefit the public necessity, convenience and general welfare and is in conformance with applicable provisions of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance; and 7. The Planned Development Rezoning will be compatible with and enhance the general development of the area because it will be developed pursuant to Conditions of Approval and site development review; and 8. The Planned Development Rezoning will provide an environment that encourages the efficient use of common areas as well as resources. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby recommend City Council approval of a Planned Development Rezoning, including the following General Provisions and Development Standards for PA 97- 019, Park Sierra Apartments, which constitute regulations for the use and improvements of an 8.9 acre parcel generally described as APN 941-0205-006-10. 2 PAGE 0f GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS GENERAL PROVISIONS A. Purpose This approval is for a Planned Development(PD) District for PA 97-019, Park Sierra Apartments. This PD District Rezone includes a Land Use and Development Plan, which is represented by materials labeled Exhibit A, stamped "approved" and on file in the Dublin Planning Department, which includes a Site Plan and Elevations prepared by Thomas P. Cox, Architect, dated Received October 3, 1997, and a Conceptual Landscape Plan prepared by Don Rose and Associates dated received October 3, 1997, and a Preliminary Grading and Utility Plan, prepared by Ruggeri-Jensen and Associates, dated received October 3, 1997. The PD District allows the flexibility needed to encourage innovative development while ensuring that the goals, policies and action programs of the General Plan are implemented. B. Dublin Zoning Ordinance-Applicable Requirements Unless as specifically modified by the provisions of the PD District rezone, all applicable and general requirements and procedures of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance shall apply to the PD Multiple Family Residential designated lands in the PD District. C. General Provisions and Development Standards 1. Intent: This Planned Development is to be established to provide for and regulate the development of the Park Sierra Apartment project. Development shall be generally consistent with the Land Use Development Plan. This approval rezones 8.9 acres of land currently zoned Planned Development (PD)-Single Family to Planned Development (PD)-Multi-Family. 2. PD Multi-Family Residential Permitted Uses: The following principal uses are permitted in the PD Multi-family Family Residential District: A. Residential development limited to: 1. Apartments, condominiums and townhouses 2. Private recreational facilities associated with a multi-family development 3 PAGE Prohibited Uses: The following uses are prohibited in the PD Multi-family Residential District: 1. Field crops 2. Orchards 3. Plant Nurseries Conditional Uses: All conditional uses in the R-4 District are conditional uses in the PD Multi-family Residential District with the exception of the prohibited uses listed above, 3. Setbacks and Yards Development Standards: Development standards within the PD Multi-family District are as follows: Development Standard PD Multi-family District R-4 District Standard Building Site Per Land Use and 6,000 square feet Development Plan Yards/Setbacks Front 20 feet (may include required 20 feet noise barrier) Rear 20 feet 20 feet Side 12 feet 10 feet+ 1 foot per each 10 feet lot frontage exceeds 50 feet Building Height 40 feet 45 feet Lot Coverage Per Land Use and 40% Development Plan PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Unless otherwise stated, all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with prior to final occupancy of any building and shall be subject to Planning Department review and approval. The following codes represent those departments/agencies responsible for monitoring compliance with the Conditions of Approval: [PL] Planning, [B] Building, [PO] Police, [PW] Public Works, [ADM1 Administration/City Attorney, [PCS] Parks and Community Services, [FIN] Finance, [F] Fire, [DSR] Dublin San Ramon Services District, [CO1 Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Zone 7. 4 PAGE P GE IL Of 1. The Land Use and Development Plan is conceptual in nature. No formal amendment of this PD Rezone shall be required so long as the materials submitted for the Site development Review are in conformance with the PD Rezone. The Community Development Director shall determine conformity or non-conformity and appropriate procedures for modifying this PD Rezone (i.e., staff approval, Planning Commission approval of a Conditional Use Permit, etc.). Major modifications or revisions not found to be in substantial conformance with this PD Rezone shall require a new PD Rezone. [PL] 2. Additions to residences in the project are prohibited. [PL] 3. Prior to issuance of building permits, a General Plan Amendment shall be approved by the City Council, changing the land use designation of the site to Medium-High Density Residential. [PL] PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 14th day of October, 1997. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Planning Commission Chairperson ATTEST: Community Development Director 5 PAGE" '1D O RESOLUTION NO. 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR PA 97-019, PARK SIERRA APARTMENT PROJECT, SHEA PROPERTIES WHEREAS, Shea Properties has requested approval of a Site Development Review consisting of 209 apartment units and related improvements on approximately 8.9 acres of land generally located on the west side of Dougherty Road at the former Southern Pacific Railroad tracks (APN 941-0205-006-10); and WHEREAS, a completed application for Site Development Review is available and on file in the Dublin Planning Department; and WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project with the finding that with the implementation of mitigation measures contained in the Initial Study, there will be no significant environmental impacts; and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing on said application on October 14, 1997; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the Planning Commission approve the Planned Development Rezone subject to conditions prepared by Staff; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and use their independent judgment and considered all said reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth. NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby make the following findings and determinations regarding said proposed Site Development Review : 1. Approval of this application(PA 97-019) is consistent with the intent and purpose of applicable provisions of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. EXHIBIT E PAGE I of 2. The approval of this application, as conditioned, will comply with the policies of the General Plan as proposed for amendment to the Medium-High Density Residential, since it will allow development within the density range allowed under the Medium-High Density Residential Land Use Designation of the General Plan and will not become effective until after the General Plan Amendment is effective. 3. The approval of this application, as conditioned, will comply with the proposed Planned Development Regulations for the project, which will allow for residential development at this location. 4. The approval of this application, as conditioned, is consistent with the design review requirements contained in the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. 5. The approval of this application, as conditioned, is in conformance with regional transportation and growth management plans. 6. The approval of this application, as conditioned, is in the best interests of the public health, safety and general welfare as the development is consistent with all laws and ordinances of the City of Dublin and implements the General Plan, as proposed for amendment. 7. The proposed site development, including site layout, vehicular access, circulation and parking, setbacks, height, walls, public safety and similar elements, as conditioned, has been designed to provide a desirable environment for the development. 8. Architectural considerations, including the character, scale and quality of the design, the architectural relationship with the site and other buildings have been incorporated into the project and as Conditions of Approval in order to ensure compatibility of this development with the development's design concept and character of surrounding uses. 9. Landscape considerations, including the location, type, size and coverage of plant materials and similar elements have been considered to ensure visual relief and screening of potentially negative elements. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission hereby conditionally approves a Site Development Review application as generally depicted by materials labeled Exhibit A, stamped "approved" and on file in the Dublin Planning Department, which includes a Site Plan and Elevations prepared by Thomas P. Cox, Architect, dated Received October 3, 1997, and a Conceptual Landscape Plan prepared by Don Rose and Associates dated received October 3, 1997, and a Preliminary Grading and Utility Plan, prepared by Ruggeri-Jensen and Associates, dated received October 3, 1997, for PA 97-019, Park Sierra Apartments, which constitute regulations for the use and improvements of an 8.9 acre parcel 2 PAGE �: vY generally described as APN 941-0205-006-10. The following conditions of approval are attached to this approval: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Unless otherwise stated, all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with prior to final occupancy of any building and shall be subject to Planning Department review and approval. The following codes represent those departments/agencies responsible for monitoring compliance with the Conditions of Approval: [PL] Planning, [B] Building, [PO] Police, [PW] Public Works, [ADM] Administration/City Attorney, [FIN] Finance, [PCS] Parks and Community Services, [F] Fire, [DSR] Dublin San Ramon Services District, [CO] Alameda County Flood Control and water Conservation District Zone 7. The following abbreviations apply in the "When Required"column: BP/Building Permit; IMPROV/Engineering Improvement plans; On-going/Throughout project; GR/Grading Permit; CON/Construction, OCC/Occupancy No. Condition Text Respon. When Agency(s) Required General Conditions 1 Approval of the Site Development Review is valid for one PL On-going (1)year, until October 14, 1997. If construction has not commenced by that time, this approval shall be null and void. The approval period may be extended for six (6) additional months by submitting a written request for extension prior to the expiration date to the Community Development Director. Any extension will be based on a determination that the conditions of approval remain adequate to assure that the stated findings of approval will continue to be met. 2 The Developer shall comply with all applicable City of PL On-going Dublin Development Site Review Standard Conditions and City of Dublin Residential Security requirements. 3 The Developer/developer shall sign and submit a copy of PL OCC the City of Dublin Standard Plan, Material and Maintenance Agreement prior to the occupancy of any unit. 3 PAGE n PAGE" of 4 All transformers,irrigation control boxes,backflow PL BP devices,valves,and similar appurtenances shall be enclosed in vaults,fencing and/or painted out or landscaped,as determined acceptable by the Community Development Director.The location of these items shall be indicated on the fmal landscape plans 5 The Developer shall comply with all mitigation measures PL On-going adopted as part of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project as well as the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan. 6 The Developer shall comply with all applicable Fire PL On-going Department,Public Works Department,Police Service, Alameda County Flood Control District 7 and Dublin San Ramon Services District requirements.Prior to the issuance of building permits or the installation of any improvements related to this project,the Developer shall supply written statements from each such agency or department to the Planning Department,indicating that all applicable conditions required have or will be met. 7 The developer shall defend,indemnify and hold harmless PL On-going the City of Dublin and its agents,officers and employees from any claim,action,or proceeding to attack,set aside, void,annul,an approval of the City of Dublin or its advisory agency,appeal board,Planning Commission, City Council,Community Development Director,Zoning Administrator,or any other department,committee or agency of the City concerning the proposed development; provided,however,that the developer's duty to defend, indemnify,hold harmless shall be subject to the City's promptly notifying the permittee of any claim,action or proceeding and the City's full action or proceedings. 8 This permit shall be revocable for cause in accordance PL On-going with applicable sections of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. Any violation of the term or conditions of this Site Development Review may be subject to the issuance of a citation. 9 The developer shall provide all units with cable TV and PL BP telephone connections. 4 PAGE Lk OF 10 To apply for building permits,the Developer shall submit B BP six(6)sets of construction plans to the Building Department for plan check.Each set of plans shall have attached an annotated copy of these Conditions of Approval.The notations shall clearly indicate how all Conditions of Approval will or have been complied with. Construction plans will not be accepted without the annotated resolutions attached to each set of plans.The Developer will be responsible for obtaining the approvals of all participating non-City agencies prior to the issuance of building permits. 11 If occupancy is requested to occur in phases,then all PL BP physical improvements within each phase shall be required to be completed prior to the occupancy of units within that phase,except for items specifically excluded in an approved Phased Occupancy Plan,or minor hand work items,approved by the Planning Department.A Phased Occupancy Plan shall be submitted for Community Development Director review and approval a minimum of 45 days prior to the request for occupancy of any unit covered by said Phased Occupancy Plan.Any phasing shall provide for adequate vehicular access to all buildings in each phase and shall substantially conform with intent and approval of the Site Development Review approval.No individual building shall be occupied until the adjoining area is finished,safe,accessible,provided with all reasonably expected services and amenities and separated from remaining construction activity.Subject to the approval of the Community Development Director, the completion of landscaping may be deferred due to inclement weather with the posting of a bond for the value of the deferred landscaping and associated improvements. 5 PA^E C OF_ 12 The Developer shall have a special rental/lease disclosure PL BP with the wording approved by the Planning Department. The disclosure form will be used as a required disclosure for future tenants indicating the presence of possible hazards.The disclosure statement shall describe: A.The close proximity of industrial uses immediately south of the site and loud noises may be generated during early morning and late evening hours related to industrial operations; B.The industrial area may generate dust and odors; C.The presence of a high pressure underground petroleum pipeline north of the site; D.Phased development with continued construction activity until project completion may cause noise and dust. E.Presence of a water treatment facility east of the site. 13 A final lighting plan shall be submitted to the City for PL,PO,PW BP approval,demonstrating that the entire area will be adequately illuminated.Photometrics and lighting plans for the site shall be submitted to the Planning and Police Departments for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits, 14 All soundwalls and other noise attenuation measures,as PL,B OCC identified in the Edward L.Pack Report,shall be in place 15 All wall and fence heights shall be designed to ensure PW BP clear vision at all street intersections to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works 6 PAGE OF 16 Prior to the final occupancy of any unit,the unit shall meet minimum health,design and safety standards, including but not limited to the following: A.The project entrance and all interior roadways and PW OCC driveways shall be complete to allow for safe traffic movement to and from residential units. B.All traffic signing and striping shall be in place. PW OCC C.All street lights and interior access and parking area PW OCC lighting shall be energized and functioning.[PW] D.All repairs to street,curb,gutter and sidewalk which PW OCC may create a hazard shall be required or any non-hazard repair shall be complete or bonded for.[PW] E.Back-lit illuminated house address numbers shall be PL.B OCC provided.[PL,F] F.Final site grading shall be approved by the Building B.PW OCC Department.[B] G.All sewer clean-outs,water meter boxes and other PW,B ()CC utility boxes shall be set to grade,to the approval of the Director of Public Works.[PW] H.Dwellings shall have received all necessary B,F OCC inspections and have final approval by the Building Department to allow occupancy.[B] I.All fire hydrants in streets providing access to the PW,F OCC homes shall be operable to Public Works and Fire Department satisfaction.[PW,F] J.All mail-box units shall be located at back of curb. B,PL OCC K.Exterior lighting shall be provided for stairwells and B,PL OCC dwelling entrances and shall be of a type and placement so as not to cause glare on to adjoining properties or the Iron Horse Trail.[B,PL] L.Lighting used after daylight hours shall be adequate to B,PL,P OCC provide for security needs. 7 a PAGE U OF 17 The provisions of the City's Inclusionary House PL BP Ordinance shall be satisfied.A written statement shall be provided to the Planning Department prior to issuance of building permits,indicating the methods to be used to comply with the Ordinance.If fees are to be paid,they shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits. 18 Construction of the proposed project is contingent on PL GR approval of a General Plan Amendment on the site to "Medium-High Density Residential"and approval of a PD Planned Development Rezone. 19 Automatic garage door openers shall be provided for all PL,B OCC garage units and shall be of a"roll up"type.Garage doors shall not intrude into public rights-of-way or parking areas. Fees 20 Prior to the issuance of building permits,the Developer PL,B,PW BP shall comply with and/or pay all applicable connection fees and development fees(plus annual increases)in effect at the time of building permit issuance.This includes but is not limited to traffic impact fees,regional traffic impact fees,inclusionary housing requirements and building permit fees.The traffic fee for the project is estimated to be$929,853,based on the project traffic study dated July 10,1997. 21 The developer shall pay a Public Facility Fee in the B BP amounts and times specified by Resolution No.32-96, plus any annual increases.,or as may be amended by future resolutions. 22 Prior to issuance of building permits,the Developer shall B BP pay fees as required in the agreement between the Shea Properties and Dublin Unified School District to mitigate all impacts to the District as a result of this project. 23 Prior to the issuance by the City of any building permit, DSR BP all utility connection fees,plan checking fees,inspection fees,permit fees and fees associated with a wastewater discharge permit shall be paid to DSRSD in accord with the rates and schedules established in the DSRSD Code. No sewer line or water line 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 referenced in this condition have been satisfied. 8 PAGE 0- OF— Public Works:Engineering improvements noted below shall be constructed prior to occupancy of any unit, unless an exception is granted by the City Engineer 24 The Developer shall provide a dedicated 12'right turn PW BP lane and a 5'bike lane with a minimum dimension of 200 feet and a 90'transition to the entrance road off southbound Dougherty Road.To access the project development from northbound lanes on Dougherty Road, the Developer shall provide at least 200 feet of 12'wide left turn lane storage and a 120'transition.All lane transitions shall be designed to a maximum design speed of 55 miles per hour.Preliminary and final designs shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. 25 One secure bicycle storage facility shall be provided at PW OCC ground level for each building.The location,number and type of storage equipment shall be approved by the Community Development Director and City Engineer. 26 The project shall provide for direct access for pedestrians PW,PL OCC, and bicyclists from the site to Alamo Creek by concrete walk and gate.The new walk and gate shall be coordinated with the Alamo Creek path improvement project and shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. 27 Layout and design of the project parking striping,drive PW GR aisles and sidewalks of the site shall be configured to maximize safety,circulation,convenience and sight distance per City of Dublin standards.Detailed, dimensioned plans shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading plans. 28 Adequate access and turnaround for fire and other PW,F GR emergency vehicles shall be provided per the Fire department.Internal streets and drive aisles shall be designed for fire and other emergency vehicles to conveniently pass through and have access to all buildings.Layout and design of internal roadways and drive aisles shall be approved by the Fire Department and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. 29 Security gates shall be constructed on the private section PW OCC of the entrance drive to provide adequate storage for incoming vehicles without queuing onto the public section of the entrance road. 9 q PAGE!OF_ _ 30 The Developer shall dedicate and improve to City PW BP standards a minimum 20' wide maintenance/emergency vehicle access from the existing east top of bank of Alamo Creek drainage channel per Zone 7 and Fire Department standards. A "vee" ditch shall be provided along the east side of the access area to collect and transport surface drainage to an inlet and into the creek. 31 The Developer shall dedicate to the City of Dublin a PW GR minimum 175' long by 28' wide street extension of Scarlett Drive from Dougherty Road that will provide adequate access to the site and accommodate potential joint use with the existing development to the north. The layout and design of street improvements shall align with future Scarlett Drive extension to the east and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to street dedication and grading permit issuance. The Developer shall provide a layout plan of the ultimate design of the intersection. 32 No parking shall be allowed along both sides of PW OCC Dougherty Road and the public entrance road to the site. The Developer shall prepare a detailed signage plan of improved portions of Dougherty Road for review and approval of the City Engineer. 33 The Developer shall widen Dougherty Road for a right PW OCC turn lane and left turn pocket into the project. The applicant shall construct a roadway shoulder along the easterly side of Dougherty Road from the entrance to Camp Parks to Houston Place. These improvements shall extend to the existing eastern right-of-way line. They shall be constructed as part of this project and shall be approved by the City Engineer. In addition, the northbound lanes of Dougherty Road shall be overlaid with asphalt concrete. Any additional ultimate improvement shall be subject to offset credits to the Traffic Impact Fee of the cost of those fees, subject to the approval of the Public Works Director. 10 PAGE GF 34 The Developer shall install a signal for traffic control into PW OCC and out of the project site.The design and installation of the signal and shall be the responsibility of the Developer and is subject to approval of and acceptance by the City Engineer.One-third of the cost of the installation shall be the responsibility of the developer and two-thirds will be a fee credit,not to exceed the cost of traffic impact fees. 35 The developer shall improve and install a 20'wide PW OCC roadway and dedicate a 22'private and emergency vehicle access easement from Sierra Court into the project site. Street improvements shall be designed to City standards and include curb and gutter.Access shall be restricted by means of an electronic-sensored gate or alternative gate approved by the Fire department and Public Works Director.The gate shall allow residents to exit the site with emergency vehicles capable of entering and exiting the site.The developer shall provide all necessary rights and agreements to secure this easement from any and all adjacent property owners and submit such easement to the City for approval prior to issuance of a building permit. 36 The developer shall reconstruct the structural section of PW OCC the previous railroad crossing of Dougherty Road located at the project frontage to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. 37 The access driveway for the DSRSD facility along PW OCC Dougherty Road shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 38 The developer shall construct pedestrian railing to current PW OCC code standards on both sides of the northernmost existing Alamo Creek bridge. 39 The developer shall dedicate required creek right-of-way PW GR to Zone 7. 40 Overall drainage patterns shall not be changed by the PW GR construction of this project.Final pipe sizes,slopes, depths and similar shall be based on final design calculations and shall be subject to approval of the City Engineer. 11 PAGE 31 OF 41 The developer shall submit to the City Engineer for PW GR review of a drainage study to determine the existing capacity of the existing drainage facilities in Dougherty Road,proposed system and possible mitigation measures for downstream facilities as a result of the increase in runoff.The developer shall comply with all mitigation measures determined by the City Engineer to be required to correct any deficiencies noted in the approved study. 42 The developer shall obtain required permits from PW GR Alameda County Zone 7 and the California Department of Fish and Game to discharge and construct drainage improvements within the creek area. 43 The drainage swale along the northerly property line shall PW GR be designed and constructed by the developer to drain the bikepath area. 44 The Developer shall secure all utilities,including but not PW BP limited to domestic fresh water,electricity,phone,cable television and other required utility services as may be necessary to provide for the proper clean,and safe functioning of the development site,into the site subject to the requirements and specifications of he agency having jurisdiction over the respective utilities. 45 The Developer shall dedicate a 25'wide Public Services PW BP Easement and an Emergency Vehicle Easement across the property. 46 The Developer shall conform with all City Standard PW On-going Conditions of Approval,revised September,1997, attached. Public Safety 47 DSRSD standard steamer(1-4-1/2"and 1-2-1/2"outlet) F BP fire hydrants are required.Fire hydrant locations shall be marked in the filed by installing"blue dot"markers adjacent to the hydrant,6"off-center from the middle of the street. 48 Access to open spaces and fire trails shall be provided F BP which may be obstructed by new development. 49 Fire apparatus roadways shall extend within 150-ft.of the F On-going most remote exterior wall of any building. 12 PAGE OF 50 Fire apparatus roadways must have a minimum F OCC unobstructed width of 20 feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of at least 13 feet,6 inches.Roadways under 36 feet in width shall be posted with signs and shall have red curbs painted with labels on one side;roadways under 28 feet in width shall be posted with signs and shall have red curbs painted with labels on both sides of the street as follows:"NO STOPPING FIRE LANE-CVC 22500.1." 51 Fire apparatus roadways shall be capable of supporting F BP the imposed weight of fire apparatus and must be provided with an all weather driving surface.Only paved surfaces are considered all weather driving surfaces. 52 Maximum grade for fire apparatus roadway is 20%. F BP Grooved concrete or rough asphalt shall be provided for grades over 15%. 53 Fire apparatus roadways in excess of 150 in length shall F BP make provision for approved apparatus turn around. 54 Fire apparatus roadways must be installed and fire F BP hydrants in service prior to the commencement of combustible framing.Prior to commencement of framing, the Fire Department shall be contacted to schedule an inspection of roadways and hydrants. 55 A weed abatement program shall be provided before, F On-going during and after construction for vegetation within 10 feet from combustible construction and 30 feet from street and property lines. 56 Temporary access roads at construction sites may be F On-going permitted in accord with Article 87 UFC 1994;however, permission for temporary access roads must be by Fire Department permit. 57 Prior to issuance of a building permit,a full set of F BP building plans must be submitted to the Fire Department, Fire Prevention Bureau,for review and approval. 13 PAGE) OF 58 An inventory statement(HMIS)for any and all hazardous F GR materials,including Material Safety Data Sheets,shall be supplied to the Fire Department,Fire Prevention Division,for approval of process and storage.Additional Contra Costa County and Alameda County Environmental Health Agency requirements,including a business emergency plan and hazardous materials management plan shall be required. 59 All construction equipment,machinery and devices with F On-going internal combustion engines shall be equipped with approved spark arrestors while operating in the project area.This condition shall be added to construction specifications. 60 Approved building numbers and/or addresses shall be F OCC placed on new buildings.Addresses shall be plainly visible and legible from the street or fronting property. Said numbers shall contrast with their background. 61 Approved spark arrestors shall be installed on each F BP chimney,flue/vent used for fireplaces and heating appliances in which solid or liquid fuel is used.This condition shall be added to construction specifications. 62 Approved smoke detectors shall be installed per current F BP UBC standards.This condition shall be added to construction specifications. 63 Any and all gates across Fire Department accessways F OCC shall have a minimum of 12 foot clear,unobstructed linear width and a clear vertical height of 13 feet,6 inches.All locking devices shall provide for Fire Department emergency access.Gate plans shall be approved by the Fire Prevention Division prior to construction. 64 All driveway access shall meet Fire department standards F OCC for distance,weight loads,grades and vertical clearance. 65 For buildings 35 feet and over in height above natural F BP grade,the required access roadway shall be a minimum of 26 feet in width and shall be positioned parallel to at least one entire side of the building and shall be located with a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 25 feet from the building 66 Adjacent to fire hydrants,access roadways shall be a F BP minimum of 28 feet in width at least 20 feet in both directions from the fire hydrant. 14 PRGE? OF 67 An approved automatic fire sprinkler system shall be F BP installed throughout. Sprinkler systems serving more than 100 heads shall be monitored by an approved central station, U.L. listed and certified for fire alarms monitoring. A copy of the U.L. listing must be provided to the Fire Department. Sprinkler plans, specifications and calculations shall be submitted to the Fire Department prior to installation. A separate review fee will be collected for this purpose. 68 Prior to installation, plans and specifications for the F BP underground fire service line shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval. 69 Prior to the installation of the ceiling or any other F CON concealment of overhead piping, the Fire Department shall be contacted for an inspection. 70 The sprinkler system shall incorporate a landscape F BP irrigation control system. 71 Final acceptance of the fire sprinkler system will be F OCC contingent on a main drain test at the time of final occupancy to verify adequate flow and pressure. Water supply deficiencies must be corrected by the contractor prior to final acceptance. 72 Welded pipe fittings are subject to field inspection prior F CON to installation. 73 If CVPC/polybutelene pipe is to be used, contact the Fire F BP Department for additional requirements. 74 A Knox Box key lock system is required for this building. F BP 75 Three emergency access points (gates) shall be provided F BP within the fence/wall along the northerly side of the project. The precise locations shall be approved by the Fire department. DSRSD 75 Prior to the issuance of building permits, complete DSR BP improvements shall be submitted to DSRSD confirming with the requirements of the DSRSD Code, "Standard Procedures, Specifications and Drawings for Design and Installation of Water and Wastewater Facilities," all applicable DSRSD Master Plans and DSRSD policies. 15 PACE r 76 All mains shall be sized to provide sufficient capacity to DSR BP accommodate future flow demands in addition to each development project's demand.Layout and sizing of mains shall be in accord with DSRSD utility master planning. 77 Sewers shall be designed to operate by gravity flow to DSR BP DSRSD's existing sanitary sewer system.Pumping of sewage is discouraged and may be allowed under extreme circumstances following a case-by-case review with DSRSD.Any pumping station shall require specific review and approval by DSRSD of preliminary 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 another conditions within a separate agreement with the applicant for any project that requires a pumping station. 78 Domestic and fire protection waterline systems shall be DSR BP designed to be looped or interconnected to avoid dead- end sections in accord with the requirements of the DSRSD Standard Specifications and sound engineering practices. 79 DSRSD policy requires public water and sewer lines to be DSR GR located in public streets to the fullest extent possible.If unavoidable,public water or sewer easements must be established to provide for future maintenance and/or replacement. 80 Prior to approval by the City of a grading permit or a site DSR GR development permit,the locations and widths of all proposed easement dedications for water and sewer lines shall be submitted to and approved by DSRSD. 81 All easement dedications for DSRSD facilities shall be by DSR GR separate instrument irrevocably offered to DSRSD or by offer of dedication on a Final Map. 82 Prior to issuance of a building permit,all utility DSR BP connection fees,inspection fees,permit fees and fees associated with a wastewater discharge permit shall be paid to DSRSD in accord with the rates and scheduled established in the DSRSD Code. 16 PAGE r.OE 83 Prior to issuance of a building permit, all improvement DSR BP plans of DSRSD facilities shall be signed by the District Engineer. Prior to DSRSD approval, the developer shall pay all DSRSD fees, and provide an estimate of construction costs for water and sewer systems, a performance bond, a one-year maintenance bond, and a comprehensive general liability insurance policy in the amounts and forms acceptable to DSRSD. Fifteen working days are required for DSRSD approval. 84 No sewer or water line construction shall be permitted DSR GR unless the proper utility construction permit has been issued by DSRSD. A construction permit will only be issued after all other items have been satisfied. 85 The developer shall hold DSRSD, its Board of Directors, DSR On-going commissions, employees, and agents of DSRSD harmless and indemnify and defend same from any litigation, claims, or fines resulting from the construction and completion of the project. 86 Prior to issuance of sewer line and water line construction DSR GR permits, developer and District shall have finalized terms and conditions regarding an Area Wide Facilities Agreement addressing concerns and upgrades to the District's #1 Water Turn Out. 87 Completion of upgrades to Turn Out#1 shall be DSR, PL OCC completed prior to building occupancy. Zone 7 88 All Zone 7 conditions and requirements shall be adhered ZONE 7 On-going to. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 14th day of October, 1997. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Planning Commission Chairperson ATTEST: Community Development Director 17 PAGE)7 OF ORDINANCE NO. -97 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO PERMIT THE REZONING OF PROPERTY LOCATED WEST OF DOUGHERTY ROAD ALONG THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC RIGHT OF WAY (APN 941-0205-006-010) The City of Dublin does ordain as follows: Section 1 Chapter 2 of Title 8 of the Dublin Ordinance Code is hereby amended in the following iIYTiTIA16 Approximately 8.9 acres of land generally located on the west side of Dougherty Road, along the Southern Pacific Right -of -Way, east of Alamo Creek, more specifically described as Assessor's Parcel Number 941-02025-006-010, is hereby rezoned from the Planned Development Single Family Residential District (92 dwelling units) to the Planed Development Multi -family Residential District (209 dwelling units), as shown on Exhibit A (Planned Development Plan) and Exhibit C (Resolution No. -97, Approving and Establishing Findings, General Provisions and Conditions of Approval), exhibits to the staff report dated November 4, 1997, to the City Council, on file with the City of Dublin Department of Community Development, and hereby adopted as the regulations for the future use, improvement and maintenance of property within the PD District. A map of the rezoning area is shown below: CD PO PAS ek-00 M I / PA85-032 EXHIBIT PAur va GF Section 2: This ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30)days from and after its passage. Before the expiration of fifteen(15) days after its passage, it shall be published once,with the names of the Councilmembers voting for and against same, in local newspaper published in Alameda County and available in the City of Dublin. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby recommend City Council adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for PA 97-019, Park Sierra Apartment Project. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin, on this 4th day of November, 1997,by the following votes: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk 2 PACE 39 OF T y0 'fir 6 0 O Project Site L�i . STH ST. 2W..1.11.i1\l11l1...,„ ..... ,#A 8`rLA,sc L 'qeF l( V �O coq e ,„,680 680 r4 ti ,'.rF,t, 3rpq� 5 �UBtiNat Vo tN \ 2 r so n East Dublin �gtFrrer BART Srauon _' ,��i seo ��� 4 sywommis ■■ North LEGEND Not to Scale • Study Intersection Initial Study Exhibit 1 ?' Park Sierra General Plan Amendment Project Location I- City of Dublin Planning Department October 1997 PA 97-019 I DRAFT Initial Study/ Negative Declaration Project Park Sierra Apartment Project General Plan Amendment Rezoning Site Development Plan File No. PA 97-019 Lead Agency: City of Dublin October 1997 ATTACHMENT A PACE_L41 OF (WF1de�OfC; 41> Section 2: This ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days from and after its passage. Before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after its passage, it shall be published once, with the names of the Councilmembers voting for and against same, in local newspaper published in Alameda County and available in the City of Dublin. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby recommend City Council adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for PA 97-019, Park Sierra Apartment Project. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin, on this 4th day of November, 1997, by the following votes: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk 2 PAGE 39 OF T JO ' r . w � S Project Site • OSTH ST. ��Maillimmiv.\. , � B`rL�'sc c4- 0 q r680 ' F, C. SrptN NtV(7r.._.___________\\ „.,,,,::„:„,:,,,..,1,,,.::„,, aro :,:l, 5..,:i sc.,q< East Stalin t'rr,,. HART Station A / seo amml ��� 4 MINIMS, ■■ North LEGEND Not to Scale • Study Intersection Initial Study Exhibit 1 ?p.; Park Sierra General Plan Amendment Project Location rc'~ City of Dublin q Planning Department October 1997 PA 97-019 DRAFT Initial Study/ Negative Declaration Project Park Sierra Apartment Project General Plan Amendment Rezoning Site Development Plan File No. PA 97-019 Lead Agency: City of Dublin October 1997 ATTACHMENT A-- PAGE 41 OF (whiled R E"\ Table of Contents Project Location 1 Project Description 1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected 7 Determination 7 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 8 Environmental Impacts 9 Discussion of Checklist 15 L Land Use and Planning 15 II. Population and Housing 17 III. Soils and Geology 18 IV. Water 20 V. Air Quality 22 VI. Transportation/Circulation 23 VII. Biological Resources 28 VII. Energy and Mineral Resources 28 IX. Hazards 29 X. Noise 32 XI. Public Services. 34 XII. Utilities and Service Systems. 37 XIII Aesthetics. 38 XIV. Cultural Resources 39 XV. Recreation. 39 P-• XVI. Mandatory Findings of Significance 40 Summary of Mitigation Measures 41 Initial Study Preparer 46 Agencies and Organizations Consulted 46 References 46 Appendices 47 List of Exhibits Exhibit 1 Project Location 3 Exhibit 2 General Plan Amendment 4 Exhibit 3 Conceptual Site Plan 5 Exhibit 4 Noise Barrier Locations and Heights 35 PN City of Dublin Environmental Checklist/ Initial Study Project Location The project site is located on the west side of Dougherty Road,immediately south of the Southern Pacific railroad right-of-way and contains approximately 8.9 acres of land. Exhibit 1 depicts the project location. Project Description The project involves changing the General Plan land use designation from"Medium Density Residential"to"Medium-High Density Residential"for the subject property.The Medium-High Density Residential classification permits residential development in the density range of 14.1 to 25.0 dwellings per acre. The project also includes a zone change from the existing"Planned Development-Medium Density" to the"Planned Development-Medium Density-High Density"Zoning District.Site Development Review by the City of Dublin to permit the construction of 209 apartment dwellings and associated improvements is also requested. A conceptual site development plan submitted by the applicant indicate that the site would be developed with 209 apartment units.The dwellings are planned to be constructed in linear "motor court"orientation,with the buildings clustered around interior ground level parking courts and open landscapped courtyards.A total of nine 3-story buildings would be constructed, each containing a range of dwelling units in a three story configuration.Ninety(90)of the units would consist of one bedroom,one bath units,with the remainder(119 units)having two bedrooms and two baths.Differing floor plans would be offered based on the number of bedroom and bathrooms.Floor areas would range in size from 710 square feet for the smallest one bedroom unit to 1,023 square feet for the largest two bedroom unit.Units would also have a private patio or deck area,depending on the location. On-site open space and recreation facilities are proposed to consist of a main recreation building near the project entrance to include a large screen television,exercise equipment,swimming pool and other amenities.Smaller recreation areas within the central portion of the project would also be constructed,which would contain either a tot-lot or bar-b-que areas.Other landscaped,passive open space areas dispersed throughout the site.Access between the project and the Iron Horse Trail,immediately north of the site,would also be provided at Dougherty Road and at Alamo Creek. Primary vehicular access is proposed from a new drive access off of Dougherty Road.This access would be sited opposite the future extension of Scarlett Drive on the west side of Dougherty Road.The drive would provide unrestricted access into a parking area adjacent to the complex leasing office to be used by prospective tenants.A secondary egress and emergency access would be provided on the southwest side of the site,at the extension of Sierra Court.This access would be gated but available to emergency vehicles and could also be activated by project /'\ residents through a key pad or other secured system.A third emergency access would be provided at the rear of the project,along Dublin Creek,through a joint access agreement with Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District(ACFCWCD)Zone 7,to allow use of an existing Zone 7 service road. A total of 420 on-site parking spaces are proposed,encompassing both enclosed spaces within private garages as well as open parking spaces.A portion of the open parking will be designed for compact vehicles and handicap-accessible spaces will also be provided.The proposed amount of parking meets the minimum City requirement of 2.0 spaces per unit. A 12 foot tall solid barrier would be constructed along the southerly property line to assist in mitigating noise and other potential impacts from existing industrial uses immediately south of the project site.Noise barriers would also be provided along the Dougherty Road frontage,with a maximum height of 6.5 feet. The project developer would also grade the site to improve drainage and would also construct underground utility improvements on and off the site,include water,sewer,electrical,natural gas and cable television facilities.Road improvements would also be made at the project entry at Dougherty Road. Certain other improvements will also be made adjacent to Alamo Creek on the northwesterly border of the project,including a continuance of an existing maintenance road and construction of related bank protection improvements which will be specified by Zone 7.These improvements /'1 would consist of rip-rapping the creek bank and installing riparian planting. Existing earth and construction debris on the site would be removed prior to construction. Exhibit 2 shows the proposed General Plan Amendment and rezoning area and Exhibit 3 depicts a proposed conceptual development plan for the site if the General Plan Amendment and other applications are approved. P'1 Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 2 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 1 • JO y0 0 P, ¢ PAP ui ( D 0 0 Project Site # 5TH ST. \. 004,6.A.:4:):(49e.e..9, U C c o9 680 F1�c 14� e s -----------7----- ,O,t, s. 5 OV SiFR�CN \ achy e�vo 2 u' D sb East 0ublin 9 D Yzel o BART Swoon D ipiii \t.. . 4 kill North LEGEND Not to Scale • Study Intersection Initial Study Exhibit 1 Park Sierra General Plan Amendment Project Location City of Dublin Ph. )ng Department Octobe 197 PA 97-019 Arroyo Vista Proposed "Medium Density Residential" to "Medium-High Density Residential" \ ■■■■..■■■■��i`�G■■■■G■G■■■G■■■i oG .■i■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■i, e6 ..■i■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■..■■i■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■. e".■uG■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■► y� ■.■■■ii■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■►■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■i, p► ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■1■o■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ -•/ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■mumm■■■■■..immommummummummumimmommimmumm __- DSRSD Turnout 1 d ^ Go �` Sierra Business Park Exhibit 2 Proposed General Plan Amendment 1.Project description: A General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from"Medium Density Residential"to "Medium-High Density Residential(PA 97-019);a Zone Change from"Planned Development-Medium Density Residential"to'Planned Development-Medium-High Density"and Site Development Review to allow the construction of 209 apartment units and associated on-and off-site improvements. 2.Lead agency: City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin CA 94568 3.Contact person: Dennis Carrington,AICP,Senior Planner 4.Project location: Southern Pacific right-of-way,west side of Dougherty Road.APN 941-0205-006-10 5.Project sponsor: Shea Properties 6.General Plan designation: Medium Density Residential 7.Zoning: P-D(Planned Development),Medium Density Residential 8.Surrounding zoning and uses: North: Planned Development(residential),Arroyo Vista project South: M-1(Light Industrial),industrial park East: Agriculture,Dougherty Road and Camp Parks West: M-1(Light Industrial),industrial uses,Alamo Creek 9.Other public agency required approvals: The following additional approvals are required: • Building and grading permits • Encroachment permits(construction work in public right-of-way and within Alamo Creek for storm drain outfall pipe) Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 6 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,involving at least one impact that is a"potentially significant impact"as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. x Land Use/Planning x Transportation/ x Public Services Circulation x Population/Housing x Biological Resources x Utilities/Service Systems - Geotechnical - Energy/Mineral x Aesthetics Resources x Water x Hazards x Cultural Resources x Air Quality x Noise x Recreation - Mandatory Findings of Significance Determination(to be completed by Lead Agency): On the basis of this initial evaluation: _I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment and a Negative Declaration will be prepared. X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project.A Negative Declaration will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, but at least one effect 1)has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards,and 2)has been addressed by mitigation measures based on earlier analysis as described on the attached sheets,if the effect is a"potentially significant impact"or "potentially significant unless mitigated."An Environmental Impact Report is required,but must only analyze the effects that remain to be addressed. _I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects(a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards,and(b)have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR,including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed on the proposed project. Signature: Date: Printed Name: For: Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 7 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except"no impact"answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parenthesis following each question.A"no impact"answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved(e.g.the project falls outside a fault rupture zone).A"no impact"answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general factors(e.g.the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants,based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action,including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level,indirect as well as direct,and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) "Potentially Significant Impact"is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant.If there are one or more"potentially significant impact"entries when the determination is made,an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration:Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated"implies elsewhere the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from"potentially significant effect"to a"less than significant impact."The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. 5) Earlier analyses may be used where,pursuant to the tiering,program EIR,or other CEQA processes,an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D).Earlier analyses are discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts(e.g.general plans,zoning ordinances).References to a previously prepared or outside document should,where appropriate,include a reference to the page or pages where the document in substantiated.A source list should be attached and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 7) This is only a suggested form and lead agencies are free to use different forms. Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 8 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 Environmental Impacts(Note:Source of determination listed in parenthesis.See listing of sources used to determine each potential impact at the end of the checklist) Note:A full discussion of each item is found Potentially Potentially Less than No following the checklist. Significant Significant Significant Impact Unless Impact Mitigated I.Land Use and Planning.Will the project: a)Conflict with general plan designation or X zoning?(Source:1) b)Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted with jurisdiction X over the project?(Source:1) c)Be incompatible with existing land use in X the vicinity?(Source:1,8) d)Affect agricultural resources or operations (soils or farmlands or impacts from X incompatible uses)?(Source:8) e)Disrupt the physical arrangement of an established community(including low X income or a minority community)?(Source: 8) H.Population and Housing.Would the project: a)Cumulatively exceed official regional or local X population projections?(Source:1,6) b)Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly(e.g.through projects in X an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)?(Source:8) c)Displace existing housing,especially X affordable housing?(Source:8) III.Soils and Geology.Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a)Fault rupture?(Source:2) X b)Seismic ground shaking?(Source:2) X c)Seismic ground failure?(Source:2) X d)Seiche,tsunami,including liquefaction? X (Source:2) e)Landslides or mudflows?(Source:2) X f)Erosion,changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation,grading or X fill?(Source:8) g)Subsidence of land?(Source:2) X h)Expansive soils?(Source:2) X _ i)Unique geologic or physical features? X n (Source:2,8) Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 9 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 Potentially Potentially Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Unless Impact Mitigated IV.Water.Would the proposal result in: a)Changes in absorption rates,drainage patterns,or the rate and amount of surface X run-off?(Source:8) b)Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding?(Source: X FEMA map)) c)Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality(e.g. X temperature,dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? (Source:6,8) d)Changes in the amount of surface water in X any water body?(Source:6,7) e)Changes in currents or the course or direction X of water movements?(Source:7) f)Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or X withdrawals,or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability?(Source:7) g)Altered direction of rate of flow of X groundwater?(Source:7) h)Impacts to groundwater quality?(Source:7) X i)Substantial reduction on the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public X water supplies?(Source:7) V.Air Quality.Would the proposal: a)Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality X violation?(Source:1) b)Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? X (Source:9) c)Alter air movement,moisture,temperature,or X cause any change in climate?(Source:8) d)Create objectionable odors?(Source:9) X VL Transportation/Circulation.Would the proposal result in? a)Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? X (Source:3) b)Hazards to safety from design features(e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses(e.g.farm equipment)? X (Source:3) n c)Inadequate emergency access or access to X nearby uses?(Source:3,7) Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 10 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 Potentially Potentially Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Unless Impact Mitigated d)Insufficient parking capacity onsite or offsite? X (Source:1) e)Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or X bicyclists?(Source:3,7) f)Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation(e.g.bus turnouts, X bicycle racks)?(Source:1) g)Rail,waterborne or air traffic impacts? X (Source:3) VII.Biological Resources.Would the proposal result in impacts to: a)Endangered,threatened or rare species or their habitats(including but not limited to X plants,fish,insects,animals and birds)? (Source:8) b)Locally designated species(e.g.heritage X trees)? c)Locally designated natural communities(e.g. X oak forest,coastal habitat)?(Source:8) d)Wetland habitat(e.g.marsh,riparian and X vernal pool)?(Source:8) e)Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? X (Source:8) VII.Energy and Mineral Resources.Would the proposal: a)Conflict with adopted energy conservation X plans?(Source: 1,9) b)Use nonrenewable resources in a wasteful and X inefficient manner?(Source:9) c)Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future X value to the region and residents of the State?(Source:1,9) IX.Hazards.Would the proposal involve: a)A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances including but not X limited to oil,pesticides,chemicals,or radiation?(Source:5,8,9) b)Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation X plan?(Source:6,7) c)The creation of any health hazard or potential X health hazards?(Source:6,7) Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 11 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 Potentially Potentially Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Unless Impact Mitigated d)Exposure of people to existing sources of X potential health hazards?(Source:6,7) e)Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable X brush,grass or trees?(Source:7) X.Noise.Would the proposal result in: a)Increases in existing noise levels?(Source:4) X b)Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X (Source:4) XL Public Services.Would the proposal result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas? a)Fire protection?(Source:6) X b)Police protection?(Source:6) X c)Schools?(Source:7) X d)Maintenance of public facilities,including X roads?(Source:6) e)Other governmental services?(Source:6) X XII.Utilities and Service Systems.Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies,or substantial alterations in the following utilities? a)Power or natural gas?(Source:7) X b)Communication systems?(Source:7) X c)Local or regional water treatment or X distribution systems?(Source:7) d)Sewer or septic systems?(Source:7) X e)Storm water drainage?(Source:6,7) X 0 Solid waste disposal?(Source:6,7) X g)Local or regional water supplies?(Source:7) X XIII.Aesthetics.Would the proposal: a)Affect a scenic vista or view?(Source:8) X b)Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic X effect?(Source:1,8) c)Create light or glare?(Source:8) X XIV.Cultural Resources.Would the proposal: a)Disturb paleontological resources?(Source:9, X Northwest Info Center) b)Disturb archeological resources?(Source:9) X c)Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural X values?(Source:9) /'\ Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 12 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 Potentially Potentially Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Unless Impact Mitigated d)Restrict existing religious or sacred uses X within potential impact area?(Source:9) XV.Recreation.Would the proposal: a)Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational X facilities?(Source:6) b)Affect existing recreational opportunities? Source:6) X XVI.Mandatory Findings of Significance. a)Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment,substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,cause a fish or wildlife population to X drop below self-sustaining levels,threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number of or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b)Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term,to the disadvantage of long-term, X environmental goals? c)Does the project have impacts that are individually limited,but cumulatively considerable?("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a X project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects and the effects of probable future projects). d)Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects X on human beings,either directly or indirectly? Sources used to determine potential environmental impacts 1. Dublin General Plan or Zoning Ordinance 2. Preliminary geotechnical analyses prepared by Terra Search(1995)and Lowney Associates (May 1997) 3. Traffic analysis prepared by TJKM Associates(July 1997) 4. Acoustic analysis prepared by E.L.Pack and Associates(May 1997) Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 13 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 5. Level I Hazards Analysis(Engeo,June 1996)and Level II Hazards Analysis(Terranext, May 1996) 6 Communication with appropriate City of Dublin Department(s) 7. Communication with appropriate service provider or public agency with jurisdiction 8. Site visit 9. Other source XVII.Earlier Analyses Earlier analyses may be used where,pursuant to the tiering,program EIR,or other CEQA process,one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.Section 15063(c)(3)(d).In this case.a discussion should identify the flowing on attached sheets. a)Earlier analyses used.This environmental analysis is based,in part,on a previous analysis prepared and approved by the City of Dublin on this site in 1996(File PA 95 029,Trumark Homes).A copy of this previous report is available from the Dublin Planning Department,100 Civic Plaza,Dublin,during regular business hours. b)Impacts adequately addressed.Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards,and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures base don an earlier analysis. c)Mitigation measures.For effects that are"less than significant with mitigation incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which are incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site specific conditions for the project. Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 14 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 Attachment to Park Sierra Negative Declaration PA 97-019 Discussion of Checklist Legend PS: Potentially Significant PS/M: Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated LS: Less Than Significant Impact NI: No Impact I.Land Use and Planning Environmental Setting The project site consists of 8.9 acres of vacant land in the central portion of Dublin.The site was previously owned by the Southern Pacific Railroad and was historically used as a railroad-related trucking facility.Most recently,the site has been used to deposit debris from nearby road improvement projects. Immediately north and west of the site is a 50-foot wide former railroad right-of-way strip which has been dedicated to Alameda County for development of the Iron Horse Trail,a regional bicycling and hiking trail proposed to extend from Pleasanton to Contra Costa County.The trail will be operated and maintained by the East Bay Regional Parks District. North of the project site lies the Arroyo Vista housing project,an assisted housing development eN owned and managed by the Dublin Housing Authority. South of the site are existing industrial buildings and warehouses located in the Sierra Business Park.Access to these businesses is provided by Sierra Court which links with Dublin Boulevard. East of the site is Dougherty Road and Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area. To the west is Alamo Creek,a regionally significant water course and drainage facility. Project Impacts a)Conflict with general plan designation and zoning?LS.The purpose of the application is to change the General Plan from"Medium Density Residential"to"Medium-High Density Residential."A change of zone to a planned development district has also been requested to ensure consistency between site zoning and the General Plan.Several potential related impacts are addressed elsewhere in this Initial Study which relate to the proposed General Plan Amendment and future residential development which would be facilitated by an amended General Plan,including transportation and circulation,hazards,noise,public services,utilities, recreation and others. Policies contained in the current General Plan applicable to this proposal include: Land Use Element:The Land Use Element designates the site as"Medium Density Residential,"which is intended to accommodate duplex,townhouses and garden apartment developments suitable for family living.Unit types may be similar with densities ranging from 6.1 to 14 units per acre.The adjacent use immediately to the south Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 15 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 is"Business Parlc/Industrial,"which is intended to provide a campus-like setting with /'\ open plazas and landscaped pedestrian amenities to allow industrial uses and retail uses which serve businesses and residents. The"Medium-High Density Residential"designation is intended to accommodate higher densities and will require some under structure parking and will have three or more living areas The Medium-High Density designation allows residential densities from 14.1 to 25.0 dwellings per acre. The Land Use Element contains the following polices which deal with this application: 2.1.1. Housing Availability Guiding Policy A:Encourage housing of varied types,sizes and prices to meet current and future needs of all Dublin residents; Implementing Policy B:Designates sites available for residential development in the primary planning area for medium to medium-high density where site capacity and access are suitable and where the higher density are compatible with existing residential neighborhoods nearby. 2.1.2 Neighborhood Diversity Guiding Policy A:Avoid economic segregation by city sector Implementing Policy B:Allocate medium and medium-high residential densities to development sites in all sectors of the primary planning area. Circulation Element:The Circulation Element notes that Contra Costa and Alameda Counties are considering the preservation of the Southern pacific right-of-way for possible future light rail transit or as a busway. Guiding polices include: A.Support preservation of the Southern Pacific right-of-way as a potential transportation corridor; B.Consider potential recreational use in conjunction with transportation use. The Circulation Element also notes that the railroad right-of-way should be incorporated into a jogging and bike path. Housing Element,The Housing Element notes that the City presently falls below production goals set for the City by the Association of Bay Area Governments(ABAG). This situation could change in the near future however,as residential projects are proposed in the east Dublin planning area. The Housing Element also identifies possible strategies to assist in the production of new housing units,some of which require the adoption of new regulations.Three programs which could have a bearing on the pending application includes I.C.,a review of development standards to determine potential changes to reduce development costs and thereby the cost of housing.Innovative site planning and construction methods were /'• specifically mentioned as ways to achieve this.Strategy I.D recommends examining the Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 16 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 use of air rights over parking lots and other sites with a low intensity of use to permit construction of housing. Safety Element.Although a large pressurized underground gas line exists near the site, there are no policies in the Safety Element which would address this application. Noise Element.The Noise element notes that portions of the site are subject to excessive noise generated by vehicles along Dougherty Valley Road.Mitigation will be needed to reduce exterior noise to 65 dB and interior noise to 45 dB. b)Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies?LS.This Initial Study represents full California Environmental Quality Act compliance with regard to the project.The City of Dublin has adopted no other city-wide or specific environmental plans or policies which would affect this application. c)Incompatibilities with existing land use in the vicinity?PS/M.Several potential incompatibilities exist with allowing residential uses adjacent to existing industrial land uses, including noise,light and glare,truck traffic,emission of fumes and potentially hazardous materials,creation of dust,and safety and security issues.These issues are addressed in the following sections of this Initial Study:noise(Section X),light and glare(aesthetics,Section XIII),truck traffic(Section VI),fumes(Section V),potentially hazardous materials(Section IX), dust creation(air quality,Section V),safety and security(Section IX).Mitigation measures are included in each of these sections,as appropriate,to deal with expected impacts. d)Effect on agricultural operations or soils?NI.The site is a former trucking facility site and has no recent history of agricultural production.No agricultural operations exist on surrounding properties. e)Disruption of physical arrangement of an established community?NI.The project site is a remnant site from closed railroad-related operation and will be a continuance of medium and high density residential development to the north and southwest.As proposed by the applicant, future residential uses on the site will have an inward orientation to assist in minimizing potential environmental impacts. II.Population and Housing Environmental Setting The city population as of January 1,1996 was estimated by the State Department of Finance to be 26,267.Significant population growth is anticipated for the community based on planned residential growth in east Dublin,where the City has approved a specific plan calling for residential growth. According to the Association of Bay Area Governments(ABAG),the total population of Dublin is expected to increase to 35,200 by the year 2000,to 49,400 by the year 2005 and 58,900 in the year 2010. Project Impacts a)Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections?LS.The project site is relatively small in size,approximately 9 acres,and will not have an appreciable affect on the city-wide population base.Based on a person per dwelling unit factor of 2.0(taken from the Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 17 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 adopted Land Use Element),up to 418 new residents could be located on the site at full project build out. The number of new residents generated by the proposed project would fall within the parameters of anticipated population growth as outlined in the Environmental Setting section,above. b)Induce substantial growth in an area,either directly or indirectly?NI.The proposed project site is an"infill"site and is substantially surrounded by existing development.A small vacant parcel exists to the north,across the railroad tracks.This land is presently General Planned as "Medium Density Residential,"which allows residential densities between 6.01 and 14 dwellings per acre and is owned by the Dublin Housing Authority. c)Displacement of existing housing,especially affordable housing?NI.The project site is presently vacant.and no housing units would be displaced. III.Soils and Geology Environmental Setting [Note:The following section is based on preliminary geotechnical analyses of the site performed by Terra Search(August,1995)and Lowney Associates(May,1997),geotechnical consultants] The site lies within the San Ramon Valley,a short distance south of the Dougherty Hills. According to historic geologic studies in the area,the site is underlain by Holocene alluvium. California Division of Mines and Geology indicate that the site is not within an Alquist-Priolo /'� Seismic Zone(1982).The nearest active and potentially active seismic faults include the Calaveras fault,located approximately 1.4 miles to the west-southwest and an isolated segment of the Pleasanton Fault,located approximately one-quarter mile to the northwest.Other major faults in the region include the Hayward Fault and the San Andreas Fault. Site soils are characterized by loose to medium dense clayey sands and sandy gravels to depths of approximately 5 feet below existing site grade.Soils are considered to have high expansive (shrink-swell)potential.Surface fill is underlain by native alluvial soils consisting of stiff to very stiff silty clays to a depth of 5 to 12 feet.It is estimated by the geotechnical engineer that the groundwater table ranges between 15 and 25 feet in depth beneath the surface,based on variability in rainfall and other considerations. Project Impacts a)Is the site subject to fault rupture?LS.The risk of fault rupture on the site is anticipated to be low,since the nearest known active or potentially active faults lie a minimum of one quarter mile away. b)Is the site subject to ground shaking?LS.The site as well as the encompassing region is subject to ground shaking from a number of active and potentially active faults in the greater Bay Area,including the Hayward fault,San Andreas fault and Calaveras Fault.Ground shaking intensity is anticipated to be"heavy"based on a Maximum Credible seismic event of a magnitude 7.5 event on the northerly portion of the Calaveras fault as estimated by geotechnical engineers.Potential direct impacts are typically less significant on residential structures,as proposed for this project,than larger mid-and high-rise office buildings and similar structures. Potential indirect impacts of a seismic event may also include release of potentially hazardous gasses and other substances from the adjacent DSRSD Turnout No.1 and from industrial uses Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 18 Parts Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 and operations located south of the project site within the Sierra Business Park.These potential impacts are addressed in Section IX,Hazards. Adherence to all requirements of the Uniform Building Code(UBC)will serve to mitigate potential significant adverse impacts related to ground shaking and ground failure.The City of Dublin currently enforces the 1994 edition of the UBC,which is updated on a periodic basis to include strengthened seismic requirements.Geotechnical reports prepared for the project,as required by the City of Dublin,will also contain recommendations construction methods to minimize seismic damage. c)Is the site subject to seismic ground failure?LS.Based on the geotechnical reports prepared for the proposed project,the risk of ground failure would be low.Enforcement of provisions of the Uniform Building Code and recommendations contained in the geotechnical report prepared for the project will serve to reduce potential impacts of seismic ground failure to a less than significant level. d)Is the site subject to seiche,tsunami hazards,including liquefaction?LS.A preliminary site investigation prepared by Lowney Associates concludes that the risk of liquefaction on the site is low.This is based on the presence of silty clay soils on the site which are not prone to liquefaction.There are no major bodies of water located nearby which could be a source of seiche hazard. e)Is the site subject to landslides or mudflows?NI.The site is relatively flat and is not located near any major hillsides which would result in landslides or mudflows. f)Is the site subject to erosion,changes in topography or unstable soil conditions?PS/M.The site,as it presently exists,is reasonably flat with a gradual slope to the southwest.A regional creek,Alamo Creek,exists immediately to the southwest of the site.The applicant has indicated that the site will be graded in order to provide for future building pads,roads,parking lots and similar features.Estimated grading quantities would include 6,500 cubic yards of cut and 5,200 cubic yards of fill material.Approximately 1,300 cubic yards would therefore need to be removed from the site by the grading contractor.Without appropriate mitigation,erosion could result into nearby Alamo Creek,onto Dougherty Road and adjacent properties. The following mitigation measure is proposed to limit impacts related to water-borne erosion. Mitigation Measure 1:The project developer shall prepare and the City shall approve an erosion and sedimentation control plan for implementation throughout project construction.The plan should be prepared in accordance with City of Dublin and RWQCB design standards.The plan,at a minimum,should include the following: • All disturbed areas should be immediately revegetated or otherwise protected from both wind and water erosion upon completion of grading activities; • Stormwater runoff should be collected into stable drainage channels from small drainage basins to prevent the build up of large,potentially erosive stormwater flows; • Specific measures to control erosion from stockpiled earth material; • Runoff should be directed away from all areas disturbed by construction; • Sediment ponds or siltation basins should be used to trap eroded soils prior to discharge into off-site drainage culverts or channels.; • Major site development work involving excavation and earth moving for construction shall be done during the dry season,except as may be approved by the City Engineer Adherence to Mitigation Measure 1 will reduce potential erosion impacts to an insignificant level. Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 19 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 n g)Subsidence of land?LS.Minimal subsidence will occur,according to preliminary geotechnical reports. h)Expansive soils?LS.Surficial soils on the site have been identified as having a high expansive potential.These soils generally tend to shrink,crack and become hard when dry,and expand and become softer when wet.Expansive soils have the potential to damage building foundations and other improvements if specific construction techniques are not followed.The project engineer has commissioned a geotechnical report to recommend construction techniques to ensure that any negative effects of expansive soils can be reduced to a level of insignificance. i)Unique geologic or physical features?NI.None have been identified on the site,based on a field visit. IV.Water Environmental S-djin No surface water exists on the site.The nearest surface water source is Alamo Creek,a naturally occurring creek which forms a portion of the northwestern boundary of the site.Alamo Creek has been improved by Zone 7 as a regional drainage facility. According to representative of Zone 7,the project site,as well as the remainder of the Tri-Valley area,is underlain by an extensive underground aquifer.The aquifer ranges in depth between 15 and 500 feet but is no longer used as the primary source of domestic water in the area.Zone 7 is presently finalizing plans to store treated wastewater within the aquifer during winter months, which will be pumped out and used for landscape irrigation during dry,summer months. t's`' Project Impacts a)Changes to absorption rates?LS.The site is currently vacant and water percolates into the groundwater table.Development of the proposed project will add impermeable and impervious surfaces on the site in the form of residences,garages,driveways,walkways and similar hard surfaces.This will result in higher quantities of storm water runoff which must be accommodated by the local drainage system.At the present time,a precise grading and drainage plan has not been submitted.Preliminarily,storm water will likely be directed into Alamo Creek.Zone 7 presently charges fees for drainage into Zone 7 facilities. Prior to approval of a final subdivision map or issuance of building permits,the project applicant will be required,by City regulation,to submit and have approved a drainage and hydrology study which will include detailed calculations regarding the amount of storm water anticipated to be generated and the ultimate disposition of the water. b)Exposure of people or property to flood hazard?LS.The project site lies outside of the 100 year and 500 year flood plain as identified on the applicable Flood Insurance Rate Map published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency,Community Panel No.060705 0001A. c)Discharge into surface waters or changes to surface water quality?PS/M.The preliminary grading concept for the project involves collecting on-site storm water run-off and transporting it to the west for ultimate outfall into Alamo Creek via a new outfall pipe.According to representatives from Zone 7,the Creek has been designed and constructed to accommodate storm water flows which would be generated on the site under developed conditions.Zone 7 will impose a number of standard conditions on the project builder to ensure Zone 7 access to the channel for maintenance purposes and to ensure that the outfall pipe is located and built to Zone 7 standards. Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 20 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 A permit from the California Department of Fish and Game to construct the outfall pipe and discharge additional water into Alamo Creek will likely be required.The following mitigation measure is recommended to ensure that all applicable requirements are met: Mitigation Measure 2:The project developer shall obtain any required permits from the California Department of Fish and Game prior to discharge of water into Alamo Creek. It is likely that initial storm water flows after a lengthy dry season(also known as"first flush" flows)may add pollutants into Alamo Creek,including but not limited to grease,oil,fertilizers and other organic and inorganic material.Typically,subsequent flows generally contain fewer amounts of pollutant material. The City of Dublin is a co-pennittee of the Alameda County Clean Water Program,which is a coordinated effort by local governments in the County to improve water quality in San Francisco Bay.In 1994,the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board issued a set of recommendations for New and Redevelopment Controls for Storm Water Programs.These recommendations include policies that define watershed protection goals,minimum non-point source pollution controls for site planning and post construction activities.Watershed protection goals are based on policies identified in the San Francisco Bay Basin Water Control Plan,which relied on Best Management Practices(BMPs)to limit pollutant contact with stormwater runoff at its source and remove such pollutants prior to being transported into receiving waters.The following mitigation measure is therefore recommended to reduce surface water quality pollution to a level of insignificance. Mitigation Measure 3:The applicant shall obtain an NPDES general construction permit from the State Water Resources Control Board.The terms of this permit require that project development not cause any increase of sedimentation,turbidity or hazardous materials within downstream receiving waters. d)Changes in amount of surface water?LS.Additional surface water will be added to Alamo Creek,however,with the imposition of Mitigation Measure 2 to maintain water quality,this is not anticipated to be a significant impact.Representatives from Zone 7 have indicated that Alamo Creek has been sized to accommodate storm water run-off from this project. e)Changes in currents or direction of water movement?NI.If stormwater runoff is discharged into Alamo Creek,the direction of flow will not be changed f)Changes in quantity of groundwaters?NI.The project does not affect groundwater resources. This is based on a telephone conversation with Dennis Lunn of Zone 7. g)Altered direction of groundwater?NI.The project does not affect groundwater resources. h)Impacts to groundwater quality?NI.The scope of the project is such that groundwater resources will not be affected. i)Substantial reduction of groundwater resources?LS.Future project residents will rely on water supplied by the Dublin San Ramon Services District(DSRSD)for water supplies.Section, XII,Utilities,further describes anticipated water supply to the project. Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 21 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 V.Air Quality Environmental Setting The project site is located within the Livermore-Diablo Valley,a sheltered,inland area surrounded by hills to the west,south and east.Most of the air flow into the southern portions of the Valley is accomplished through only two gaps in the hills:the Hayward and Niles canyons. Local wind data show the frequent occurrence of low wind speed and calm conditions(the latter approximately 23 percent of the time).These local limitations on the capacity for horizontal dispersion of air pollutants combined with the regional characteristic of restricted vertical dispersion give the area a high potential for regional air quality problems. Project Impacts a)Violation of air quality standard?PS/M.Potential air quality impacts can be divided into short-term,construction related impacts and long-term operational impacts associated with the project. In terms of construction-related impacts,it is anticipated that the project would generate temporary increases in dust and particulate matter caused by site excavation and grading activities.Construction vehicle equipment on unpaved surfaces also generates dust as would wind blowing over exposed earth surfaces.Generalized estimates of construction air emissions include approximately 1.2 tons of dust per acre per month of construction activity.About 45 percent of construction-related dust is composed of large particles which settle rapidly on nearby surfaces and are easily filtered by human breathing patterns.The remainder of dust consists of small particles(also known as PM10)and could constitute a more severe air quality impact, unless mitigated. The following mitigation measure is therefore recommended to reduce potential short-term, construction related impacts. Mitigation Measure 4:The following measures shall be incorporated into construction specifications and shall be followed by the project grading contractor: • All material excavated or graded shall be sufficiently watered to prevent excessive amounts of dust,Watering shall occur at least twice per day with complete coverage, preferably in the late morning and at the completion of work for the day; • All clearing,grading,earthmoving and excavation shall cease during periods of high winds greater than 20 mph over one hour; • All material transported off-site shall either be sufficiently watered or securely fastened to prevent escape of dust and debris; • All inactive portions of the construction site shall be planted and watered,if construction is accomplished in more than one phase; • On-site vehicle speed shall be limited to 15 mph; • During rough grading and construction,Dougherty Road and Sierra Court(if used for construction access)shall be swept at least once per day,or as required by the City of Dublin,to remove silt ad construction debris; • Unnecessary idling of construction equipment shall be avoided; • Equipment engines shall be maintained in proper working condition per manufacturers' specification; • During periods of heavier air pollution(May to October),the construction period shall be lengthened to minimize the number of equipment operating at one time. /'N Construction of the proposed project will add additional vehicular traffic to this portion of Dublin as identified in Section VI,Transportation and Circulation.These additional vehicles will Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 22 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 generate quantities of carbon monoxide,reactive organic gasses,nitrous oxide,sulfur dioxide and particulate matter(PM10).However,the location of the proposed project near a major regional transportation corridor(Dougherty Road),the relatively high density of the project (approximately 25 units per acre)and the fact that the proposed project is considered an"infill" type residential project results in conformity with the Bay Area Air Quality Management District's Clean Air Plan. b)Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants?LS.The project,if approved and constructed,would add an anticipated 418 future residents to the project site.Since the site is located along Dougherty Road,a major regional arterial highway which presently carries up to 42,800 vehicles per day near the project site,additional sensitive receptors,future residents,would be exposed to somewhat higher concentrations of vehicle related pollutants.Given the prevailing wind pattern from west to east and the proposed solid noise barrier wall to be constructed adjacent to Dougherty Road,the amount of pollutant exposure is not anticipated to be significant. c)Alter air movement,moisture,temperature or climate?NI.The project is anticipated to consist of three story multi family residences,which will not substantially interfere with prevailing wind patterns or climatic conditions.The final height of buildings within the project will be determined through the Site Development Plan process. d)Create objectionable odors?NI.As a proposed residential project,no objectionable odors are to be created. VI.Transportation/Circulation [Note:The following section is based on an analysis of the traffic and transportation performed /y by TJKM Associates,Inc.,transportation consultants.The entire text of the report is reprinted in the Appendix of the Initial Study.] Environmental Setting Major roadways serving the site include: • Interstate 580,a six-lane east-west freeway connecting Dublin with nearby local communities such as Livermore and Pleasanton and regional destinations,such as Tracy and Oakland.In the vicinity of the proposed project,I-580 carries between 171,000 and 187,000 vehicles per day.Nearby interchanges include 580/680;Dougherty Rd./Hopyard Rd.and Hacienda Dr. • Interstate 680 is a six-lane north-south freeway connecting Dublin with local communities in the Tri-Valley area and regional destinations north and south of Dublin. This freeway accommodates between 115,000 and 119,000 vehicles per day with interchanges at Alcosta Blvd.,Interstate 580 and Stoneridge Drive. • Dougherty Road is a two-lane rural roadway north of the site,within Contra Costa County which has been widened to four lanes between the Alameda County/Contra Costa County border near Dublin.It is six lanes between Dublin Boulevard and I-580.Average Daily Traffic(ADT)varies between 12,600 north of Amador Valley Road to 42,800 south of Dublin Boulevard. • Dublin Boulevard is a major east-west arterial within Dublin and is configured as a four- to six-lane road which serves primarily industrial and commercial uses in the vicinity of the project.A two-lane extension from Dougherty Road east to Tassajara Road has Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 23 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 recently been completed.ADT varies from 29,300 vehicles per day,east of San Ramon Road to 3,000 vehicles east of Tassajara Road. • Hacienda Drive is an arterial designed to provide access to Hacienda Business Park in Pleasanton.These are two lanes of his roadway extending as far north as Dublin Boulevard.ADT is approximately 5,300 vpd. • Scarlett Drive is a two-lane road providing access to land uses south of Dublin Boulevard.An extension of this road is planned to be built with funds obtained from traffic impact fees collected from new development projects in East Dublin.The extension will proceed along the Southern Pacific right-of-way line to the northwest from the intersection of Scarlett Drive and Dublin Boulevard and terminate at Dougherty Road. • Amador Valley Boulevard is a three-lane east-west road north of the project site, extending near San Ramon Road on the west to Dougherty Road on the east.ADT is 10,800. • 5th Street is an east-west street within the Camps Parks Reserve Forces Training Area,a military base located immediately opposite Dougherty Road to the east of the project. Currently,5th Street is the main entrance to Camp Parks,although a new entrance to the facility is planned north of the new Dublin BART station and this entrance will be abandoned. • Sierra Court is a two-lane road providing local access within Sierra Business Park,an industrial complex located south of the project site. • Monterey Drive is a two-lane residential road west of Dougherty Road which intersects Dougherty Road north of the project site. • Houston Place is a two-lane road east of Dougherty Road with fronting industrial uses. Houston Road intersects Dougherty Road south of the proposed project. Existing traffic conditions,including development projects which have been approved in the vicinity of the project site but not yet constructed or are presently being constructed,have been summarized to determine peak hour level of service at key intersections in the vicinity of the proposed project.Existing conditions are expressed in terms of volume-to-capacity on adjacent roadways using the Level of Service(LOS)concept.LOS ratings are qualitative descriptions of intersection operations reported using an A through F ranking system to describe travel delay and congestion.LOS A indicates free flow of traffic through intersections and LOS F indicates jammed conditions with excessive delay and long back-ups. The following table summarizes existing peak hour intersection operations without the extension of Scarlett Drive. /-s. Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 24 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 Table 1: Existing Intersection Operation s Summary .......... >tie it>tt .......... ... :A Pak > : : ::` : P :Peak : :::: LOS LOS 1. Dougherty Rd./Amador Valley Blvd. B A 2. Dougherty Rd./Dublin Blvd. B B 3. Dougherty Rd./I-580 WB Ramps A A 4. Hopyard Rd./I-580 EB Ramps A A 5. Scarlett Dr./Dublin Blvd. B E The following table summarizes traffic conditions with existing development, approved but not yet built projects and the proposed project. These conditions assume the completion of I-580/I- 680 improvements, construction of the planned Scarlett Drive extension, Dougherty Road improvements, Dublin Boulevard improvements and the operation of the recently opened East Dublin/Pleasanton BART station. A complete listing of traffic improvements assumptions is contained in the TJKM traffic impact analysis prepared for this project. Table 2: Existing and Future Intersection Operations,Without Project >: xts ng Intersections Peak - Existmg� Approved Period • ...>: Proj s U) ..... .. V/C LOS V/C LOS 1. Dougherty Rd./Amador Valley AM 0.66 B 0.69 B Blvd. PM 0.56 A 0.61 B 2. Dougherty Rd./Dublin Blvd. AM 0.68 B 0.73 C PM 0.70 B 0.78 C 3. Dougherty Rd./I-580 WB Ramps AM 0.47 A 0.59 A PM 0.51 A 0.69 B 4. Hopyard Rd./I-580 EB Ramps AM 0.56 A 0.84 D PM 0.54 A 0.78 C 5. Scarlett Dr./Dublin Blvd./ AM 6.5 B 67.5 F PM 44.46 E 999 F Note (1): Calculations assume mitigations for the intersections of Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard and Hopyard Road/I-580 Eastbound ramps based on existing City plans. Based on the above,the unsignalized intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Scarlet Drive will continue to operate at an unacceptable Level of Service. This intersection is projected to warrant traffic signalization. Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 25 Park Sierra Apartment Project October, 1997 PA 97-019 Project Impacts a)Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion?PS/M.The proposed project will add additional vehicles to local and regional roadways as a result of project construction. The traffic report includes assumptions for project trip generation,based on Institute of Traffic Engineers standards and distribution of project traffic on nearby streets.Based on this analysis,a summary of expected project traffic impacts at full build-out,combined with existing and traffic associated with approved but not constructed other development projects is as follows. Table 3:Intersection Operations with Project §!!1.:Mg:g4StI0011,111 Intel ectiorns Peak Extsttng+ Approved+ Period Approved Project<'') V/C LOS V/C LOS 1.Dougherty Rd./Amador Valley AM 0.69 B 0.69 B Blvd. PM 0.61 B 0.61 B 2.Dougherty Rd./Dublin Blvd. AM 0.82 D 0.74 C PM 1.03 F 0.80 C 3.Dougherty Rd./I-580 WB Ramps AM 0.59 A 0.59 A PM 0.69 B 0.70 B 4.Hopyard Rd./I-580 EB Ramps AM 1.05 F 0.84 D PM 0.89 D 0.78 C 5.Scarlett Dr./Dublin Blvd. AM 67.5 F 0.79 C PM 999 F 0.82 D 6.Dougherty Road/Scarlett Drive AM - - 0.54 A PM - - 0.68 B Note(1):Calculations assume mitigations for the intersections of Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard and Hopyard Road/I-580 Eastbound ramps based on existing City plans. With implementation of previously identified traffic mitigations undertaken by the City and other property owners,intersections nearest the proposed project would operate at acceptable levels of service.The unacceptable level of service at intersection 4,above,is not directly related to the development of the project,but rather the result of traffic generated by other approved projects in the vicinity of the Park Sierra site. The following measures for the project are recommended as a part of the traffic study to mitigate potential impacts relating to local circulation and site access. Mitigation Measure 5:The project developer shall be responsible for installing the following frontage improvements on Dougherty Road:upgrading the pavement condition,providing 200-foot southbound right-turn lane deceleration lane plus a 90-foot taper,and a 200-foot northbound left-turn plus a 120-foot taper.The applicant shall pay a "fair share"portion of the cost of future intersection signalization at the project entryway. Necessary Traffic Improvement Fees shall also be paid to the City. Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 26 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 Mitigation Measure 6:The final design of the site access off of Dougherty Road and the driveway into the project from the access road shall be approved by the Dublin City Engineer.The overall design shall be consistent with City plans for the relocation or extension of Scarlett Drive. The City of Dublin has instituted a traffic impact fee based on the number of trips generated by development projects.The applicant will be required to pay this fee to assist in off-setting the costs of city-wide traffic improvements as part of development plan approval. The Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TJKM also contains projections regarding future cumulative impacts for the year 2010,including the proposed project.Under the cumulative scenario,all six study intersections are expected to operate at acceptable level of service. b)Hazards to safety from design features(e.g.sharp curves or dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses(e.g.farm equipment)?PS/M.Although a final,precise design for the proposed project has not been submitted by the applicant,implementation of the following mitigation measure will ensure that all no public safety hazards will be created. Mitigation Measure 7:The final design of the project shall meet all Dublin Public Works Department,Police Department and Fire Department policies and standards for internal street widths and corner radii. c)Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses?PS/M.The applicant proposes a main project entrance off of Dougherty Road and a secondary access connecting with Siena Court to the south.The secondary access is intended to be gated and equipped with an'opticon"sensor, which would open the gate based upon sensing the presence of an emergency vehicle.The gate /'1 could also be activated by use of a key pad or similar device for use by project residents. According to representatives from the Dublin Fire Department,construction of the proposed project in accord with an amended General Plan and mitigation measures outlines above will not block emergency access or conflict with regional emergency evacuation plans. d)Insufficient parking capacity onsite or offsite?LS.The proposed project would supply parking at a ratio of 2.0 spaces per unit,which meets City parking requirements. e)Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?PS/M.One main drive is proposed for the project off of Dougherty Road.Potential conflicts could result between project-related vehicles and pedestrians and bicyclists traversing either Dougherty Road or the future Iron Horse Trail. Since the drive approach will be signalized,anticipated risks to pedestrians and bicyclists at the main project entrance is expected to be less than significant. The proposed project is located adjacent to a pedestrian and bicycle bridge over Alamo Creek, immediately west of the site.The bridge has been in place for a number of years and is lacking adequate guard rails on both sides of the structure and the possibility exists that future residents of this project could be endangered by the lack of guard rails.The following mitigation measure is therefore recommended to rectify this potentially hazardous situation. Mitigation Measure 8:The project developer shall install safety rails on both sides of the existing pedestrian bridge over Alamo Creek to the satisfaction of the Dublin City Engineer. 0 Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation(e.g.bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?LS.Construction of the proposed project would serve to advance regional and Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 27 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 subregional goals and policies which promote the development of higher density residential /''N projects near major transportation corridors.In this instance,the site is adjacent to Dougherty Road,a major transportation corridor which includes bus service.In addition,the site is approximately one mile from the Dublin BART station.According to representatives of WHEELS,additional bus service will added to Dougherty Road to serve BART. g)Rail,waterborne or air traffic impacts?NI.The proposed project is not sited near operating railroad facilities,near a navigable waterway or near an airport. VII.Biological Resources Environmental Setting Portions of the site have recently been used to deposit spoils from excavations and similar public works projects undertaken elsewhere in the City.No trees or any type of significant vegetation or animal life have been observed on the site.The site was formerly used as a truck yard associated with railroad operations. Project Impacts a)Endangered,threatened or rare species or their habitats(including but not limited to plants, fish,insects,animals and birds)NI.No such species have been observed on the site based on filed observations conducted in November,1995 and January,1996. b)Locally designated species(e.g.heritage trees).NI.No trees of any kind are currently growing on the site. c)Locally designated natural communities(e.g.oak forest,coastal habitat)NI.There are no significant stands of vegetation on the site. d)Wetland habitat(e.g.marsh,riparian and vernal pool)?LS.No wetlands exist on the project site.It is anticipated that all or a portion of project storm water run-off will be transported to Alamo Creek for ultimate disposal into San Francisco Bay.As a major regional drainage facility, wetland habitat has been observed within the bottom of the creek.However,since the applicant will be discharging water under the direction of Zone 7 and with the review of the California Department of Fish and Game,this is not expected to be a significant impact.Reference Mitigation Measure No.2. e)Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors?NI.The site is substantially surrounded by existing industrial or residential development and no wildlife corridors have been observed on the site. VII.Energy and Mineral Resources Environmental Setting Based on preliminary geotechnical surveys of the site(Terrasearch,1995 and Lowney,1997)no known deposits of minerals exist on the project site.The Conservation Element of the General Plan does not reference any significant mineral resources on the project site. Project Impacts a)Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?NI.The proposed project will not conflict with energy goals,policies or programs established in the General Plan regarding energy or energy conservation. Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 28 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 b)Use nonrenewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner?NI.The proposed project is not anticipated to use resources in a wasteful manner.The project will be constructed in accord with the Uniform Building Code and Title 24 of the California Administrative Code,both of which require stringent energy efficient construction methods,such as insulation,thermal pane windows and installation of efficient appliances.Exterior landscaping will be governed by AB 325,which requires"water budgets"for landscape material sand methods of irrigation.Finally, the City is mandated by AB 939 to reduce the solid waste stream generated by residences, business and industrial establishments by promoting recycling and similar programs. c)Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and residents of the State?NI.The preliminary geotechnical investigation did not indicate that significant quantities of mineral resources are located on the site. IX.Hazards Environmental Setting The site of the proposed project is located near several potential sources of hazardous incidents, including: • Dublin-San Ramon Service District's Turnout 1,located immediately southeast of the site (see Exhibit 4),which is a connection point for DSRSD to receive wholesale water from ACFCWCD Zone 7.An integral part of this operation includes chlorination and floridation of water to meet safe drinking water standards.DSRSD maintains 600 pounds of gaseous chlorine on the site as well as 150 pounds of liquid fluoride for this purpose. Existing safety features include use of"fusible links"which prevent explosion of gas cylinders,but would not prevent escape of the gas itself,and a gas leak warning system /••s which consists of a warning light that illuminates upon detection of a leak. • Santa Fe Pacific Pipeline Company maintains a 10-inch pressurized refined oil pipeline within the Southern Pacific right-of-way area northeast of the site.The pipeline carries a variety of refined petroleum products including aviation fuel,kerosene,automobile gasoline and other refined petroleum products.The pipeline originates at petroleum refineries located in Concord and terminates in San Jose.Based on a preliminary reconnaissance,the pipeline is located approximately 50 feet northeast of the Trumark property.Exhibit 4 shows the approximate location of the pipeline in relation to the project site.According to representatives of the pipeline operating company,the pipe is periodically checked for leaks via periodic surface investigations by pipeline personnel, internally by way of a remote video camera and by continual monitoring of pipeline pressure by gauges throughout the pipeline to check for sudden pressure drops. • Sierra Business Park is located immediately south of the site.The business park currently contains only one potential use which could pose a health hazard to the proposed project. This use is a swimming pool and spa supply establishment which sells pool supplies, including acid for pool cleaning.The business park is zoned M1(Light Industrial)by the City.Permitted uses include a range of manufacturing,assembly,wholesale,distribution and storage uses.Land uses which have the potential to have a greater impact on surrounding properties,including storage of liquefied petroleum gas,concrete and asphalt batching plants,and outdoor uses are required to obtain a conditional use permit from the Dublin Planning Commission. The applicant has submitted a Level One Environmental Site Assessment for the subject property /'1 prepared by the firm of ENGEO(8/95).This assessment included a walk through of the site and Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 29 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 a search of local,state and federal records of hazardous materials regulatory agencies.No /-• documentation of hazardous materials was found with regard to the property.The study did discover four leaking underground storage tanks approximately one-half mile from the site, however,these are not believed to present a hazard to the site. Project Impacts a)A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances including but not limited to oil,pesticides,chemicals,or radiation?LS.The proposed residential project will not contain substantial quantities of oil,pesticides,chemicals or radiation.It is likely that limited quantities of household chemicals,pesticides,herbicides and similar materials would be used and stored on the site,either in individual units or for maintenance purposes.The amounts of such materials would be typical of any residential development in the community and such quantities are not considered to be significant. b)Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?LS. Preliminary plans supplied by the applicant indicate that there will be two access points to the and from the project,one on Dougherty Road and one on Sierra Court.Mitigation Measure 7 would ensure full emergency access even if site accesses are gated. c)The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazards?NI.As a proposed residential development,the project will not generate a health hazard. d)Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards?PS/M.Construction of the proposed project will expose future project residents(estimated to be a maximum of 418)to potential hazards from the three sources described above:DSRSD's Turnout 1,Santa Fe Pipeline and Sierra Business Park. n • Turnout 1:Future residents of the project could be exposed to escape of chlorine gas from Turnout 1.According to safety representatives from DSRSD,this would pose a significant safety impact,although there has been ho history of any safety incidents at Turnout 1 for the past 20 years.The possibility of a major seismic event on or near the site would magnify safety concerns.Other similar DSRSD facilities in close proximity to residential neighborhoods use a sodium hyperchlorite system to achieve the same level of chlorination.According to DSRSD staff,it would be possible to upgrade the chlorination system at Turnout 1 with the assistance of the project developer. The following mitigation is recommended to ensure that hazards related to Turnout 1 facility can be reduced to a level of insignificance: Mitigation Measure 9:The project developer shall: (1) Prior to issuance of building permits,have a signed agreement with the DSRSD agreeing to upgrade the water treatment method of Turnout 1 which will eliminate gaseous chlorine from the site and replace it with a system compatible,from a safety perspective,with adjacent residential uses. (2) Prior to occupancy of residences,all necessary treatment upgrades for Turnout 1 shall be installed.This may include providing adequate truck access from the project site to Turnout 1 for delivery of supplies and/or other improvements.All such improvements shall be done to the satisfaction of the DSRSD and Dublin City Engineer. /'\ • Oil Pipeline:Future residents of the proposed project could be subject to hazards from escaping refined petroleum products or from fire and explosion if the pipeline were to Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 30 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 break or rupture.This risk would be increased in the event of a seismic event.The Transportation Research Board(TRB)has issued a special report(219)entitled Pipelines '"..\ and Public Safety which recommends a safety setback from pipelines of 35 to 60 feet from the centerline of a liquid carrying pipeline.Preliminary plans submitted by the applicant indicate that a minimum 50-foot setback from the pipeline will be maintained within the project.Based on this structural setback from the pipeline,construction of a masonry wall is not required. The following mitigations are recommended in the Level One Site Assessment to ensure that hazards related to pipeline leakage or rupture be reduced to a level of insignificance. Mitigation Measures 11 and 12 were recommended in the Level One Assessment. Mitigation Measure 10:A minimum setback of 50 feet shall be established and maintained from the petroleum pipeline and any habitable structure on the project site. Mitigation Measure 11:A subsurface investigation,including recovery of soil and ground water samples,should be undertaken to address potential impacts from the adjacent petroleum pipeline and former rail transfer facility. Mitigation Measure 12:The property should be monitored by an environmental professional during demolition and pregrading activities to observe areas which may have been obscured by remnant structures,paving or fill material.Recommendations of the environmental professional shall be followed during site grading and construction. • Sierra Business Park:The business park presently contains a range of light industrial, warehouse,wholesale and distribution uses in immediate proximity of the proposed project.Adjacent uses include a street maintenance yard(MCE),a metal fabrication company(Ron Nunes Enterprises),a Federal Express delivery center,and similar uses. Although these uses are a source of noise(which is addressed in Section X,Noise),they are not anticipated to result in significant hazards to proposed residential uses on the Trumark site.An analysis of past hazardous incidents in the vicinity of the project site indicate that 24 such incidents have been reported to the Fire Authority between 1990 and 1995.These have ranged from relatively minor incidents such as gasoline spills to more serious incidents,such as three hazardous materials releases in 1991,three releases in 1993 and one release in 1994. e)Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,grass or trees?PS/M.Construction of the proposed project will add wood frame dwellings,garages and other related improvements, including new landscaping.All structures will be built in conformity with provisions of the Uniform Building Code and Uniform Fire Code to minimize fire hazard.Landscaped areas will be permanently irrigated to ensure that plant material will not be flammable,based on recommended Mitigation Measure 13,below. Mitigation Measure 13:Permanent irrigation systems and automatic controllers shall be installed within all landscaped planter areas to assist in reducing the danger from grass fires. Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 31 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 X.Noise Environmental Setting [Note:The following section is based on a noise analysis of the site performed by Edward L. Pack Associates,Inc.,acoustical consultants,dated May 16,1997.The entire text of the report is reprinted in the Appendix of the Initial Study.] Primary sources of noise in the vicinity of the project site include vehicular-related noise emanating from Dougherty Road and noise generated by industrial and truck operations within the Sierra Business Park,immediately south of the site. Long-term measurements of existing noise levels were made over a 24-hour period to determine the present noise environment.Monitoring locations included a spot approximately 73 feet west of the centerline of Dougherty Road and a second site along the southerly property line near the Federal Express facility. Expressed in Leq(continuous equivalent energy levels),the existing noise level adjacent to Dougherty Road range from 60.0 to 64.5 dBA(decibels weighted to an"A"scale,approximating the perception level of the human ear)during daytime hours,58.6 to 60.5 during the evening and 50.4 to 60.7 dBA during the nighttime period. In addition to the above,measurements of short-term noise were made at the southerly site property line adjacent to the Ron Nunes Company,a metal fabricating establishment.Existing noise levels were found to range from 55 dBA for normal,on-going work to 87 dBA associated with forklift operations and short term noises of 100 dBA emanating from container wheel squeal. The Noise Element of the City's General Plan establishes the following noise exposure limits for residential(exterior)and industrial land use types(expressed in decibels): Table 4:Noise Exposure Limits Land Use Normally Conditionally Normally Clearly Acceptable Acceptable Unacceptable Unacceptable Residential 60 or less 60-70 70-75 Over 75 Industrial 70 or less 70-75 Over 75 The maximum interior noise exposure limits for residential units is 45 decibels,established through both the City's Noise Element and Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. Project Impacts a)Increases in existing noise levels?PS/M.As a residential project,small,incremental permanent increases in noise from automobiles,mechanical and gardening equipment and similar sources can be expected.These are not anticipated to be significant.Short-term construction related noise can also be expected to be generated which could be considered significant based on specific types of equipment which may be used in the construction process. The following mitigation measure is therefore recommended to limit the potential impacts of construction noise to an acceptable level. Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 32 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 Mitigation Measure 14:All construction activities on the project site shall be limited to 7 a.m.to 5 p.m.,Monday through Friday,unless alternative hours are approved by the Dublin Building Official for structural construction and the City Engineer for grading activities.Construction equipment,including compressors,generators,and mobile equipment,shall be fitted with heavy duty mufflers designed to reduce noise impacts. b)Exposure of people to severe noise levels?PS/M.The acoustic analysis reviewed existing and future traffic conditions(Year 2010)as well as surrounding industrial operations to predict the effect of noise levels on proposed residential dwellings. Using standard noise prediction techniques published by the Highway Research Board,future noise along Dougherty Road is anticipated to be up to 67 dB which is 7 dB higher than normally acceptable for residential dwellings under the Noise Element.For that portion of the site adjacent to Sierra Business Park it is assumed that future noise levels at the property line between the site and business park will be 75 dB,the highest acceptable level for industrial uses pursuant to the City's Noise Element. Future interior noise levels for residential dwellings are also anticipated to be 7 dB in excess of noise standards of 45 dB. These anticipated future noise levels represent significant levels of noise which would be considered irritating to future residents of the proposed project.Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce future noise levels to levels of insignificance. Mitigation Measure 15:The following measures are recommended to mitigate exterior noise levels to acceptable levels: • A 6.5 foot high(from finished pad)acoustically effective patio barrier shall be built for all patios within 100 feet of the centerline of Dougherty Road and with a direct or side view of the roadway; • Forty-eight(48)inch high acoustically effective balcony railings shall be provided for all second floor balconies within 100 feet of the centerline of Dougherty Road and with a direct or side view of the roadway; • Forty-two(42)inch high acoustically effective balcony railings shall be provided for all third floor balconies within 100 feet of the centerline of Dougherty Road and with a direct or side view of the roadway; • A twelve(12)foot high acoustically effective barrier shall be constructed along the southerly property line,extending the full length of the property line.This barrier may be reduced to ten(10)feet around the DSRSD Turnout 1 on the southeast corner of the site; • At the secondary site entry at Sierra Court,the south property line barrier shall turn towards the industrial uses to reduce flanking noise through the opening.On the west side,the flanking segment must continue for a distance of 35 feet from the main bather.On the east side,the flanking segment must extend for a distance of 20 feet from the main bather; • Sixty(60)inch high acoustically effective balconies shall be constructed for all second floor balconies within 70 feet of the south property line and with a direct or side view of industrial uses; Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 33 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 • Fifty-four (54)inch high acoustically effective balconies shall be constructed for all second floor balconies within 70 feet of the south property line and with a direct or side view of industrial uses; • Forty-eight(48)inch high acoustically effective balconies shall be constructed for all second floor balconies within 70 feet and 125 feet of the south property line and with a direct or side view of industrial uses; • Forty-two(42)inch high acoustically effective balconies shall be constructed for all third floor balconies within 70 feet and 125 feet of the south property line and with a direct or side view of industrial uses; • Forty-two(42)inch high acoustically effective balconies shall be constructed for all second and third floor balconies within 70 feet and 225 feet of the south property line and with a direct or side view of industrial uses; • Construction specifications for the noise barriers shall be as outlines in acoustic report for this project dated May 16,1997,prepared by Pack Associates. Mitigation Measure 16:To mitigate interior noise levels,the following window controls shall be provided as noted: • Maintain closed at all times all windows of second floor and unshielded first floor living spaces of dwellings located within 200 feet of the centerline of Dougherty with a direct or side view of the roadway.Windows within 150 feet of the centerline of Dougherty shall be rated with a minimum Sound Transmission Class(STC)28; • Maintain closed at all times all windows of second floor and unshielded first floor living spaces of all units located within 225 feet of the south property line and which also have a direct or side view of industrial uses.These windows shall be rated minimum STC 28; • Uniform Building and Mechanical Codes for ventilation of habitable structures shall be complied with. The location and height of recommended noise barriers are shown on Exhibit 4. XI.Public Services. Environmental Setting The project site is served by the following service providers: • Fire Protection.Fire protection is provided by the Alameda County Fire Department, under contract to the City of Dublin,which provides structural fire suppression,rescue, hazardous materials control and public education services. • Police Protection.Police protection is provided by the Dublin Police Department which is headquartered in the Civic Center.The Department,which maintains a sworn staff of 31 officers,performs a range of public safety services including patrol,investigation,traffic safety and public education. Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 34 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 • \\ •--`-- - \ 4z N. .r � L 111E _ I :a "II 11'i i ,il�,t t • I -la I 'llll' 4.8.: 54: , I,Q�... > . \ SETW' aix:ii- •iiSYiiilaidiiWdiiiliiirGYiiiiiiiiiiiiVriiii iiViiiiiiidi Off■}iklr i ■ r■i'■■■■+ ■Lmr!".eielu■■ ■ae. \ FIGURE 1 \\I Locations and heights of the noise control barriers needed to reduce exterior noise exposures to 60 dB CNEL The barrier heights x=3rd Floor Balcony Railing Height are in reference to the nearest building pad,patio pad or balcony \ x=2nd Floor Balcony Railing Height floor elevation. x=1st Floor Patio Fence Height `;`- na=Patio fence not required due to property line barrier Source:Edward L Pack Assoc.,Inc. May 19,1997 an.0 :Z1 FACT4 Pffe7iyE,V7 ' ""'7 Exhibit 4 Noise Barrier Heights and Location ) ) ) . n • Schools.Educational facilities are provided by the Dublin Unified School District which operates kindergarten through high school services within the community.Schools which would serve the project include Dublin High School(grades 9-12)and Wells Middle School(graded 6-8). Grades K-5 could be served by one of three elementary schools within the District. • Maintenance.The City of Dublin provides public facility maintenance,including roads, parks,street trees and other public facilities.Dublin's Civic Center is located at 100 Civic Plaza. • Other governmental services.Other governmental services are provided by the City of Dublin including community development and building services and related governmental services.Library service is provided by the Alameda County Library with supplemental funding by the City of Dublin. The City of Dublin has adopted a Public Facilities Fee for all new residential development in the community for the purpose of financing new municipal public facilities needed by such development.Facilities anticipated to be funded by the proposed fee would include completion of the Civic Center Complex,construction of a new library,expansion of the existing senior center,acquisition and development of new community and neighborhood parks and similar municipal;buildings and facilities.The amount of the fee is presently$3,332 per unit. Environmental Impacts a)Fire protection?LS.According to representatives of the Fire Department,the proposed project lies within a 1 1/2 mile radius of a fire station located at 9399 Fircrest in Dublin.A typical response time of under five minutes is anticipated.As part of the site development review process,specific fire protection requirements will be imposed on the development to ensure compliance with applicable provisions of the Uniform Fire Code. Based upon discussions between the applicant and Fire Department officials,the project has been modified to provide minimum turning radii and aisle widths for emergency equipment as well as emergency fire access from the Iron Horse Trail. b)Police protection?PS/M.Concerns have been raised by the Police Department concerning the ability of the Department to provide adequate surveillance of the proposed complex,given the linear layout of buildings and limited turn-around room for police vehicles at the rear of the complex.The following mitigation is therefore recommended to reduce potential police protection impacts to levels of insignificance: Mitigation Measure 17: Prior to issuance of building permits,the project developer shall submit for Police Department approval a Master Security Plan,indicating specific measures which will be taken by the developer to supplement Police Department security for the project.Specific items to be included are:provision of private security forces, ensuring long term availability of private security services for the project,formation of a neighborhood watch association,providing alarm systems within each unit and related items. c)Schools?PS/M.The Dublin Unified School District recently completed a Facilities Master Plan which includes estimates of student generation by residential density type.Typical medium /•N density residential projects would generate the following students. Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 36 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 Since many local schools are or are expected to be at full capacity in the near future,the following mitigation is recommended to ensure that potential impacts can be reduced to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure 18:The applicant shall,prior to issuance of building permits,obtain a written agreement with the Dublin Unified School District for the project's fair share mitigation of school impacts.Any fees which are required pursuant to that agreement shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits. d)Maintenance of public facilities,including roads?LS.The project represents an incremental increase in area population and vehicles.Roadways within the project will be privately owned and maintained.The applicant is required to pay a traffic impact fee to the City of Dublin which will assist in of-setting costs of public roadway maintenance. e)Other governmental services?LS.The project would represent incremental increases in the demand for general governmental services.Payment of the City's Public Facility Fee would offset any impacts caused by the project. XII.Utilities and Service Systems. Environmental Setting The project site is served by the following service providers: • Electrical and natural gas power:Pacific Gas and Electric Co. efts • Communications:Pacific Bell • Water supply and sewage treatment:Dublin San Ramon Services District • Storm drainage:City of Dublin • Solid waste disposal:Dublin-Livermore Disposal Company Environmental Impacts a)Power or natural gas?LS.According to representatives from Pacific Gas and Electric Company,adequate facilities exist in the vicinity of the project to provide power and natural gas service. b)Communication systems?LS.According to representatives from Pacific Bell,communication facilities presently exist near the site which could be extended to serve future development on the site. c)Local or regional water treatment or distribution systems?LS.According to representatives of DSRSD,12-inch and 16-inch water mains exist on the periphery of the site which could provide adequate water volumes and pressures for domestic and fire fighting purposes to the proposed project.DSRSD purchases water on a wholesale basis from Zone 7 of the Alameda County Flood and Water Conservation District and provides water service to residences and businesses within its service area. Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 37 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 d)Sewer or septic systems?LS.According to representatives of DSRSD,8-inch sewer lines have /\ been constructed within the right-of-way of Dougherty Road and within Sierra Court,south of the proposed project.Adequate capacity exists to accommodate anticipated sewer flows from the proposed project.Untreated effluent would be transported to DSRSD's Regional Treatment Plant in Pleasanton for treatment prior to being discharged into the East Bay Discharge Authority's outfall line for eventual disposal into San Francisco Bay.DSRSD officials indicate that adequate capacity exists within the regional treatment facility to accommodate this project. e)Storm water drainage?LS.This topic was previously addressed in Section IV,Water. f)Solid waste disposal?LS.The City of Dublin contracts with Livermore-Dublin Disposal Company to collect solid waste from households and businesses and transport it to the Altamont Landfill,located in eastern Alameda County.The Landfill currently has an anticipated capacity until the year 2005 and plans are underway to extend landfill capacity for an additional 50 years. Livermore-Dublin Disposal Company also operates a curbside recycling service to ensure that the City's waste stream complies with state requirements for reduction of solid waste.The most current information available indicates that Dublin exceeds state requirements for reducing solid waste. Although approval of the proposed project will incrementally increase the amount of solid waste, any such increases will be able to be accommodated with existing facilities and resources. g)Local or regional water supplies?LS.DSRSD staff indicate that adequate long term water supplies are available from Zone 7 and other sources to serve the proposed project. XIII.Aesthetics. Environmental Setting The site is currently vacant of any permanent structures,although it is being used to store excavated earthen material and other construction debris. Environmental Impacts a)Affect a scenic vista or view?LS.The Dublin Zoning Ordinance limits low and medium density residential building height to 25 feet and the nearest residential dwellings(Arroyo Vista complex)are located approximately 100 to 150 feet to the north.Therefore,distant views to the foothills from adjacent residential areas will not be blocked. b)Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect?PS/M.Recommended noise mitigation include construction of a 6.5-foot high noise barrier wall adjacent to Dougherty Road and a 12 foot high noise barrier wall along the southerly property line.The proposed height of these barriers could be a negative aesthetic impact to future residents of the project as well as passers-by on Dougherty Road and occupants and visitors to nearby properties.The following mitigation is therefor recommended to reduce potential impacts to a level of insignificance. Mitigation Measure 19:The design of the proposed project shall incorporate the following features: • The 12-foot wall along the southerly property line shall be"softened"with the planting of permanent vines on both sides of the wall and trees on the residential side of the wall. Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 38 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 • Patio walls and fences along Dougherty shall be constructed of decorative material, shall be setback a minimum distance of ten feet from the property line and shall be "softened"by appropriate landscape material,including trees,shrubs and vines and use of turfed berms. c)Create light or glare?LS.Although it is expected that the proposed residential project will add additional exterior lighting in the project vicinity,including driveway lighting,security lighting and porch lights,a significant amount of this lighting will occur behind noise barriers and will not be visible from Dougherty Road or from adjacent properties. XIV.Cultural Resources Environmental Setting The Northwest Information Center,located at Sonoma State University,was contacted regarding this project and a search of records,including cultural,archeological,paleontological and historical literature conducted. The records search indicate that the site contains no recorded Native American or historical cultural resources sites on file with the Center.State and federal inventories similarly list no historic resources on the site nor does any record exist of previous archeological studies of the project area. Native American archeological sites tend to be situated on broad midslope terraces and alluvial plains near former and existing water sources,so the possibility does exist of historic or archeological artifacts,however,the Center concluded that the possibility of identifying historic cultural resources on the site is low. Project Impacts a)Disturb paleontological resources?NI,based on Northwest Information Center letter. b)Disturb archeological resources?PS/M.The Northwest Information Center letter indicates the possibility of sites or artifacts on the site given the proximity to Alamo Creek.The following mitigation is therefore recommended to reduce any such impacts to a level of insignificance: Mitigation Measure 20:Should archeological artifacts or remains be discovered during construction of the project,work in the vicinity of the find shall stop immediately until a qualified archeologist can evaluate the site and determine the significance of the find. Project personnel shall not collect or alter cultural resources.Identified cultural resources shall be recorded on forms DPR 422(archeological sites)and/or DPR 523(historic resources).If human remains are found,the County Coroner shall be contacted immediately. c)Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values?NI,based on the Northwest Information Center letter. d)Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within potential impact area?NI,no such sites have been identified based on a comprehensive records search of the project site. XV.Recreation. Environmental Setting Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 39 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 City parks closest to the project site include Stagecoach Park,Alamo Creek Park,both neighborhood parks and Dublin Sports Grounds,a community park. Project Impacts a)Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities?LS. The addition of approximately 418 residents in this portion of the City will add an incremental demand for parks and recreational facilities.A portion of needed park facilities will be met by proposed construction of recreational amenities within the project.However,demand would still exist for community-scale park and playground facilities.The applicant would be required to pay a Public Facility fee,which includes a contribution toward construction of new parks in the city. b)Affect existing recreational opportunities?PS/M.The project site is immediately adjacent to the Iron Horse Trail,a regional multi-use trail presently being developed by the City of Dublin on the site of the former Southern Pacific Railroad line between Contra Costa County and Pleasanton.Precise interfaces between the trail and the proposed project have not yet been formulated.The applicant has proposed to construct a wrought iron fence adjacent to the Trail. According to EBRPD representatives,no significant adverse impacts are anticipated should the proposed project be constructed.The proposed mitigation is recommended to ensure that no adverse impacts will be created by the proposed project with respect to the Iron Horse Trail: Mitigation Measure 21:The applicant shall work with City of Dublin with input from the East Bay Regional Parks District,through the Site Development Review process,with regard to treatment of the proposed project adjacent to the Iron Horse Trail,including number and location of access points,wall treatment and landscaping. The applicant shall also dedicate to the City of Dublin and improve additional right-of- way for recreational purposes,generally located on the northwest corner of the site.This dedication will complete public ownership of the Iron Horse Trail in this portion of the City. XVI.Mandatory Findings of Significance a)Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment,substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,reduce the number of or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?No.The preceding analysis indicates that the proposed project will not have a significant adverse impact on overall environmental quality, including biological resources or cultural resources. b)Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term,to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals?No.The project represents an example of infill,higher density housing which will be sited near a major regional transportation corridor. c)Does the project have impacts that are individually limited,but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,the effects of other current projects and the effects of probable future projects).No although incremental increases in certain areas can be expected as a result of constructing this project,including additional traffic air emissions, light and glare and need for public services and utilities,the project site lies within an already urbanized area and sufficient capacity exists within service systems to support the additional /'\ population anticipated associated with the project. Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 40 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 d)Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,either directly or indirectly?No.Although potential safety impacts exist in the vicinity of the,adequate mitigations are proposed to reduce such potential impacts to levels of insignificance. Summary of Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure 1:The project developer shall prepare and the City shall approve an erosion and sedimentation control plan for implementation throughout project construction.The plan should be prepared in accordance with City of Dublin and RWQCB design standards.The plan, at a minimum,should include the following: • All disturbed areas should be immediately revegetated or otherwise protected from both wind and water erosion upon completion of grading activities; • Stormwater runoff should be collected into stable drainage channels from small drainage basins to prevent the build up of large,potentially erosive stormwater flows; • Specific measures to control erosion from stockpiled earth material; • Runoff should be directed away from all areas disturbed by construction; • Sediment ponds or siltation basins should be used to trap eroded soils prior to discharge into off-site drainage culverts or channels; • Major site development work involving excavation and earth moving for construction shall be done during the dry season,except as may be approved by the City Engineer Mitigation Measure 2:The project developer shall obtain any required permits from the California Department of Fish and Game prior to discharge of water into Alamo Creek. Mitigation Measure 3:The applicant shall obtain an NPDES general construction permit from the State Water Resources Control Board.The terms of this permit require that project development not cause any increase of sedimentation,turbidity or hazardous materials within downstream receiving waters. Mitigation Measure 4:The following measures shall be incorporated into construction specifications and shall be followed by the project grading contractor: • All material excavated or graded shall be sufficiently watered to prevent excessive amounts of dust,Watering shall occur at least twice per day with complete coverage, preferably in the late morning and at he completion of work for the day; • All clearing,grading,earthmoving and excavation shall cease during periods of high winds greater than 20 mph over one hour; • All material transported off-site shall either be sufficiently watered or securely fastened to prevent escape of dust and debris; • All inactive portions of the construction site shall be planted and watered,if construction is accomplished in more than one phase; • On-site vehicle speed shall be limited to 15 mph; /'\ Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 41 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 • During rough grading and construction,Dougherty Road and Sierra Court(if used for /'N construction access)shall be swept at least once per day,or as required by the City of Dublin,to remove silt ad construction debris; • Unnecessary idling of construction equipment shall be avoided; • Equipment engines shall be maintained in proper working condition per manufacturers' specification; • During periods of heavier air pollution(May to October),the construction period shall be lengthened to minimize the number of equipment operating at one time. Mitigation Measure 5:The project developer shall be responsible for installing the following frontage improvements on Dougherty Road:upgrading the pavement condition,providing 200- foot southbound right-turn lane deceleration lane plus a 90-foot taper,and a 200-foot northbound left-turn plus a 120-foot taper.The applicant shall pay a "fair share"portion of the cost of future intersection signalization at the project entryway.Necessary Traffic Improvement Fees shall also be paid to the City. Mitigation Measure 6:The final design of the site access off of Dougherty Road and the driveway into the project from the access road shall be approved by the Dublin City Engineer. The overall design shall be consistent with City plans for the relocation or extension of Scarlett Drive. Mitigation Measure 7:The final design of the project shall meet all Dublin Public Works Department,Police Department and Fire Department policies and standards for internal street widths and corner radii. Mitigation Measure 8:The project developer shall install safety rails on both sides of the existing pedestrian bridge over Alamo Creek to the satisfaction of the Dublin City Engineer. Mitigation Measure 9:The project developer shall: (1) Prior to issuance of building permits,have a signed agreement with the DSRSD agreeing to upgrade the water treatment method of Turnout 1 which will eliminate gaseous chlorine from the site and replace it with a system compatible,from a safety perspective,with adjacent residential uses. (2) Prior to occupancy of residences,all necessary treatment upgrades for Turnout 1 shall be installed.This may include providing adequate truck access from the project site to Turnout 1 for delivery of supplies and/or other improvements.All such improvements shall be done to the satisfaction of the DSRSD and Dublin City Engineer. • Oil Pipeline:Future residents of the proposed project could be subject to hazards from escaping refined petroleum products or from fire and explosion if the pipeline were to break or rupture.This risk would be increased in the event of a seismic event.The Transportation Research Board(TRB)has issued a special report(219)entitled Pipelines and Public Safety which recommends a safety setback from pipelines of 35 to 60 feet from the centerline of a liquid carrying pipeline.Preliminary plans submitted by the applicant indicate that a minimum 50-foot setback from the pipeline will be maintained within the project.Based on this structural setback from the pipeline,construction of a masonry wall is not required. Mitigation Measure 10: A minimum setback of 50 feet shall be established and maintained /"\ from the petroleum pipeline and any habitable structure on the project site. Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 42 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 Mitigation Measure 11:A subsurface investigation,including recovery of soil and ground water samples,should be undertaken to address potential impacts from the adjacent petroleum pipeline '' and former rail transfer facility. Mitigation Measure 12:The property should be monitored by an environmental professional during demolition and pregrading activities to observe areas which may have been obscured by remnant structures,paving or fill material.Recommendations of the environmental professional shall be followed during site grading and construction. Mitigation Measure 13: Permanent irrigation systems and automatic controllers shall be installed within all landscaped planter areas to assist in reducing the danger from grass fires. Mitigation Measure 14: All construction activities on the project site shall be limited to 7 a.m. to 5 p.m.,Monday through Friday,unless alternative hours are approved by the Dublin Building Official for structural construction and the City Engineer for grading activities.Construction equipment,including compressors,generators,and mobile equipment,shall be fitted with heavy duty mufflers designed to reduce noise impacts. Mitigation Measure 15 :The following measures are recommended to mitigate exterior noise levels to acceptable levels: • A 6.5 foot high(from finished pad)acoustically effective patio barrier shall be built for all patios within 100 feet of the centerline of Dougherty Road and with a direct or side view of the roadway; • Forty-eight(48)inch high acoustically effective balcony railings shall be provided for all second floor balconies within 100 feet of the centerline of Dougherty Road and with a direct or side view of the roadway; • Forty-two(42)inch high acoustically effective balcony railings shall be provided for all third floor balconies within 100 feet of the centerline of Dougherty Road and with a direct or side view of the roadway; • A twelve(12)foot high acoustically effective barrier shall be constructed along the southerly property line,extending the full length of the property line.This barrier may be reduced to ten(10)feet around the DSRSD Turnout 1 on the southeast corner of the site; • At the secondary site entry at Sierra Court,the south property line barrier shall turn towards the industrial uses to reduce flanking noise through the opening.On the west side,the flanking segment must continue for a distance of 35 feet from the main barrier.On the east side,the flanking segment must extend for a distance of 20 feet from the main barrier; • Sixty(60)inch high acoustically effective balconies shall be constructed for all second floor balconies within 70 feet of the south property line and with a direct or side view of industrial uses; • Fifty-four (54)inch high acoustically effective balconies shall be constructed for all second floor balconies within 70 feet of the south property line and with a direct or side view of industrial uses; Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 43 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 • Forty-eight(48)inch high acoustically effective balconies shall be constructed for all /'1 second floor balconies within 70 feet and 125 feet of the south property line and with a direct or side view of industrial uses; • Forty-two(42)inch high acoustically effective balconies shall be constructed for all third floor balconies within 70 feet and 125 feet of the south property line and with a direct or side view of industrial uses; • Forty-two(42)inch high acoustically effective balconies shall be constructed for all second and third floor balconies within 70 feet and 225 feet of the south property line and with a direct or side view of industrial uses; • Construction specifications for the noise barriers shall be as outlines in acoustic report for this project dated May 16,1997,prepared by Pack Associates. Mitigation Measure 16:To mitigate interior noise levels,the following window controls shall be provided as noted: • Maintain closed at all times all windows of second floor and unshielded first floor living spaces of dwellings located within 200 feet of the centerline of Dougherty with a direct or side view of the roadway.Windows within 150 feet of the centerline of Dougherty shall be rated with a minimum Sound Transmission Class(STC)28; • Maintain closed at all times all windows of second floor and unshielded first floor living spaces of all units located within 225 feet of the south property line and which also have a direct or side view of industrial uses.These windows shall be rated minimum STC 28; • Uniform Building and Mechanical Codes for ventilation of habitable structures shall be complied with. Mitigation Measure 17:The applicant shall,prior to issuance of building permits,obtain a written agreement with the Dublin Unified School District for the project's fair share mitigation of school impacts.Any fees which are required pursuant to that agreement shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits. Mitigation Measure 18:The applicant shall,prior to issuance of building permits,obtain a written agreement with the Dublin Unified School District for the project's fair share mitigation of school impacts.Any fees which are required pursuant to that agreement shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits. Mitigation Measure 19:The design of the proposed project shall incorporate the following features: • The 12-foot wall along the southerly property line shall be"softened"with the planting of permanent vines on both sides of the wall and trees on the residential side of the wall. • Patio walls and fences along Dougherty shall be constructed of decorative material, shall be setback a minimum distance of ten feet from the property line and shall be "softened"by appropriate landscape material,including trees,shrubs and vines and use of turfed berms. /1 Mitigation Measure 20:Should archeological artifacts or remains be discovered during construction of the project,work in the vicinity of the find shall stop immediately until a Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 44 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 qualified archeologist can evaluate the site and determine the significance of the find.Project personnel shall not collect or alter cultural resources.Identified cultural resources shall be recorded on forms DPR 422(archeological sites)and/or DPR 523(historic resources).If human remains are found,the County Coroner shall be contacted immediately. Mitigation Measure 23:The applicant shall work with City of Dublin with input from the East Bay Regional Parks District,through the Site Development Review process,with regard to treatment of the proposed project adjacent to the Iron Horse Trail,including number and location of access points,wall treatment and landscaping. The applicant shall also dedicate to the City of Dublin and improve additional right-of-way for recreational purposes,generally located on the northwest corner of the site.This dedication will complete public ownership of the Iron Horse Trail in this portion of the City. Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 45 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 Initial Study Preparer Jerry Haag,Urban Planner Agencies and Organizations Consulted The following agencies and organizations were contacted in the course of this Initial Study: City of Dublin Eddie Peabody Jr,.AICP,Community Development Director Dennis Carrington,AICP, Senior Planner Mehran Sepehri,Senior Engineer Robert Snodgrass,Fire Department Sgt.DiFranco,Police Department Dublin-San Ramon Services District John Mauck,Operations Manager Rhordora Biagtan,Engineer Dublin Unified School District Jeanne Howland,Business Manager .-. Alameda County Planning Department Joanne Parker,Transportation Planner References Dublin General Plan,Revised September 1992 Dublin General Plan Housing Element,June,1990 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for Trumark Homes General Plan Amendment,City of Dublin,March 1996 Feasibility Investigation on Dublin Site Cluster Housing,Terrasearch Inc.,August 1995 Phase One Environmental Site Assessment,ENGEO Inc.,August,1995 Pipelines and Public Safety,Transportation Research Board,1988 Noise Assessment Study for the Planned Park Sierra Multi-Family Development. Dougherty Road,Dublin,Edward L.Pack Associates,May,1997. Traffic Study of the Proposed Park Sierra Apartments TJKM Associates,July,1997 Geotechnical Investigation for Park Sierra Apartments,Lowney Associates,May 1997 Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 46 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 Appendices Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 47 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 Traffic Impact Analysis Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 48 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 �Trenaponallon Consultants _ REVISED DRAFT A Traffic Study for the Proposed Park Sierra Apartments In the City of Dublin July 2, 1997 PLEASANTON • FRESNO • SANTA ROSA TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 1 Introduction 1 Summary 3 Additional Recommendations 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS 4 Existing Transportation Network 4 Existing Land Uses 5 Level of Service Analysis Methodology 5 Unsignalized Intersections 5 Impact Criteria 5 Results of Level of Service Analysis 6 Signal Warrant Analysis(Existing Conditions) 6 IMPACTS OF APPROVED PROJECTS 8 Description of Approved Projects 8 East Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station 8 Hacienda Crossings(Opus) 9 Auto Nation 10 California Creekside 10 Villas at Santa Rita 10 Santa Rita Business Center(Opus Industrial) 11 Dublin Ranch Phase I 11 Arlen Ness Motorcycle Parts Store 11 Kassabian Motors 11 BJ Dublin Commercial 12 Approved Projects Within the City of Pleasanton 12 Proposed Future Transportation Improvements 12 Existing Plus Approved Project Traffic Impacts 13 Signal Warrant Analysis 15 IMPACTS OF PROPOSED PROJECT 16 Project Description 16 Trip Generation 16 Trip Assignment 16 Level of Service Analysis(Existing plus Approved plus Project-No Scarlett Drive Extension) 18 Signal Warrant Analysis 21 ANALYSIS WITH CONSTRUCTION OF THE SCARLETT DRIVE EXTENSION (Alternative 2) 22 Reassignment of Traffic Assuming Scarlett Drive Extension 22 Level of Service Analysis(With Scarlett Drive Extension) 22 CUMULATIVE 2010 IMPACTS 25 Traffic Model Description 25 Cumulative Conditions 25 Results of Level of Service Analysis(Cumulative Year 2010 plus Project Scenario) 25 Methodology 28 Results 30 Existing plus Approved 30 Existing plus Approved plus Project 30 Table of Contents Page PROJECT ACCESS AND INTERNAL CIRCULATION 31 Project Access 31 Traffic Signals 31 Internal Circulation 31 Parking 32 Pedestrian and Bicycle Access 32 RECOMMENDATIONS 36 Intersection Mitigations 36 Roadway Segment Mitigations 36 Access,Circulation and Parking 36 Additional Recommendations 37 STUDY PARTICIPANTS AND REFERENCES 38 TJKM Personnel 38 Persons Consulted 38 References 38 APPENDICES A Description of the Intersection Analysis B Results of the Intersection Analysis Existing C Results of the Intersection Analysis Existing plus Approved D Results of the Intersection Analysis Existing plus Approved plus Project Scenario (Without Scarlett Drive Extension) E Results of the Intersection Analysis Existing plus Approved plus Project Scenario(With Scarlett Drive Extension) F Results of the Intersection Analysis Cumulative(2010)plus Project Scenarios TABLES I Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service-Existing Conditions 6 II BART Modal Split Assumptions 9 III Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service-Existing plus Approved Scenario 15 IV Project Trip Generation 16 V Trip Distribution Assumptions 16 VI Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service-Existing plus Approved plus Project Scenario (No Scarlett Drive Extension) 18 VII Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service-Existing plus Approved plus Project Scenario (With Scarlett Drive Extension) 24 VIII Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service-Cumulative Year 2010 plus Project Scenario27 IX Forecasted Average Daily Traffic 30 X Estimated Project Share of Planned Improvement Costs 35 FIGURES 1 Vicinity Map 2 2 Existing Peak Hour Turning Movements 7 3 Existing plus Approved Peak Hour Turning Movements 14 4 Site Plan 17 5 Trip Distribution 19 6 Existing plus Approved plus Project(Alternative 1)Peak Hour Turning Movements 20 7 Existing plus Approved plus Project(Alternative 2)Peak Hour Turning Movements 23 8 Cumulative Year 2010 plus Project Peak Hour Turning Movements 26 9 Estimated Daily Volumes 29 10 Conceptual Access Plan 33 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY Introduction This report presents the results of TJKM's traffic impact analysis of the proposed Park Sierra development consisting of 209 apartments to be located in the City of Dublin. This site is located west of Dougherty Road between Monterey Drive and Houston Place. The project entrance is proposed to be directly across from the intersection of the Southern Pacific right-of-way(future Scarlett Drive)and Dougherty Road. The study area is shown in Figure 1. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the traffic impacts of the proposed project upon the nearby street system. The study methodology was to determine if any nearby intersections are projected to operate at worse than Level of Service(LOS)D and to determine what mitigations would be necessary if level of service standards are exceeded. The study also includes roadway segment level of service analysis for key roadways within the study area. Finally,signal warrant analyses for unsignalized intersections and the project entries are also included. Six intersections were analyzed for this study. These are listed below and shown in Figure 1. 1. Dougherty Road/Arnador Valley Boulevard 2. Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard 3. Dougherty Road/I-580 Westbound Ramps 4. Hopyard Road/I-580 Eastbound Ramps 5. Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett Drive 6. Dougherty Road/Scarlett Drive(Future) Four scenarios were addressed in the study: • Existing Conditions-Current traffic volumes and roadway conditions. • Existing plus Approved-Existing land use conditions plus future traffic from approved but unbuilt or occupied development near the project in the cities of Pleasanton and Dublin,including BART,Hacienda Crossings Retail Center (Opus),California Creekside residential Development,Villas at Santa Rita residential development,Auto Nation,Santa Rita Business Center(Opus industrial),Arlen Ness Motorcycle Parts Stores,Kassabian Motors,Shell Gas Station,BJ Dublin Commercial and the full build-out of Hacienda Business Park. • Existing plus Approved plus Project(No Scarlett Drive)-Identical to the Existing plus Approved Scenario but with traffic added from the development of the proposed project The extension of Scarlett Drive between Dublin Boulevard and Dougherty Road is not assumed to be completed. • Existing plus Approved plus Project(With Scarlett Drive)-Identical to the above scenario but assumes the completion of the extension of Scarlett Drive from Dublin Boulevard to Dougherty Road. • Cumulative(Year 2010)plus Project-Forecast land conditions for 2010 with assumed roadway improvements with project traffic added. Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 1 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 1 y0 �Pyp P� a p w O Project Site 5TH ST. `'9H YC e 9 h- ••so •+ 6 cU8uNetvo SipR�tN \ 2 9 s'c astDubiin �tF KART Station for 9fillpoii. sao ��� a Nil North LEGEND Not to Scale • Study Intersection City of Dublin Figure ciiii Park Sierra Apartments-Traffic Impact Study Vicinity Map 1 157-081-597-NA ) ) Summary Intersections are deemed in need of mitigation if they operate(or are projected to operate)at LOS E or worse(volume-to-capacity ratios exceeding 0.90). Two study intersections are projected to operate at unacceptable levels of service during one or more of the scenarios analyzed. The intersections of Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard and Hopyard Road/I-580 Eastbound Ramps operate at unacceptable levels of service under the Existing plus Approved Scenario without the proposed project. Mitigation measures discussed in this report would improve the levels of service at these intersections. In addition,the planned improvements to the I-580/1-680 interchange will likely reduce traffic volumes at the Hopyard Road/I-580 Eastbound Ramps intersection. Analysis of average daily traffic(ADT)was conducted for key two-lane roadway segments in the study area. The level of service for these segments was analyzed using the methodology for two-lane highways in the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual and the standards of the City of Dublin's General Plan. Some of the roadway segments are projected to operate unacceptably as two-lane roadways under one or more of the scenarios analyzed. This report concludes that each of the following roadways will need to be widened under a future scenario: Dublin Boulevard between Dougherty Road and Scarlett Drive,Dublin Boulevard west of Dougherty Road,Dougherty Road between Dublin Boulevard and I-580,and Dougherty Road between Dublin Boulevard and Amador Valley Boulevard. Caltrans signal warrant analyses,based on peak hour traffic and estimated future ADT,were conducted for both unsignalized study intersections. It was found that traffic signals will eventually be warranted at all these intersections(Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett Drive and Dougherty Road/Project Entrance/ Scarlett Drive). Internal circulation and project access proposals should be subject to the evaluation criteria described in this report. Additional Recommendations The project will not require any off-site mitigations measures that are not covered in the traffic impact fees with the exception of the main entrance to the project at the intersection of Dougherty Road and Scarlett Drive. The intersection improvements relating to the addition of the project entrance as a fourth leg of this intersection include a northbound left-turn lane,a southbound right-turn deceleration lane,and funding a"fair share"portion of the future cost of signalization of the intersection. The ultimate configuration of this intersection should function adequately. However,if the proposed project precedes the construction of the Scarlett Drive extension,precise design of the project entrance and its relation to Dougherty Road will need to consider alignment with the Scarlett Drive extension. The design of the west leg of the intersection will need to be done such that the appropriate lanes are adequately aligned with the appropriate lanes of the east leg of the intersection. The project will also be responsible for a"fair share"contribution toward future improvemnts at the intersection of Dougherty Road and Dublin Boulevard. Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 3 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 EXISTING CONDITIONS Existing Transportation Network The proposed project and the surrounding area are illustrated in Figure 1. Important roadways serving the project area are discussed below. Interstate 580 is a six-lane east-west freeway that connects Dublin with local cities such as Livermore and Pleasanton as well as regional origins and destinations such as Tracy,Fremont,and Oakland. In the vicinity of the proposed project,I-580 carries between 171,000 and 187,000 vehicles per day (based on data published in Caltrans'1995 Traffic Volumes on California State Highways)with interchanges at Interstate 680,Dougherty Road/Hopyard Road,and Hacienda Drive. Interstate 680 is a six-lane north-south freeway that connects Dublin with local cities such as Sunol and Walnut Creek as well as regional origins and destinations to the south such as Fremont and San Jose. To the north,it terminates at its interchange with Interstate 80 near the City of Fairfield. In the vicinity of the proposed project,I-680 carries between 115,000 and 119,000 vehicles per day(based on data published in Caltrans'1995 Traffic Volumes on California State Highways)with interchanges at Alcosta Boulevard,Interstate 580,and Stoneridge Drive. Dougherty Road is a two-lane rural road in its northern section located in Contra Costa County. It has been widened to four lanes between the Alameda/Contra Costa County border and Dublin Boulevard. It is six lanes wide between Dublin Boulevard and I-580. South of I-580,it continues with six lanes as Hopyard Road in the City of Pleasanton. Average daily traffic(ADT)varies from 12,600 vpd north of Amador Valley Boulevard to 42,800 vpd south of Dublin Boulevard. Dublin Boulevard is a major east-west arterial in the City of Dublin. It is a four-to six-lane road fronted largely by retail/commercial land uses to the west of Dougherty Road. A two-lane extension from Dougherty Road east to Tassajara Road has recently been constructed. ADT varies from 29,300 vpd east of San Ramon Road to 3,000 vpd west of Tassajara Road. Hacienda Drive is an arterial designed to provide access to the Hacienda Business Park in Pleasanton. It is a six-lane arterial south of I-580. Currently,there are two lanes to the north of I-580 that extend only as far north as Dublin Boulevard. Hacienda Drive is currently being widened north of I-580. Between I-580 and Dublin Boulevard,the ADT is approximately 5.300 vpd. Scarlett Drive is a two-lane road that provides access to land uses to the south of Dublin Boulevard west of Dougherty Road. An extension of this road is to be built with funds obtained from the traffic impact fees from development in East Dublin. This extension will proceed along the Southern Pacific right-of-way to the northwest from the intersection of Scarlett Drive and Dublin Boulevard and terminate at Dougherty Road. Amador Valley Boulevard is a three-lane east/west road to the north of the project site. It extends from San Ramon Boulevard to Dougherty Road. In the vicinity of the project,the land uses along Amador Valley Boulevard are primarily residential. ADT on Amador Valley Boulevard is approximately 10,800 vpd. 5th Street is an east/west street within the Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area,a U.S.military base located immediately opposite Dougherty Road to the east of the project. Currently,5th Street provides the main entrance to Camp Parks. In the near future,the main entrance will be relocated to Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 4 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 the north of the East Dublin BART Station and the 5th Street/Dougherty Road entrance will be abandoned. Sierra Court is a two-lane industrial collector road providing access to the primarily industrial land uses located to the south of the proposed project. Monterey Drive is a two-lane residential mad that intersects the west side of Dougherty Road north of the proposed project. Houston Place is a two-lane road with fronting industrial land uses. It intersects the east side of Dougherty Road to the south of the proposed project. Existing Land Uses To the north of the site,existing development is largely residential in nature to the west of Dougherty Road. East of Dougherty Road are governmental land uses consisting of Camp Parks,the Federal Correctional Institution,and Santa Rita Rehabilitation Center. South of the project site,there are largely industrial land uses with some retail land uses. Level of Service Analysis Methodology Peak hour intersection conditions are reported as volume-to-capacity(V/C)ratios with corresponding levels of service. Level of service ratings are qualitative descriptions of intersection operations and are reported using an A through F letter rating system to describe travel delay and congestion. Level of Service(LOS)A indicates free flow conditions with little or no delay and LOS F indicates jammed conditions with excessive delays and long back-ups. The operating conditions at signalized study intersections were evaluated using the Intersection Capacity Utilization(ICU)methodology adopted by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority(CCTA). This method provides an overall intersection level of service. LOS D is considered as the standard of significance in this traffic study. Appendix A contains a detailed description of the methodology. The intersection of Dougherty Road/Scarlett Drive/Project Entrance and Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett Drive are currently unsignalized. As part of the Scarlett Drive Extension Project,both of these intersections will be signalized. For those scenarios under which Scarlett Drive Extension is not assumed to be constructed,signal warrant analysis was conducted for these two intersections. Unsignalized Intersections The existing STOP-controlled,or"unsignalized;'intersections were analyzed using the methodology contained in the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual. This methodology also bases level of service on movement and intersection delays. Level of Service D is considered as the standard of significance for unsignalized intersections in this traffic study. The need for traffic signals at unsignalized study intersections was evaluated using peak hour warrants for rural area contained in Caltrans'Traffic Manual. Impact Criteria This analysis uses a minimum acceptable intersection level of service of LOS D(total volume-to- capacity ratio of 0.90). Mitigation measures must be implemented if the addition of project traffic causes an intersection to drop to LOS E or F conditions. Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 5 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 Results of Level of Service Analysis Turning movement counts for the a.m.and p.m.peak hours for all existing study intersections were either conducted by TJKM or obtained from other sources,namely the City of Pleasanton's Traffic Counts for Baseline 1996. All traffic counts used were conducted either during 1996 and 1997. Figure 2 illustrates the existing peak hour turning movements for the existing study intersections. Table I summarizes the results of the intersection analysis for existing conditions. None of the existing study intersections currently operate at Level of Service E or worse during either peak period, except the intersection of Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett Drive. The intersection of Dublin Boulevard/ Scarlett Lane currently operates at LOS E. Turning movements at this intersection experience long delays during the p.m.peak hour. This condition can be mitigated by signalizing the intersection. The detailed calculations of the level of service analysis are contained in Appendix B. Table I Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service-Existing Conditions A.M.Peak Hour P.M.Peak Hour Intersection Control • LOS * LOS 1 Dougherty Road/Amador Valley Boulevard Signal 0.66 B 0.56 A 2 Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard Signal 0.68 B 0.70 B 3 Dougherty Road/I-580 Westbound Ramps Signal 0.47 A 051 A 4 Hopyard Road/I-580 Eastbound Ramps Signal 036 A 054 A 5 Scarlett Drive/Dublin Boulevard 1-way Stop 65 B 44.4 E Note: •= Volume-to-Capacity(V/C)Ratio for signalized intersections; Average Delay in Seconds for stopping and yielding movements at 1-way STOP-controlled intersections. Signal Warrant Analysis(Existing Conditions) Signal warrant analyses based on estimated average daily traffic and peak hour traffic volumes were conducted for the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Scarlett Drive. It was found that this intersection warrants a traffic signal. Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 6 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 Intersectic ) Intersection a2 ) Intersection 03 Intersection a4 Intersect. AS Dougherty/Amador Valley Dougherty/Dublin Dougherty/1.580 WB Ramps Hopyard/IS80 EB Ramps Dublln/Scartett Fo G- 7- iiIgn w 4 o R..93(184) 1 Sf o- 4--128(171) o IL 459(379) 4-239(313) A A r79(76) ..al 4 r 265(189) d' r38(8) 606(350��'' 42 -,'1,1 f t� 482(431)�r� 183(692)��� 449(891�1 ei.ilia, 920 557-4 ni"' 14(16)-14 m '�� a les,') n gi wN un ��4. o n �0- at m 4P w P u 0 ° Project Site \— z.: s1H ST. Fs .y 1,-6B0 'h y F+'' / z °a S4nq 5 °ueta.,8„, AW to a East Dublin SO"q<F 9ART5ali9n,, A MAIN.580 � 3 a � 4 LEGEND -- 111 Study Intersection North XX A.M.Peak Hour Volume Not to Scale (XX)P.M.Peak Hour Volume City of Dublin Figure Park Sierra Apartments-Traffic Impact Study Existing Peak Hour Turning Movements 2 157081.497-NA IMPACTS OF APPROVED PROJECTS Several approved projects are included in this scenario: the East Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station;the Hacienda Crossings retail center(Opus);the Auto Nation used and new car sales site;the California Creekside residential project;the Villas at Santa Rita apartments;Santa Rita Business Center(Opus industrial);Arlen Ness Motorcycle Parts Store;Kassabian Motors;BJ Dublin Commercial;Shell Gas Station and approved projects from within the City of Pleasanton. Approved projects consist of developments that are either under construction,are built but unoccupied or partially occupied,or that are unbuilt but have final development plan approval. Following are descriptions of these projects. Description of Approved Projects East Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station The trip generation and distribution process for the East Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station traffic parallels that used in the BART Draft Environmental Impact Report and the Terminal Area Study. The Draft Environmental Impact Report was prepared by BART in September of 1989. The East Dublin/Pleasanton BART Terminal Area Study was prepared by Richard T.Loewke in August of 1994. These documents state that the daily ridership at the BART station will be 15,140 in the year 2005,with 4,930 occurring during the a.m.period. Year 2000 traffic volumes were assumed for this study. These are projected to be 85 percent of the year 2005 volumes(12,870 daily trips and 4,190 a.m.peak hour trips). The a.m.peak hour volumes are assumed to be 60 percent of the a.m.peak period(7:00-9:00 a.m.) volumes. The in:out split for these trips is based upon existing and future distribution of land uses in the service area of the station. The resulting in:out split is 86 percent entering the station and 14 percent exiting the station during the a.m.peak period. The p.m.peak period is assumed to be the reverse of the a.m.peak period(14 percent in,86 percent out)with the same total peak hour volume as the a.m.period. The modal shares of the BART patrons are given in Table II. The a.m.inbound and the p.m. outbound modal share percentages are the same as those used in the Draft EIR. The a.m.outbound percentages were modified based on the fact that most trips from the station in the a.m.peak would have a work site as a destination(i.e.Hacienda Business Park). These travellers would be much less likely to have access to an automobile for the trip from the BART station to their work place. They would instead be expected to have an increased propensity to use transit or walk. The p.m.inbound modal shares also reflect an increased modal share for walking and transit,and a decreased auto drive percentage. However,other factors are at work in the p.m.peak. For example,workers are being dropped off(kiss-and-ride)and non-commute BART patrons are using the system. Therefore,different modal shares were developed for the p.m.inbound passengers. The BART station is planned to be opened on May 10,1997. Of all the access modes,only kiss-and-ride and auto drive contribute to the total number of auto trips into and out of the station. Kiss-and-ride trips are counted twice since they consist of both an inbound trip and an outbound trip. The total number of auto drive trips generated for the a.m.peak period was compared to the number of available parking spaces to ensure that there is adequate parking for this level of demand. Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 8 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 Table II BART Modal Split Assumptions A.M. P.M. Travel Mode In Out In Out Transit 13% 70% 35% 13% Walk/Bike 10% 15% 10% 10% Kiss-and-Ride 8% 12% 20% 8% Auto Drive 57% 3% 25% 57% Auto Ride 12% 0% 5% 12% The trip distributions used are virtually identical to those used in the BART Draft EIR. A rough breakdown of the trip distribution is: • 40 percent to and from the east via I-580 • 31 percent to and from south of I-580 • 9 percent to and from the northwest via Dublin Boulevard • 10 percent to and from the northwest via I-680 • 10 percent to and from the north via Dougherty Road and Tassajara Road One significant assumption made in the BART Draft EIR,and replicated in this study,is that all of the BART trips are displaced auto trips. No new trips are created by the BART station since all BART trips are diverted trips. For each projected auto trip to the BART station(an"after"trip),the corresponding existing("before")trip without the existence of the BART station was determined. It was assumed that all of the"before"trips are currently travelling on I-580 to and from the west. To determine the final traffic volumes resulting from the BART station,the existing"before"trips were counted as negative trips,since they would no longer be present once the BART station is constructed. The"after"trips were counted as positive trips. Thus,some study intersection turning movements due to BART are actually negative. Special attention was given to which parking lot (north side or south side)the auto drive trips would use. Vehicles were assigned in such a manner that each parking lot received an equal number of vehicles since they are virtually the same size. The net effect of the BART station on local traffic is generally to divert vehicles that would have travelled directly to I-580,to local streets and ultimately the BART station. Some traffic originating from the east of the study area(i.e.Tracy)will,with the presence of the BART station,now exit the freeway and use local streets to arrive at the BART station. Hacienda Crossings(Opus) The Hacienda Crossings development is a 469,600-square-foot retail center with an assumed completion date of 1997. This is a very conservative assumption given that the initial construction phase of the project has yet to begin. The proposed development consists of a 120-room hotel,a 21- screen theater and a commercial center. The Hacienda Crossings site is located in the southeast corner of the Hacienda Drive and Dublin Boulevard intersection. The site's southern boundary is I-580. Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 9 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 The trip generation and distribution calculations for the Hacienda Crossings were developed by TIKM. The trip generation rates applied in this study were drawn from the Institute of Transportation Engineers'(ITE),Trip Generation,Fifth Edition and the San Diego Traffic Generators,published by the San Diego Association of Governments(SanDAG). The Hacienda Crossings development is expected to generate 20,923 daily trips,409 during the a.m.peak hour and 1,955 during the p.m.peak hour. Auto Nation The proposed Auto Nation consists of a 21.4-acre facility for sales of used and new cars. The Auto Nation site is located south of Dublin Boulevard and east of the Hacienda Crossings site. The site extends to Tassajara Creek to the east and I-580 in the south as shown in the Figure 1. Adjacent to the site,a 5-acre car sales facility is planned. The trip generation and distribution calculations for Auto Nation were developed by TJKM. The Auto Nation development is expected to generate 4,765 daily trips,306 during the a.m.peak hour and 358 during the p.m.peak hour. The trip generation assumptions for the project are based on a trip rate study conducted by Kimley-Hom at a similar facility located in Lewisville,Texas. The study was prepared for the developer of the Auto Nation project. California Creekside The California Creekside project consists of 154 single-family detached homes and 126 townhomes to the north of Dublin Boulevard between Tassajara Creek on the west and Hacienda Drive on the east. The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan calls for single-family and medium/high density residential development in this area with densities ranging from 1.0 dwelling units/acre to 25.0 dwelling units/ acre. The 280-unit development is expected to generate 2,296 daily trips,169 during the a.m.peak hour and 225 during the p.m.peak hour. The trip generation assumptions for the project are based on information contained in Trip Generation and the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Study. Villas at Santa Rita The Villas at Santa Rita project consists of 324 apartments(132 one-bedroom, 144 two-bedroom and 48 three-bedroom)on east side of Hacienda Drive between Dublin Boulevard and the proposed Central Parkway. The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan calls for single-family and medium/high density residential development in this area with densities ranging from 1.0 dwelling units/acre to 25.0 dwelling units/acre. The 324-unit development is expected to generate 2,268 daily trips,165 during the a.m.peak hour and 204 during the p.m.peak hour. The trip generation and distribution calculations for the Villas at Santa Rita are taken from the traffic impact analysis conducted for the project by TJKM Transportation Consultants entitled A Traffic Impact Study for the Villas at Santa Rita Apartments,prepared in March of 1997. The trip generation assumptions for the project are based on information contained in Trip Generation,Fifth Edition,published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers'and the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Study. Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 10 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 • . • • '/ / • #.,;• • AEI . - 0 ..- „, . a q,_. --.,.. k, , R .. .01. , .. . rtna a R. O . ._ . j� • . . A do. 1t -. Cibt \,. .30 4r. .. H ......‘.V... P71TAT11 • ti, r. • . ..• �'e ti -\ \ • v. ti\. k•41,;,i. • • lPJE6M2 SP. N9'M�470 P. e Exhibit 3 '_ Conceptual Site Plan —mir— fiance P.Cae ARCHITECT, INC. US Mi. Y m u� 4/e/r s/EBelf 74P74/elli�-#7:: p ado 180' r'-____1-- SHEET I OF I 0/22/•1-1 Source: Thomas Cox Associates Santa Rita Business Center(Opus Industrial) The Santa Rita Business Center consists of 409,360 square feet of office/light industrial space located to the south of Gleason Drive between Hacienda Drive on the east and Arnold Road on the west. The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan calls for Campus Office and Light Industrial in this area. The trip generation and distribution calculations for Santa Rita Business Center are taken from the traffic impact analysis conducted for this project by TJKM Transportation Consultants entitled A Traffic Impact Study for the Santa Rita Business Center Proposed Development,prepared in September of 1996. The 409,360-square-foot development is expected to generate 4,070 daily trips,571 during the a.m.peak hour and 525 during the p.m.peak hour. The trip generation assumptions for the project are based on information contained in Trip Generation,Fifth Edition,published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. Dublin Ranch Phase I The Dublin Ranch Phase I project consists of 847 single-family detached homes to the northeast of the intersection of Tassajara Road and Gleason Drive. The Eastern Dublin Specific Plan calls for single- family and medium density residential development in this area with densities ranging from 1.0 dwelling units/acre to 14.0 dwelling units/acre. The 847-unit development is expected to generate 8,137 daily trips,630 during the a.m.peak hour and 869 during the p.m.peak hour. The trip generation and distribution calculations for Dublin Ranch Phase I are taken from the traffic impact analysis conducted for the project by TJKM Transportation Consultants entitled A Traffic Study for Phase I of the Dublin Ranch Property Proposed Residential Development,prepared in December of 1995. The trip generation assumptions for the project are based on information contained in Trip Generation,Fifth Edition,published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers'and the Eastern Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Study. Arlen Ness Motorcycle Parts Store The proposed Arlen Ness Motorcycle Parts Store consists of 43,700 square feet of specialty retail, space located in the southeast quadrant of the Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett Drive intersection. The trip generation and distribution calculations for Arlen Ness Motorcycle Parts Store were developed by TJKM. The 43,700-square foot development is expected to generate 350 daily trips,38 during the a.m.peak hour and 40 during the p.m.peak hour. The trip generation rates applied in this study were drawn from the Institute of Transportation Engineers'(ITE)Trip Generation,Fifth Edition. Kassabian Motors The proposed Kassabian Motors consists of 22,360 square feet of specialty retail,space located in the southwest quadrant of the Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett Drive intersection. The trip generation and distribution calculations for Kassabian Motors were developed by TJKM. The 22,360-square foot development is expected to generate 179 daily trips,20 during the a.m.peak hour and 20 during the p.m.peak hour. The trip generation rates applied in this study were drawn from the Institute of Transportation Engineers'(ITE)Trip Generation,Fifth Edition. Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 11 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 BJ Dublin Commercial The proposed BJ Dublin Commercial project includes is a 63,900-square-foot retail center and an 89 room hotel. The BJ Dublin Commercial site is located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Dougherty Road. The trip generation and distribution calculations for the BJ Dublin Commercial project were developed by TJKM. The entire development is expected to generate 6,348 daily trips,184 during the a.m.peak hour and 546 during the p.m.peak hour. The trip generation rates applied in this study were drawn from the Institute of Transportation Engineers'no Trip Generation,Fifth Edition. Approved Projects Within the City of Pleasanton For traffic impact studies within the City of Pleasanton,TJKM developed a travel demand forecasting model for the City. This model considers all of the approved projects within the City. The resulting list of approved projects is considered to be very conservative since the Hacienda Business Park is treated as built out under the"most probable development"scenario. This scenario allows for an additional 4,631,059 square feet of building space in the business park. It should be noted that while this large amount of development is approved,it will likely be a number of years before this level of development is actually constructed. Proposed Future Transportation Improvements Planning efforts for East Dublin are currently dynamic. Known long-term transportation improvements planned for the area are listed below: Bay Area Rapid Transit District(BART)opened the East Dublin/Pleasanton Station on May 10,1997. The station is located in the center of I-580 between the Dougherty Road/Hopyard Road and Hacienda Drive interchanges. Because all traffic counts were taken before the BART opening,the station is treated as an approved project in this report. Improvements to the 1-580/1-680 Interchange have been proposed and will be funded by traffic impact fees from projects located within the Tri-Valley region. The proposed improvements consist mainly of hook ramps to provide access from I-680 to points in nearby Dublin and a flyover from southbound I-680 to eastbound I-580. The Scarlett Drive Extension from Dublin Boulevard northwest to Dougherty Road will be constructed when traffic impact fees from new development in the area have been collected. This extension will be located along the current Southern Pacific right-of-way. The planned improvements include the construction and signalization of the intersections of Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett Drive and Dougherty Road/Scarlett Drive. Improvements are planned for only three legs at the intersection of Dougherty Road/Scarlett Drive. Dougherty Road Improvements have been proposed between Interstate 580 and the Contra Costa County line. These improvements are to be funded by traffic impact fees from development within the City of Dublin and nearby areas. They include widening of the roadway,improving the pavement, and providing a southbound right-turn lane between Houston Place and Dublin Boulevard. Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 12 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 Dublin Boulevard Widening has also been proposed to be funded by traffic impact fees paid by new development. Dublin Boulevard will ultimately be widened to six lanes from Village Parkway in downtown Dublin east to Tassajara Road. The mad is already six lanes wide from San Ramon Road to Village Parkway. The East Dublin Specific Plan shows Dublin Boulevard as the major east/west roadway in the area. The Existing plus Approved Scenarios include the BART station but not the improvements to Dougherty Road or Dublin Boulevard. Existing Plus Approved Project Traffic Impacts The Existing plus Approved traffic volumes at the study intersections are shown in Figure 3. The results of the level of service analysis for the Existing plus Approved Scenario are shown in Table III. The detailed calculations of the level of service analysis are contained in Appendix C. Under this scenario,two study intersections are projected to operate at unacceptable levels of service: • Dougherty RoadlDublin Boulevard: The intersection is projected to operate at LOS E (V/C=0.92)during the p.m.peak hour. This condition can be mitigated by widening the eastbound approach to provide a second through lane and by restriping the southbound approach to provide a second exclusive left-turn lane. The second southbound left-turn lane currently exists,but is striped out. The measures required to mitigate this intersection are part of the City of Dublin Traffic Impact Fee. • Hopyard Road1l-580 Eastbound Ramps: The intersection is projected to operate at LOS F(V/C=1.05)during the a.m.peak hour and LOS E(V/C=0.92)during the p.m.peak hour. This condition can be mitigated by widening the eastbound off-ramp to provide a third right-turn lane. The eastbound off-ramp widening is mainly attributable to the large number of right-turn movements at the intersection,related to developments within the City of Pleasanton. The City of Pleasanton has previously identified some restriping measures for the off-ramp as part of the buildout requirements,but no widening. In addition,the intersection of Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett Drive will continue to operate at an unacceptable level of service during the p.m.peak hour. Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 13 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 Intersectional Intersection A2 Intersection#3 Intersection A4 Intersection A5 Dougherty/Amador Valley Dou9herty/Dublin Dougherty/I-580 WB Ramps Hopyard4580 EB Ramps Dublin/Scarlett .2 ,gird 1 f i2 `r'f222487j) 1k-598(575) .- s-477(1,078) .'i It+A 0105 182) Adi r366(382) 4i %45(16) 51((14())� )f 61(((123jjj-4�tL tr 608(519).}I' 746 1,244)-0'i 634(395)71 c o. 319(503�-►a N Q^, 2.176(1.155) 4)26)�1 m `mom 449 891�1 a ,,, 03 _ 10 0 -w g. m aw m P,p P tj �p9 w O O Project Site � srll sr. /T � % 4•.Gt`'9F ic sc <19 u \-- l4CF 09F N62 \ 0uet/NetW 4imos,,,„,, s `~ ''' East Dublin sct,9 � 6ART Station F for $ 3 4 LEGEND -- North • Study Intersection Not to Scale XX A.M.Peak Hour Volume (XX)P.M.Peak Hour Volume City of Dublin Figure viii Park Sierra Apartments-Traffic Impact Study Existing +Approved Peak Hour Turning Movements 3 157-081-5197-NA ) ) Table III Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service-Existing plus Approved Scenario Existing plus Existing Approved Conditions Intersection Unmitigated Mitigated V/C LOS V/C LOS V/C LOS 1 Dougherty Road/ A.M. 0.66 B 0.69 B Amador Valley Boulevard P.M. 056 A 0.61 B 2 Dougherty Road/ A.M. 0.68 B 0.82 D 0.73 C Dublin Boulevard P.M. 0.70 B 1.03 F 0.78 C 3 Dougherty Road/ A.M. 0.47 A 059 A I-580 Westbound Ramps P.M. 051 A 0.69 B 4 Hopyard Road/ A.M. 056 A 1.05 F 0.84 D I-580 Eastbound Ramps P.M. 054 A 0.89 D 0.78 C 5 Scarlett Drive/ A.M. 6.5 B 675 F Dublin Boulevard P.M. 44.4 E 999 F Signal Warrant Analysis Signal warrant analysis based on estimated average daily traffic and peak hour traffic volumes were conducted for the intersection of Dublin Boulevard and Scarlett Drive. Under the Existing plus Approved scenario,the intersection of Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett Drive(Number 5)is projected to warrant traffic signalization. Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 15 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 IMPACTS OF PROPOSED PROJECT Project Description The proposed project consists of 209 apartments on west side of Dougherty Road between Monterey Drive and Houston Place. Figure 4 illustrates the preliminary site plan for the proposed project. Access to the proposed development will be provided primarily from Dougherty Road. Additional access will be provided from the western portion of the project via Sierra Court. It is expected that almost all of the project traffic will use the Dougherty Road access. The site is adjacent to Dougherty Road's west side and extends to the northwest,parallel to the Alameda County right-of-way(which is planned to be used as a trailway). Trip Generation The 209-unit apartment development is expected to generate 1,463 daily trips,107 during the a.m. peak hour and 132 during the p.m.peak hour. The trip generation assumptions for the project are based on information contained in Trip Generation,Fifth Edition,published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers as well as assumptions used in the City of Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Study. Table IV illustrates the estimated trip generation for the proposed project Table IV: Project Trip Generation Daily A.M.Peak Hour P.M.Peak Hour UseSizeRate Trips Rate In:Out In Out Total Rate In:Out to Out Total Apartment 209 du 7.0 1,463 0.51 17:83 18 89 107 0.63 68:33 90 42 132 Source: Trip Generation,Institute of Transportation Engineers,Fifth Edition,1991,and the City of Dublin Traffic Impact Fee Study. Trip Assignment Project trip distribution assumptions were developed based on existing travel patterns,knowledge of the study area,and information contained in previous traffic studies. The trip distribution assumptions for project trips are summarized in Table V. Table V: Trip Distribution Assumptions To and from the.... Percent North via Dougherty Road 3% West via Amador Valley Boulevard 15% West via Dublin Boulevard 30% East via Dublin Boulevard 10% West via I-580 35% East via I-580 5% South(to Pleasanton)via Hopyard Road 2% Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 16 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 --- GpriT1 re.? North Not to Scale City of Dublin Figure icifio Park Sierra Apartments-Traffic Impact Study Site Plan 4 157-081-4N7-NA Figure 5 illustrates the trip distribution assumptions for the proposed project. The project trips were assigned to the study intersections using these trip distribution assumptions to produce project traffic volumes on all of the study intersections. It was assumed that none of the vehicles would use the Sierra Court access point. This assumption is conservative with respect to Dougherty Road. Since the exact timing of the construction of the Scarlett Drive Extension is uncertain,this study analyzed the Existing plus Approved plus Project Scenario twice. Alternative 1 assumes that the extension is not constructed,and Alternative 2 assumes that the extension is constructed. Level of Service Analysis(Existing plus Approved plus Project-No Scarlett Drive Extension) The results of the level of service analysis performed for this scenario are summarized in Table VI. Figure 6 illustrates the projected peak hour turning movement volumes for this scenario. Detailed calculations for this scenario are contained in Appendix D. Under this scenario,the three study intersections projected to operate at unacceptable level of service under the Existing plus Approved scenario are projected to continue to do so. With mitigation measures described under the"Impacts of Approved Projects"section,these intersections will operate at acceptable level of service. As previously mentioned,the planned improvements to the 1-580/1-680 interchange are expected to reduce traffic volumes at the Dougherty Road and Hopyard Road intersections,also resulting in improved levels of service under this scenario. It should be noted that the projected unacceptable levels of service conditions at these intersections are not directly related to the development of the proposed project,but rather result from the addition of traffic from already approved projects within the project vicinity. However,the project is expected to make"fair share contributions to need— tm rovemen ts at impacted intersections within the City of Dublin. Table VI Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Existing plus Approved plus Project Scenario(No Scarlett Drive Extension) Existing+Approved Existing+Approved+Project Peak Unmitigated Mitigated Intersection Period V/C LOS V/C LOS V/C LOS 1 Dougherty Road/Amador A.M. 0.69 B 0.69 B Valley Boulevard P.M. 0.61 B 0.61 B 2 Dougherty Road/ A.M. 0.82 D 0.83 D 0.74 C Dublin Boulevard P.M. 1.03 F 1.05 F 0.80 C 3 Dougherty Road/ A.M. 059 A 0.59 A I 580 Westbound Ramps P.M. 0.69 B 0.70 B 4 Hopyard Road/I 580 A.M. 1.05 F 1.05 F 0.84 D Eastbound Ramps P.M. 0.89 D 0.89 D 0.78 C 5 Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett A.M. 675 F 0.59 A Drive P.M. 999 F 0.90 D 6 Dougherty Road/ A.M. -- -- 055 A Starlets Drive P.M. -- -- 0.47 A Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 18 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 ) ) ) =3% 1 .yO y0 AO" Alf 0 PP � O 0 Project Site 57H Sr. 4A,16 2r \ G9 'FS, 680 h 6 rF / 2S DIVON Du, O 10% o 1--.11110 30// SOa9 n East Dublin [FTrcT o BART Station �� 580 Jj �� 35% 4 R2% 5% LEGEND �1 N _ North • Study Intersection Not to Scale City of Dublin il Park Sierra Apartments-Traffic Impact Study Figure Project Trip Distribution 5 157-081-597-NA Intersection f1 Intersection a2 Intersection A3 Intersection#4 Intersection#5 Dougherty/Amador Valley Dougherty/Dublin Dougherty/I-580 WB Ramps Hopyard/l-580 EB Ramps Dublin/Scatted ^ C- cr m „,.14 it179 471 t A. H �-479(1,087) �i- 599(580) �� 45 10 a`4, X: (�♦-222 182 A11$c'366(382) A) ( ) �� ,0 rrlos�le2 t r 61((551)-xTf 76512(2)) s7 140��� 66 150�r�tfi F 2,176(1,155)->1 m �4(26I�rn 637(409�-�0 319((503)J-a^—^ !; MI La 449(891)�1 e�o ,p. CV Eye E. nab $� CV �' ,� a Intersection a6 �PcPP 1.' Dougherty/Barlett P 0 Project 170..1 Site � •- J 73(34)-4 0446 CA 680 5 • DUBLINBWO11111011HL N 9 Se East Dublin KART Station ale, or 9 ......... 3 A �i 580 %�i � 4 LEGEND ill North • Study Intersection Not to Seale XX A.M.Peak Hour Volume (XX)P.M.Peak Hour Volume City of Dublin Figure ../N Park Sierra Apartments-Traffic Impact Study 6 Existing + Approved + Project (Alternative 1) Peak Hour Turning Movements 157 081-597-NA ) ) Signal Warrant Analysis Signal warrant analyses based on estimated average daily traffic and peak hour traffic volumes were conducted for the intersection of Dougherty Road and Project Entrance. Under the Existing plus Approved plus Project(Alternative 1)scenario,the intersection of Dougherty Road/Project Entrance is not projected to warrant signalization. Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 21 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 ANALYSIS WITH CONSTRUCTION OF THE SCARLETT DRIVE EXTENSION (Alternative 2) As mentioned,the exact timing of the construction of the Scarlett Drive Extension is uncertain and analysis was conducted with and without the extension. This section assumes that the extension is constructed. The Existing plus Approved plus Project Scenario with the Scarlett Drive Extension is equivalent to its counterpart without the Scarlett Drive Extension with the following exceptions: • Traffic from the Existing plus Approved Scenario was reassigned to account for the presence of the extension. This reassignment is discussed below. • Traffic from the project was assigned assuming that the extension is constructed. • The intersections of Dougherty Road/Scarlett Drive/Project Entrance and Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett Drive are assumed to be signalized. Reassignment of Traffic Assuming Scarlett Drive Extension Traffic from the Existing plus Approved Scenario was reassigned based on the two turning movements at Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard that are expected to be reduced with the construction of the extension. These turning movements are the southbound left-turn movement and the westbound right- turn movement. Two-thirds of the traffic completing these turning movements was reassigned to the Scarlett Drive Extension. The turning movement volumes were adjusted accordingly at the intersections of Dougherty Road/Scarlett Drive/Project Entrance,Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard, and Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett Drive. Level of Service Analysis(With Scarlett Drive Extension) The results of the level of service analysis for the Existing plus Approved plus Project Scenario(with Scarlett Drive Extension)are shown in Table VII. Figure 7 illustrates the projected peak hour turning movement volumes for this scenario. Detailed calculations are contained in Appendix E. The results of this analysis are very similar to the analysis assuming the extension is not constructed. Under this alternative,the two study intersections projected to operate at unacceptable levels of service under the Existing plus Approved scenario are projected to continue to do so. With the mitigation measures described under the"Impact of Approved Projects"section,these intersections will operate at acceptable levels of service. Despite the decrease in traffic at the intersection of Dougherty Road/ Dublin Boulevard as a result of the extension,the level of service does not change since none of the critical turning movements are affected. It should be noted that the projected unacceptable level of service conditions at these intersections are not directly related to the development of the proposed project,but rather result from the addition of traffic from already approved projects within the project vicinity. As mentioned in the previous section,the project will be required to pay a"fair share" portion of improvement costs at impacted City of Dublin intersections. Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 22 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 Interseello Intersections , Intersection e3 Intersection#4 Intersect. Dougherty/Amador Valley Dougoherty/Dublln Dougherty/I-580 WB Ramps Hopyard/I-580 EB Ramps Dublin/Scarier! ev, Q6 ,, m m �q$ vS tts9(,(54)� t C� -SN £{ } }�tC'105(�82) �599(580) $� `..4--659120(378) ,t4,r366(382) 51(1404�f 64(139.�1r 5) }�lt'4s(10) 6344091�0 319(503�_ N Zr 614(551)� (� 880(756)� 4491(891,1 moo nay (.`.�� 42(23)'���� ��7SS 2.17611 a ,a o P NN may¢ a N m _ oeJT 2 f ci f mnN !1P p Intersection#6 Dougheny/Scarlrlen 'o Project g Site '. N tC 121(320) sTH ST. Al}k.,4-2(9) � B 16 I4)y ?`1 L 64(30)�e TG F < SC 1 \... ,,0 -f� t '9!F,,T c,.. � F C 42F+T / \_ 7 ti so puec/ SlfRgq LN ti 5 Nett/0 2 ci Sc,4/F East Du6lm /ToT 9 BART Station 3 11111phip. � 4 r— LEGEND II • Study Intersection North XX A.M.Peak Hour Volume Not to Scale (XX)P.M.Peak Hour Volume City of Dublin Figure oil Park Sierra Apartments-Traaffic Impact Study Existing +Approved + Project (Alternative 2) Peak Hour Turning Movements 7 157-091-597-NA Table VII Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Existing plus Approved plus Project Scenario(With Scarlett Drive Extension) Existing+Approved Existing+Approved+Project Peak Intersection Period Unmitigated Mitigated V/C LOS V/C LOS V/C LOS 1 Dougherty Road/ A.M. 0.69 B 0.69 B Amador Valley Boulevard P.M. 0.61 B 0.61 B 2 Dougherty Road/ A.M. 0.82 D 0.83 D 0.74 C Dublin Boulevard P.M. 0.92 E 0.92 E 0.80 C 3 Dougherty Road/ A.M. 0.59 A 059 A I-580 Westbound Ramps P.M. 0.69 B 0.70 B 4 Hopyard Road/ A.M. 1.05 F 1.05 F 0.84 D I-580 Eastbound Ramps P.M. 0.89 D 0.89 D 0.78 C 5 Dublin Boulevard/ A.M. 673 F 0.79 C Scarlett Drive P.M. 999 F 0.82 D 6 Dougherty Road/ A.M. — -- 034 A Scarlett Drive P.M. — — 0.68 B Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 24 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 CUMULATIVE 2010 IMPACTS 5c(‘ Traffic Model Description q" ii�'� Traffic volumes taken from the Tri-Valley travel demand forecast model were used for Year 2010 background volumes in the study area. The model has been adopted by the Tri-Valley Transportation Council(TVTC),a body representing seven Tri-Valley jurisdictions(five cities and two counties) charged with establishing a long-range transportation plan for the entire Tri-Valley. The model uses the EMME/2 software. The land use forecasts included in the Tri-Valley Model(TVM)are based on each Tri-Valley jurisdiction's estimates of expected residential and business growth through 2010. Roadway network improvement assumptions are similarly based on each jurisdiction's estimate of likely construction by 2010 not all improvements are currently funded,but local roadway improvements and extensions are contained in local general plans and have funding sources identified. The model bases its trip-making assumptions on standard trip generation data. The trip distribution is based on standard gravity model concepts. Fundamentally,the model assumes that the"attractiveness" of one traffic zone to another(i.e.the likelihood of trips travelling between the two zones)is inversely proportional to the square of the effective distance between the two zones. Cumulative Conditions Traffic conditions(turning movement volumes and lane geometries)for the year 2010 at the study intersections are taken from the traffic impact study conducted by TJKM Transportation Consultants entitled Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Update Traffic Study,prepared in July of 1996. The traffic conditions for the updated Alameda County Alternative with the assumption of build-out of the City of Dublin were used for this scenario. The turning movements at the intersection of Dougherty Road/ Amador Valley Boulevard are forecasted using a growth rate of 1.15 applied to Existing plus Approved plus Project traffic volumes during the a.m.peak hour. The traffic volumes during the p.m. peak hour at the intersection of Amador Valley Boulevard/Dougherty Road were taken from the "Existing plus Approved plus Project"scenario,as the model does not show any growth in traffic at the intersection of Dougherty Road/Scarlett Drive. Results of Level of Service Analysis(Cumulative Year 2010 plus Project Scenario) Figure 8 illustrates the turning movements for this scenario. The results of the level of service analysis for this scenario are shown in Table VIII. Detailed calculations of level of service are contained in Appendix F. Under this scenario,all study intersections are projected to operate at acceptable levels of service. The intersection of Dublin Boulevard/Dougherty Road is projected to operate with highest volume-to-capacity ratio(V/C=0.89)during the p.m.peak hour. Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 25 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 Intersection#1 Intersection#2 Intersection#3 Intersection$14 Intersection#5 Dougherty/Amador Valley Dougherty/Dublin Dougherty/I-580 WB Ramps Hopyard/l580 EB Ramps Dublin/Scadett ;n <- P°‘N-, �'�k.255(235) 1 il. a�-1 742 .595) :•1-1.101 795) - +�B00 (( A i �4 (493) .11 r 460(366) ;1 1(4.r-50( 5 0) 59 �)4�lfq ter 766(1,083)-11 t 1,058(1.793)�11 t r 736 4231a— 1200(1,159)-4 a 60(`a-,1 ma 87 951 1.105)-1 g4 S.‘, o es � J ,,z. J � i a �P Intersection rt6 Dougherty/Scarlet(w &- - Project /(- 3B3(688) Site �j /1i�~2(9) / 6 64(30)�1 LrLHF. r'' s\..... 4 � 4 oy �— �A F+T 680 ''h- 4 Ftis oti 5 OOgltNe[W. 2 n 33. SCgq( ✓AR StatiDubloon � o B/11{�r5fd}ion limillmill 580 *lko.-I.. .........:.,,..---- LEGEND h t Nor Study Intersection Not to Scale XX A.M.Peek Hour Volume (XX)P.M.Peek Hour Volume City of Dublin Figure oil Park Sierra Apartments-Traaffic Impact Study Cumulative Year 2010 Plus Project Peak Hour Turning Movements 157-081-597-NA ) ) ) Table VIII Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service-Cumulative Year 2010 plus Project Scenario Cumulative(2010)Conditions Intersection A.M.Peak Hour P.M.Peak Hour V/C LOS V/C LOS 1 Dougherty Road/Amador Valley Boulevard 0.80 C 0.62 B 2 Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard 0.84 D 0.89 D 3 Dougherty Road/I 580 Westbound Ramps 0.63 B 0.85 D 4 Hopyard Road/I 580 Eastbound Ramps 0.69 B 0.86 D 5 Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett Drive 0.63 B 0.61 B 6 Dougherty Road/Scarlet[Drive 0.48 A 0.72 C Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 27 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 OFF-SITE DAILY VOLUME ANALYSIS Methodology An analysis was conducted to determine if certain existing roadways would operate at acceptable levels of service under the scenarios analyzed. Eight roadway segments were identified for analysis: • Amador Valley Boulevard,West of Dougherty Road • Dougherty Road,North of Amador Valley Boulevard • Dougherty Road,between Amador Valley Boulevard and Scarlett Drive • Dougherty Road,between Scarlett Drive and Dublin Boulevard • Dougherty Road,between Dublin Boulevard and I-580 westbound ramps • Dublin Boulevard,west of Dougherty Road • Dublin Boulevard,between Dougherty Road and Scarlett Drive • Scarlett Drive,between Dublin Boulevard and Dougherty Road(Future) The existing average daily traffic volumes(ADT)at these locations were measured during 1995. The ADT volumes for the various future development scenarios were estimated by assuming that the p.m. peak hour volumes for the approved and proposed projects were 10 percent of their ADT volumes (with the exception of BART whose p.m.peak hour traffic is 33 percent of the ADT). These estimated daily volumes were then added to the actual existing daily volumes. The resulting ADT volumes for all three scenarios are shown in Figure 9. The City of Dublin General Plan contains specifications for a number of roadway types. The eight roadway segments analyzed would be classified as one of the following three types: • Six-Lane Prime Arterial-Design ADT of 50,000 • Four-Lane Major Street-Design ADT of 30,000 • Class II Collector Street-Design ADT of 12,000 The definition of Class II Collector Streets in the General Plan lists the following items that are clearly not present along Dublin Boulevard or Dougherty Road in the vicinity of the project: • Minimum design speed of 30 miles per hour, • "serve primarily to circulate localized traffic,"and • "carry lower traffic volumes at slower speeds than Class I collector street." A more appropriate level of service methodology for these segments can be found in the Transportation Research Board's 1994 Highway Capacity Manual(HCM). Of the various types defined in the HCM,the segments under study best match the category of two-lane highways. Using roadway geometries matching those in project vicinity,the HCM methodology yielded a maximum average annual daily traffic(AADT)of 15,600 vpd to maintain a Level of Service D. This value is used in this analysis as the threshold of acceptability for average daily traffic for two-lane study roadway segments. Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 28 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 LEGEND ) ) ) 12,600 • Study Intersection 10,850 14,000 24,950 Existing 10,950 14,050 31,260 Existing+Approved 11,150 14,050 31,500 Existing+Approved+Project(Alternative 1) 11,150 1 31,500 Existing+Approved+Project(Alternative 2) .P 'V:it 18,300 P,0- 20,600 Per 20,850 20,850 Project Site s o 5TH ST. 6 0 0 22,500 0 8,\\ ...... 800 eS c+ 30,450 y► 6,750 29,200 680 % a. 31,450 • 29,350 ,? " 24,900 - 22,600 DUBUryeIV s/EgaitN ' 0 2 m East Dublin BART Station 7 3 i A i 7 i��� 580 24,950 42,750 � 31, 0 2,800 4 31,50500 22,400 31,500 22,400 `i North Not to Scale City of Dublin Figure ciiii Park Sierra Apartments-Traffic Impact Study Estimated Daily Volumes 9 157-081-4/97•NA Results The following roadway level of service results are based on the 15,600-vpd,30,000-vpd and 50,000- vpd thresholds described above. Existing plus Approved Under this scenario,three study segments are expected to require widening: • Dublin Boulevard between Dougherty Road and Scarlett Drive: This segment (currently two lanes)is expected to carry 29,200 vpd. The widening and realignment of this segment is included in the East Dublin Specific Plan and is proposed by Alameda County. • Dublin Boulevard west of Dougherty Road: This segment is expected to carry 31,260 vpd. Currently,Dublin Boulevard in this segment is a four-lane road. The traffic projections indicate that this segment will require widening to six lanes under this scenario. • Dougherty Road between Dublin Boulevard and Scarlett Drive: This segment of Dougherty Road is expected to carry 30,450 vpd. Currently,this segment of Dougherty Road is a four-lane road. The traffic projections indicate that this segment will require widening to six lanes under this scenario. Existing plus Approved plus Project Without the Scarlett Drive extension,the three segments identified above will require widening as specified. With the extension,the volume on Dougherty Road between Dublin Boulevard and Scarlett �► Drive will be substantially reduced,eliminating the need for widening in the near term. Table IX,illustrates the forecasted average daily traffic on each road segments. Table IX Forecasted Average Daily Traffic Future ADT Segment Existing Maximum Number ADT without with Scarlett of Lanes Scariest Drive Drive Extension Extension Amador Valley Blvd.,west of Dougherty Rd. 4 Dougherty Rd.,north of Amador Valley Blvd. 4 30,000 14,050 14,050 Dougherty Rd.,between Amador Valley Blvd.and Scariest Dr. 4 30,000 28,850 20,850 Dougherty Rd.,between Scarlett Dr.and Dublin Blvd. 4 30,000 31,450 24,900 Dougherty Rd.,between Dublin Blvd.and 1580 WB Ramps 6 50,000 22,400 22,400 Dublin Blvd.,west of Dougherty Rd. 4 30,000 31,500 31,500 Dublin Blvd.,between Dougherty Rd.and Scariest Dr. 4 30,000 29,350 22.600 Scarlett Dr.,between Dublin Blvd.and Dougherty Rd. - - - 6'75 (Future) Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 30 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 PROJECT ACCESS AND INTERNAL CIRCULATION Project Access The preliminary site plan indicates that vehicular access to the site will be provided via Dougherty Road. Emergency access will be provided from the south and west of the project via Sierra Court. The current proposal is to provide access to Dougherty Road directly south of Alameda County's right-of-way that will ultimately be used as part of the Ironhorse Trail system. The intersection with Dougherty Road is planned to be directly opposite the future extension of Scarlett Drive forming a fourth leg of the intersection. Also,it is unclear at the present time whether the Scarlett Drive Extension will be completed before or after the proposed project. Whichever leg of this intersection is constructed first will need to consider that the intersection of Dougherty Road/Scarlett Drive/Project Entrance will ultimately be a four-legged intersection. Figure 10 illustrates the recommended layout of the intersection. To facilitate project access at the new intersection on Dougherty Road,it is recommended that the applicant construct: 1)a 200-foot northbound left-turn lane plus a 120-foot taper,and 2)a 200-foot southbound right-tum deceleration lane plus a 90-foot taper. Traffic Signals In conjunction with the proposed project,a traffic signal will not be warranted at the intersection of Dougherty Road/Project Entrance/Scarlett Drive,under Scenario 1(No Scarlett Drive Extension). However,a traffic signal will be warranted at this intersection under Scenario 2(With Scarlett Drive Extension). As a result of addition of the project entrance as a fourth leg of this intersection,the City will require the project to fund one-fourth of the cost of a traffic signal at the project entrance (Dougherty Road/Scarlett Drive). Internal Circulation The project entrance should be a minimum of 36 feet wide. The provision of a single road within the project will be adequate based on the density of units proposed. The highest daily volume within the project would be near the project driveway. The estimated average daily volume at this location would be below 1,500 vehicles per day(vpd),well below the 4,000 vpd recommended as the maximum for a residential street by the City of Dublin. Queuing Analysis at the Project Entrance To determine the maximum hourly flow into and out of the project,the p.m.period was analyzed for inbound trips and the a.m.period was analyzed for outbound trips since these represent the heaviest traffic movements for each direction. Stochastic queuing analysis at the gate begins by determining the traffic intensity,which is defined as the arrival rate divided by the service rate. For analysis purposes,a"coded-card reader"operation was used for the entrance gate,with an average service flow rate of 350 vehicles per hour(vph)r. Assuming Poisson distribution of traffic arriving at the gate,the average queue length and the 95th 1 Source:Parking,Weant and Levineton,1990. Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 31 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 percentile queue can be determined. The 95th percentile queue is commonly used as the maximum queue that needs to be accommodated. Finally,all of the figures are rounded up to the nearest whole number and multiplied by 22 feet. The analysis revealed that the maximum queue length at the project entrance during the a.m.peak hour and the p.m.peak hour would be 44 feet. A minimum queue storage space of 50 feet should be provided on either side of the gated access to the project. Parking The proposed site plan provides a total of 435 parking spaces,equivalent to 2.08 spaces per unit. A parking ratio of 1.9 is adequate based on at least two sources: ITE's Parking Generation and Barton- Aschman's 1988 Residential Parking Study of the San Francisco Bay Area. TJKM recommends that most of the stalls be undesignated,available to residents and visitors alike. The City of Dublin is currently contemplating reducing its apartment parking requirements from 2.0 spaces per unit to 1.8 per unit. The Park Sierra Apartments project meets this requirement. Pedestrian and Bicycle Access It is recommended that the site be designed to provide direct pedestrian and bicycle access to Dougherty Road and the Alamo Creek bike path(which could also be used as an emergency vehicle access). Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 32 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 t80-LS l 'ON 103roNd Ob= l 31V0S L6-Z-L =3M NSO :03NO3HO t3unimi ` ®`Sots L 'ON JNIM"O 8S3 :NM"Cl 8S3 '03N01S30 1 LirM '3'0'8 A183Honoci Nnena jo Aiio s;ue;'nsuoo uo,ie;iodsue,l NOISNIIIX] \ -3nl8a mi�jdOS ii Ijnin-j ,OZ 0l Z l ,8l 3W3Sd3 aid S 109 �b ),dMSNB VWJ38 11 J.dM--�0-1HO1� J.1N(1O0 dCl-3Wd-`d , g \ \ TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE CALCULATION Traffic Impact Fee Calculation The TIF calculation computes the project's share of traffic growth on several planned circulation improvement projects within the City of Dublin that are likely to be used by site traffic(see Table X). These improvements include new bikes lanes on the easterly portion of Amador Valley Boulevard, new traffic signals along Village Parkway,widening Dougherty Road from I-580 north to the City limit,the widening of Dublin Boulevard between Village Parkway and Dougherty Road,widening of Dublin Boulevard between Dougherty Road and BART entrance,improvements at the intersection of Dublin Boulevard/Dougherty Road and finally,the construction of future Scarlett Drive extending diagonally from Dublin Boulevard to Dougherty Road. The total expected cost for these improvements is$23,629,100. The pro-rata cost share is based on the added increment of vehicles entering and exiting from the project on planned roadway improvements as shown in Table X. Project trip distribution assumptions are shown in Figure 5. Table X shows the number of project trips that are estimated to use each of the improvements listed. The table also outlines the 1997 Average Daily Traffic(ADT)and the forecasted 2010 ADT for the arterial segments to be improved. The project's estimated share of the cost of these improvements is derived by calculating the project's percentage of the future traffic growth(2010 ADT minus 1997 ADT)and then multiplying this percentage by the expected improvement costs. The subtotal for the project's share is$ 1,623,333. This results in a total of$7,767 for each dwelling unit. A new regional traffic impact fee is being developed based on revisions to the Tri-Valley Traffic Model. The proposed project will also be responsible for these fees. Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 34 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 Table X Estimated Project Share of Planned Improvement Costs Roadway CIP Project Percent Project Project Trips 1997ADT 2010 ADT Traffic Project Percent Estimated Tool Project Share Project No. Total Growth of Growth Costs Amador Valley BI - Bike Lane-Stagecoach Road to Dougherty 15% 219 17900 19400 1,500 14.60% $121,500 $17,739 Dougherty Road 9655 South City Limits to Site Entrance 72% 1,053 35500 38900 3,400 •12.07% $1,771,400 S213,818 Dougherty Road 9685 Site Entrance to North City Limits 18% 263 29000 30900 1,900 ••5.16% $4,132,300 $213,313 Dougherty Road - Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard Improvements 82% 1,200 35500 38900 3,400 35.29% $700,000 $247,058 Dublin Boulevard - Dougherty Road to BART Entrance 10% 146 8800 48550. 39,750 0.37% S3,075,000 SI 1,294 Dublin Boulevard 9692 Village Parkway to Sierra Court 30% 439 25600 48600 23,000 1.91% S2,500,800 $47,733 Dublin Boulevard - Siena Court to Dougherty Road 30% 439 25600 48600 23,000 1.91% S2,625,200 $50,107 Scarlett Drive 9686 Dougherty Road to Dublin Boulevard 10% 146 - 10200 10,200 1.43% S8,313,800 $119,001 Village Parkway 9656 New TratrcSignals 8% 117 12200 16850 4,650 2.52% $389,100 $9,790 Total Costs $23,629,100 S929,853 Cost per Unit $4,449 Note: •=Project Percent of Growth after deducting 18.9%Contra Costa County contributable traffic growth ••=Project Percent of Growth after deducting 8.68%Contra Costa County contributable traffic growth Traffic Study for the Proposed Park Sierra Apartments tu RECOMMENDATIONS Intersection Mitigations As noted,two study intersections are projected to operate at unacceptable levels of service during one or more of the scenarios analyzed. For the intersections on Dougherty Road and Hopyard Road, traffic volumes will likely be reduced as a result of the improvements to the I-580/1-680 interchange. The following mitigation measures were identified in this report: • Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard: The eastbound approach would need to be widened to provide a second through lane and also the southbound approach would required to be restriped to provide a second exclusive left-turn lane. Although the project is not responsible for complete funding of this improvement,it will be required to pay a"fair share"contribution. • Hopyard Road/1-580 Eastbound Ramps: The eastbound off-ramp should be widened to provide a third right-turn lane. The eastbound off-ramp widening is mainly attributable to the large number of right-turn movements at the intersection,related to developments within the City of Pleasanton. The City of Pleasanton has previously identified some restriping measures for the off- ramp as part of the buildout requirements,but no widening. These mitigation measures are not related to the proposed project,but are driven by approved developments. Roadway Segment Mitigations Using the appropriate methodology,several of the roadway segments analyzed will require widening to four lanes or six lanes under one or more of the scenarios analyzed. For each scenario,the segments that will need widening are summarized below: Existing plus Approved: Dublin Boulevard,Dougherty Road to Scarlett Drive;Dublin Boulevard,west of Dougherty Road;Dougherty Road,Dublin Boulevard to Scarlett Drive. Access,Circulation and Parking • A single entrance at Dougherty Road will be adequate to accommodate projected demand. Internal circulation will also be adequate. • It is recommended that the site be designed to provide direct pedestrian and bicycle access to Dougherty Road and the Alamo Creek bike path. • At the new intersection of Dougherty Road with the proposed project,it is recommended that the applicant provide a 200-foot southbound right-turn deceleration lane plus a 90-foot taper and a 200-foot northbound left-turn pocket plus a 120-foot taper. It is required that the applicant contribute one- fourth of the cost of a traffic signal at the project entry intersection with Dougherty Road. Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 36 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 • It is required that the applicant contribute one-fourth of the cost of a traffic signal at the project entry intersection with Dougherty Road. Additional Recommendations It is recommended that the City of Dublin develop a plan that functionally combines access from Dougherty Road to both the proposed project and existing Monterey Drive. Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 37 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 STUDY PARTICIPANTS AND REFERENCES TJKM Personnel: Christopher S.Kinzel Project Manager Nayan S.Amin Project Engineer Geri Foley Graphics Designer Ruth Huycke-McCall Word Processing Persons Consulted: Mr.Mehran Sepehri Public Works Department,City of Dublin Mr.Tim Tucker Public Works Department,City of Dublin References: Trip Generation,Fifth Edition,Institute of Transportation Engineers,1991 San Diego Traffic Generators,SANDAG, 1996 Parking Generation,Second Edition,Institute of Transportation Engineers,1987 Residential Parking Study of the San Francisco Bay Area,Barton-Aschman, 1988 Highway Capacity Manual,Special Report No.209,Transportation Research Board,1994 Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Update,TJKM,July 1996 Traffic Manual,Caltrans, 1992 Traffic Study of the Park Sierra Apartments Development Page 38 TJKM Transportation Consultants July 2,1997 APPENDIX A Description of the Level of Service Methodology DESCRIPTION OF SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS TJKM METHODOLOGY Background TJKM utilizes a method of intersection capacity analysis known as the Intersection Capacity Utilization(ICU)method. A variation of the TJKM method,known as the critical movement analysis,is described in Interim Materials on Highway Capacity,Transportation Research Circular 212,January 1980,published by the Transportation Research Board of the National Academy of Sciences. The TJKM method is similar to the planning applications method of Signalized Intersection analysis described in Circular 212. This method addresses the capacity of intersections as a whole. It simulates the operation of an actuated signalized intersection. The method determines the critical movement by approach. The critical movements are determined by identifying the conflicting movements on the north-south and east-west approaches. The critical movement on an approach with split phase operation is the movement with the highest volume-to-capacity ratio since it has no conflicting movements. The method then sums the volume-to-capacity ratio of each critical movement at an intersection to produce an overall intersection volume-to-capacity ratio. When the ratio of volume to capacity reaches unity(1.00), the intersection is "at capacity" and is described as operating at Level of Service E and approaching Level of Service F conditions. If an existing intersection is found to have a volume- to-capacity ratio greater than 1.0,this indicates that the actual lane capacities are greater than those assumed in the methodology. The advantages of this type of capacity calculation is its direct relationship to actual intersection operations and the ease with which changes in traffic volumes or intersection capacity (i.e. intersection lane configuration)or both can be analyzed. The level of accuracy of this method is comparable to that of the traffic projection processes used to determine future traffic volumes. Level of Service The volume-to-capacity ratio is related to the level of service. The relationship of volume-to- capacity ratio to level of service is a scale with a range of LOS A through LOS F. The table "Levels of Service for Intersections"depicts the relationship between the level of service rating and volume-to-capacity ratio. Input Data The input data necessary to use this methodology are: • Lane geometries • Turning movement volumes • Split phasing information The lane configuration for the study intersections is indicated with a special nomenclature for the TJKM intersection capacity analysis. This nomenclature is explained on the attached"Description of Lane Configuration Format." tiba app Sample A sample calculation is shown on the accompanying computer print-out "TJKM Intersection Capacity Analysis." This example describes a hypothetical intersection of A Street and B Street, which is regulated by three phase traffic signals. The following three steps for this example demonstrates how opposing approaches to the traffic signals are analyzed individually in the first two steps,and the third step computes totals for the intersection. Step 1 The first phase is for southbound traffic only and contains three lanes. Right turn movements in the right lane(189 vehicles)have a smaller per lane volume than in the two remaining lanes(226 vehicles). Therefore,the length of the signal phase is governed by the traffic in the two left lanes. The capacity of Phase 1 is 2,970 vehicles per hour of green,the volume is 452 vehicles and the resulting volume-to-capacity ratio is 0.1522. Phase 2,for the northbound movements,has two lanes and a volume-to-capacity ratio of 0.1706. Step 2 For Phase 3.the westbound through plus right traffic cannot proceed through the intersection at the same time as the eastbound left-turn movement,even though they are on the same signal phase. Practically, the left turning vehicles and opposing through traffic alternate as gaps in traffic allow. The total Phase 3 capacity requirement is the sum of the westbound through and right combined, 0.2041,and the eastbound left,0.0818. Step 3 The critical movement volume-to-capacity ratios are summed,then rounded to two decimal places. An allowance for yellow time(assumed to be lost time for vehicle movement)is added to obtain the overall intersection volume-to-capacity rating. /4s In the example,the intersection rating of 0.71 equates to a Level of Service C designation. sample.pls • TJNB INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS 5/6/93 INTERSECTION 1 A STREET and B STREET ANYTOWN /'\ COUNT DATE/TIME: 6/5/00 4:00-6:00 PM PEAK HOUR: 4:30-5:30 PM CONDITION : P.M. PEAK HOUR- EXISTING FILE saaple.i RIGHT THRU LEFT 189 225 227 " I I I NORTH I <- v -> I . LEFT 135 - 1.0 1.0 1.1 2,1 1.1 - 45 RIGHT STREET NAME: THRU 623 -> 2.0 (NO. OF LANES) 2.1<- 644 THRU B STREET RIGHT 15 - 1.0 1.1 2.2 1.1 1.0 - 11 LEFT SPLIT PHASE? < -> I N v I I I v I 30 SI15 C �LEFT THRU RIGHT STREET NAME: A STREET SPLIT PHASE? Y ORIGINAL ADJUSIED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 15 15 1650 0.0091 THRU (T) 518 518 3300 0.1570 LEFT (L) 30 30 1650 0.0182 T + R 533 3300 0.1615 T + L 548 3300 0.1661 T + R + L 563 3300 0.1706 0.1706 SB RIGHT (R) 189 109 * 1650 0.0661 THRU (T) 225 225 1650 0.1364 LEFT (L) 227 227 2970 0.0764 T + L 452 2970 0.1522 0.1522 EB RIGHT (R) 15 0 * 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 623 623 3450 0.1806 LEFT (L) 135 135 1650 0.0818 0.0818 WB RIGHT (R) 45 45 1650 0.0273 THRU Cr) 644 644 3375 0.1908 LEFT (L) 11 11 1650 0.0067 T + R 689 3375 0.2041 0.2041 VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO FOR THE INTERSECTION: 0.61 ADJUSTMENT FOR LOST YELLOW TIME: 0.10 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.71 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: C * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED Developed by TJf 4 Transportation Consultants, Pleasanton, CA, 1991 YY DESCRIPTION OF LANE CONFIGURATION FORMAT The number of lanes and the use of the lanes is denoted with a special nomenclature described below: Lane Nomenclature X.Y Where X Denotes the total number of lanes available for a particular movement. Y Denotes how the lanes are used. When Y is... ...The following applies: I' p oo A lane used exclusively for a particular movement(i.e.exclusive left-turn lane). o 1.0 L I' ' A lane which is shared,that is,either of two different movements can be made - 1.1 from a articular lane 1 e a lane which is shared bythrough and right-turn 1 .— z1 r P (•• 8 g ' lr 1.0 L traffic). I; 2 u R Denotes two or more through lanes in which two lanes are shared,one with 's- 1.1 L left-turn traffic,the other with right-turn traffic. I 3 Denotes an expressway through movement. I: 4 +�--- ii i Denotes a right-turn movement from a wide outside lane where right-turn 1.0 L vehicles can bypass through traffic sharing the lane to make a right-turn on red. �. 5 z 15o Denotes a right-turn movement from an exclusive right-turn lane with a ,.0 L right-turn arrow and prohibition on the conflicting U-turn movement. I' 6 _ . 1.6 T R Denotes a right-turn movement from a shared lane with a right-turn arrow and 10~_ . L prohibition on the conflicitng U-turn movement. I; Denotes a turning movement which has a separate lane to turn into,as shown 7,8,9 below: I':t't s 1.7 R Turn lane which is shared with a through lane or left-turn lane and under signal 7 :_ 2.1 T control,and which has its own lane to turn into.There must be at least two t( r— 1.0 L through lanes. 11 R 8 ao r Exclusive turn lane which is under signal control,and which has its own lane 1.0 L to turn into. It'tf t:t 19 R Exclusive turn lane not under signal control and which has an exclusive lane to 9 zo r turn into,often referred to as a"free"turn. Since the volumes in this lane do not IA L conflict with other intersection movements,the V/C ratio of the free right-turn t't movement is not included in the sum of critical V/C ratios. FACTORS FOR TJKM METHODOLOGY Lane Capacities Designation Through Capacity Turn Capacity' 1.0 1,725 1,650 1.1 1,650 1,650 2.0 3,450 2,970 2.1 3,375 2,970 2.2 3,300 2,970 • 3.0 5,175 4,290 3.1 5,100 4,290 3.3 5,550 4,290 4.0 6,900 n/a 4.1 6,825 n/a Now 1.Second(and third)turn lane capacity reduced to 80%of first turn lane(1,650 x 0.8=1,320 Yellow Time Adjustment Green Time Add Yellow Total (Lost)Time 0.71 0.10 0.81 0.72 0.10 0.82 0.73 0.10 0.83 0.74 0.10 0.84 0.75 0.09 0.84 0.76 0.09 0.85 0.77 0.08 0.85 0.78 0.08 0.86 0.79 0.07 0.86 0.80 0.07 0.87 0.81 0.06 0.87 0.82 0.06 0.88 0.83 0.05 0.88 0.84 0.05 0.89 0.85 0.04 0.89 0.86 0.04 0.90 0.87 0.03 0.90 0.88 0.03 0.91 0.89 0.02 0.91 0.90 0.02 0.92 0.91 0.01 0.92 0.92 0.01 0.93 0.93 0.00 0.93 oornple.plf Level of Service for Signalized Intersections Level of Type of Delay Maneuverability WC Flow Ratio A Stable Very slight or no delay. If Turning movements are easily 0.00-0.60 Flow signalized,conditions are such made,and nearly all drivers that no approach phase is fully find freedom of operation. utilized by traffic and no vehicle waits longer than one red indication.• B Stable Slight delay.If signalized,an Vehicle platoons arc formed. 0.61-0.70 Flow occasional approach phase is Many drivers begin to feel fully utilized. somewhat restricted within groups of vehicles. C Stable Acceptable delay. If signalized, Back-ups may develop behind 0.71-0.80 Flow a few drivers arriving at the end turning vehicles. Most of a queue may occasionally drivers feel somewhat have to wait through one signal restricted. cycle. D Approaching Tolerable delay. Delays may be Maneuverability is severely 0.81-0.90 Unstable substantial during short periods, limited during short periods Flow but excessive back ups do not due to temporary back ups. '1 occur. E Unstable Intolerable delay. Delay may be There are typically long 0.91-1.00 Flow great—up to several signal queues of vehicles waiting cycles. upstream of the intersection. F Forced Flow Excessive delay Jammed conditions. Back Varies` ups from other locations restrict or prevent movement. Volumes may vary widely, depending principally on the downstream back-up conditions. Notes: 1. In general,volume-to-rapacity ratios cannot be greater than 1.00,unless the lane capacity assumptions are too low. Also, if future demand projections are considered for analytical purposes,a ratio greater than 1.00 might be obtained,indicating that the projected demand would exceed the capacity. References: Highway Capacity Manual,Special Report No.209,Transportation Research Board,1985. Highway Capacity Manual,Special Report No.87,Highway Research Board,1965. TJKbf. tos dese.tab DESCRIPTION OF INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS UNSIGNALIZED 1994 METHOD Background The method of unsignalized intersection capacity analysis used in this study is from Chapter 10, "Unsignalized Intersections" of the Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report No. 209, Transportation Research Board,updated October 1994. This method applies to two-way STOP sign or YIELD sign controlled intersections(or one-way STOP sign or YIELD sign controlled intersections at three-way intersections). At such intersections,drivers on the minor street are forced to use judgment when selecting gaps in the major flow through which to execute crossing or turning maneuvers. Thus,the capacity of the controlled legs of an intersection is based on three factors: 1. The distribution of gaps in the major street traffic stream. 2. Driver judgment in selecting gaps through which to execute their desired maneuvers. 3. Follow-up time required to move into the front-of-queue position It is assumed that gaps in the traffic stream are randomly distributed. For this reason, the methodology will be less reliable in situations in which the conflicting flows are strongly platooned,as would be the case at many urban intersections where the major street is part of a signalized network. This method assumes that major street traffic is not affected by minor street flows. This assumption is generally good for periods when the operation is smooth and uncongested. (When congestion occurs,it is likely that major street traffic will experience some impedance due to minor street traffic.) Left turns from the major street am assumed to be affected by the opposing major street flow,and minor street traffic is affected by all conflicting movements. Input Data The general procedure to calculate the level of service is as follows: 1. Define existing geometric and volume conditions for the intersection under study. 2. Determine the conflicting traffic through which each minor street movement and the major street left-turn must cross. 3. Determine the size of the gap in the conflicting traffic stream needed by vehicles in each movement crossing the conflicting traffic stream. 4. Determine the capacity of the gaps in the major traffic stream to accommodate each of the subject movements that will utilize these gaps. 5. Adjust the capacities found to account for impedance and the use of shared lanes. 6. Estimate the average total delay for each of the subject movements and determine the level of service for each movement and for the intersection. Gaps are utilized by vehicles in the following priority order. 1. Right turns from the minor street 2. Left turns from the major street 3. Through movements from the minor street 4. Left turns from the minor street For example,if a left-turning vehicle on the major street and a through vehicle from the minor street are waiting to cross the major traffic stream,the first available gap of acceptable size would be taken by the left-turning vehicle. The minor street through vehicle must wait for the second available gap. In aggregate terms,a large number of such left-turning vehicles could use up so many of the available gaps that minor street through vehicles are severely impeded or unable to make safe crossing movements. Level of Service See the following table "Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections" for the relationship between delay and level of service. LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS AVERAGE DELAY LEVEL OF SERVICE DELAYS 5 5 s/veh A Little or no delay >5 and 5 10 s/veh B Short traffic delays > 10 and<_20 s/veh C Average traffic delays >20 and<_30 s/veh D Long traffic delays >30 and 5 45 s/veh E Very long traffic delays 2 45 s/veh F Extreme traffic delays The level of service criteria for Two-Way STOP controlled intersections is somewhat different from the criteria used in Chapter 9 for signalized intersections. The primary reason for this is the difference is that drivers expect a signalized intersection to carry higher traffic volumes than unsignalized intersections. Additionally,several driver behavior considerations combine to make delays at signalized intersections less onerous than at unsignalized intersections. Reference: Highway Capacity Manual,Special Report 209,Transportation Research Board,Update October 1994 bcm94amapp APPENDIX B Results of the Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing Conditions )L. Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants ) LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Existing (AM) 05/14/97 Condition: Existing (PM) 05/14/97 INTERSECTION 1 Dougherty Road/Amador Valley City of Dublin INTERSECTION 1 Dougherty Road/Amador Valley City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL 146 924 0 69 448 0 <--I I I--> I Split?N I <-I I I > I Split? N LEFT 51 --- 1.0 1.1 2.1 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT LEFT 140 --- 1.0 1.1 2.1 0.0 0.0--- 0 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 0 --->0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU Amador Val Ley THRU 0 --->0.0 (N0. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU Amador Valley RIGHT 606 --- 1.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 LEFT RIGHT 350 --- 1.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 LEFT 1 < I I I I <---I I ---> I W+E V 224 215 10 V SIG Urb=Yf,ANTS: N Rur=Y W+E v 566 778 10 v S1G WARRANTS: N Urb=Y. Rur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split?N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split?N STREET NAME: Dougherty Road STREET NAME: Dougherty Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME. CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB THRU (T) 215 215 3440 0.0625 NB THRU (T) 778 778 3440 0.2262 LEFT (L) 224 224 1720 0.1302 0.1302 LEFT (L) 566 566 1720 0.3291 0.3291 SB RIGHT (R) 146 146 1720 0.0849 SB RIGHT (R) 69 69 1720 0.0401 THRU (T) 924 924 3440 0.2686 THRU (T) 448 448 3440 0.1302 T+R 1070 3440 0.3110 0.3110 T+R 517 3440 0.1503 0.1503 EB RIGHT (R) 606 382* 1720 0.2221 0.2221 EB RIGHT (R) 350 0' 1720 0.0000 LEFT (L) 51 51 1720 0.0297 LEFT (L) 140 140 1720 0.0814 0.0814 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.66 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.56 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: B INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: A ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED *ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.PMV,CAP:D:..LOSCAP.TAB LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Existing (AM) 05/23/97 Condition: Existing (PM) 05/23/97 INTERSECTION 2 Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard City of Dublin INTERSECTION 2 Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 8-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 8-PHASE SIGNAL 68 1230 " "0 106 57 823 296 <--I I I--> " I <--- v ---> I Split? N I I Split? N LEFT 42 --- 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 --- 93 RIGHT LEFT 99 --- 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 --- 184 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 95 ---> 1.0 (NO. OF LANES) 2.0<--- 128 THRU Dublin Boulevard THRU 281 ---> 1.0 (NO. OF LANES) 2.0<--- 171 THRU Dublin Boulevard RIGHT 449 --- 2.5 2.0 2.1 1.1 2.0 --- 79 LEFT RIGHT 891 --- 2.5 2.0 2.1 1.1 2.0 --- 76 LEFT I <--- " .--> I I <--- ---> I N I I 138 SIG WARRANTS: N I SIG WARRANTS: W + E v 670 724 v Urb=Y, Rur=Y W + E v 760 95I 0 71 v Urb=Y, Rur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: Dougherty Road STREET NAME: Dougherty Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 138 138 1650 0.0836 NB RIGHT (R) 71 71 1650 0.0430 THRU (T) 724 724 3300 0.2194 THRU (T) 950 950 3300 0.2879 LEFT (L) 670 670 3000 0.2233 0.2233 LEFT (L) 760 760 3000 0.2533 0.2533 T + R 862 3300 0.2612 T + R 1021 3300 0.3094 SB RIGHT (R) 68 26 * 1650 0.0158 SB RIGHT (R) 57 0 * 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 1230 1230 3300 0.3727 0.3727 THRU (T) 823 823 3300 0.2494 0.2494 LEFT (L) 106 106 1650 0.0642 LEFT (L) 296 296 1650 0.1794 EB RIGHT (R) 449 0 * 3000 0.0000 EB RIGHT (R) 891 131 * 3000 0.0437 THRU (T) 95 95 1650 0.0576 0.0576 THRU (T) 281 281 1650 0.1703 0.1703 LEFT (L) 42 42 1650 0.0255 LEFT (L) 99 99 1650 0.0600 WB RIGHT (R) 93 0 * 1650 0.0000 WB RIGHT (R) 184 0 * 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 128 128 3300 0.0388 THRU (T) 171 171 3300 0.0518 LEFT (L) 79 79 3000 0.0263 0.0263 LEFT (L) 76 76 3000 0.0253 0.0253 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.68 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.70 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: B INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: B * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB )Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants ) LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants ) Condition: Existing (AM) 05/14/97 Condition: Existing (PM) 05/14/97 INTERSECTION 3 Dougherty Road/I 580 WB Ramps City of Dublin INTERSECTION 3 Dougherty Road/I 580 WB Rasps City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHCO RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL 485 1101 0 505 1328 0 1 <--I I I > , Split? N ; <--I I I > , Split?N LEFT 0 --- 0.0 1.9 2.0 0.0 2.0 --- 459 RIGHT LEFT 0 --- 0.0 1.9 2.0 0.0 2.0 --- 379 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 0--->0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU 1580 WE Ramps THRU 0--->0.0 (N0. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU 1580 WB Ramps RIGHT 0--- 0.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 2.0 --- 265 LEFT RIGHT 0 --- 0.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 2.0--- 189 LEFT W+E V 1 937 348 V N SIG U rb=YRANTS:Rur=Y V N E V 0 1376 999 V SIGU WARRANTS: :Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split?N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split?N STREET NAME: Dougherty Road STREET NAME: Dougherty Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME" CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 348 348 1720 0.2023 NB RIGHT (R) 999 999 1720 0.5808 THRU(T) 937 937 5160 0.1816 THRU (T) 1376 1376 5160 0.2667 SB RIGHT (R) 485 485 1720 0.2820 SB RIGHT (R) 505 505 1720 0.2936 THRU(T) 1101 1101 3440 0.3201 0.3201 THRU (T) 1328 1328 3440 0.3860 0.3860 WB RIGHT (R) 459 459 3127 0.1468 0.1468 WB RIGHT (R) 379 379 3127 0.1212 0.1212 LEFT (L) 265 265 3127 0.0847 LEFT (L) 189 189 3127 0.0604 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.47 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.51 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: A INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: A *ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED *ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=EXIST.INT,VOL:EXIS.PMV,CAP:D:..LOSCAP.TAB LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Existing (AM) 05/14/97 Condition: Existing (PM) 05/14/97 INTERSECTION 4 Hopyard Road/I 580 EB Ramps City of Dublin INTERSECTION 4 Hopyard Road/I 580 ES Ramps City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL 406 931 0 514 935 0 <--I I I--> I Split? N I <--I I I I > I Split? N LEFT 482 --- 2.0 1.9 2.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT LEFT 431 --- 2.0 1.9 2.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 0---> 0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0x--- 0 THRU 1580 EB Ramps THRU 0 --->0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0x--- 0 THRU 1580 EB Ramps RIGHT 920 --- 2.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 0.0 --- 0 LEFT RIGHT 557--- 2.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 0.0 --- 0 LEFT I <___ ^ I I <--- I G WARRANTS: W N E V I 0 81I 2 I37 V SIG WARR Urb=Y, Rur=Y W N E V 0 18 I94 V ANTS: SIUrb=T, Rur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split?N STREET NAME: Hopyard Road STREET NAME: Hopyard Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME' CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME' CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 37 37 1720 0.0215 NB RIGHT (R) 94 94 1720 0.0547 THRU (T) 812 812 5160 0.1574 THRU (T) 1872 1872 5160 0.3628 0.3628 GB RIGHT (R) 406 406 1720 0.2360 SR RIGHT (R) 514 514 1720 0.2988 THRU (T) 931 931 3440 0.2706 0.2706 THRU (T) 935 935 3440 0.2718 EB RIGHT (R) 920 920 3127 0.2942 0.2942 EB RIGHT (R) 557 557 3127 0.1781 0.1781 LEFT (L) 482 482 3127 0.1541 LEFT (L) 431 431 3127 0.1378 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.56 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.54 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: A INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: A *ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED •ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EKIS.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EKIS.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB • ) ) )Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants ) LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants ) Condition: Existing (AM) 05/14/97 Condition: Existing (PM) 05/14/97 INTERSECTION 5 Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett Drive City of Dublin INTERSECTION 5 Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett Drive City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour 94 HCM Unsignal N/S CONTROL: STOP 94 HCM Unsignal N/S CONTROL: STOP 0 0 0 E/W CONTROL: NONE 0 0 0 E/W CONTROL: NONE A I I I MThJ =T SAT 1900,FRt=1650 ^ I I I " MAJ T SAT 1900,FLOW: Th= Rt= 1650 I <--- V ---> I I <--- v ---> I 0 --- 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 CRITICAL GAP ADJUST 0 --- 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 CRITICAL GAP ADJUST 183 ---> 1.1 (NO. OF LANES) 1.1<--- 239 LEFT THRU RIGHT 692 ---> 1.1 (NO. OF LANES) 1.1<--- 313 LEFT THRU RIGHT NB 0.0 --- 0.0 NB 0.0 --- 0.0 14 --- 1.1 1.1 0.0 1.1 1.1 --- 38 EB --- --- --- 16 --- 1.1 1.1 0.0 1.1 1.1 --- 8 EB --- --- --- <--- A ---> I WB 0.0 --- --- I <--- ^ ---> I WB 0.0 --- --- SIGNAL WARRANTS: N I I SIGNAL WARRANTS: V V v v N I I W + E 1.1 0 20 Urb=N, Rur=N W + E 12 0 35 Urb=N, Rur=Y S S ACCEL X X PEAK HOUR ACCEL X X PEAK HOUR LANE % COMBO MOTOR FACTOR LANE % COMBO MOTOR FACTOR FOR LT SU/RV VEH CYCLE LEFT THRU RGHT FOR LT SU/RV VEH CYCLE LEFT THRU RGHT N 0 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 N 0 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 - 0 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 - 0 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 - 0 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 - 0 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 ORIG ADJ ADJ CONFL POT ACT MVMT MVT APP APP ORIG ADJ ADJ CONFL POT ACT MVMT MVT APP APP MOVEMENT VOL VOL GAP VOL CAP CAP DELAY LOS ( DELAY LOS MOVEMENT VOL VOL GAP VOL CAP CAP DELAY LOS I DELAY LOS + + NB L 73 89 6.5 519 530 514 7.7 B NB L 128 156 6.5 1134 233 230 46.1 F T 0 0 6.0 519 583 559 T 0 0 6.0 1134 277 272 R 20 24 5.5 211 1082 1082 R 35 43 5.5 778 559 559 LTR 93 113 7.7 B LTR 163 199 46.1 F EB T 183 224 I 0.0 A EB T 692 846 I 0.0 A R 14 17 R 16 20 TR 197 241 0.0 A TR 708 866 0.0 A WB L 38 46 5.0 219 1348 1348 I 3.6 A WB L 8 10 5.0 787 723 723 110.7 C T 239 292 T 313 383 LT 277 338 3.6 A LT 321 393 10.7 C INT TOTAL: 3.0 A INT TOTAL: 9.2 B MINOR MOVEMENTS: ( 6.5) (B) MINOR MOVEMENTS: ( 44.4) (E) INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB APPENDIX C Results of the Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing plus Approved Conditions ))Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants ) LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants ) Condition: Existing+Approved (AM) 05/14/97 Condition: Existing+Approved(PM) U5/14/97 INTERSECTION 1 Dougherty Road/Amador Valley City of Dublin INTERSECTION 1 Dougherty Road/Amador Valley City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peek Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL 146 965 0 69 515 0 I I I--> I Split?N I -_I I I--> I Split?N LEFT 51 --- 1.0 1.1 2.1 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT LEFT 140 --- 1.0 1.1 2.1 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 0 --->0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0x--- 0 THRU Amador Valley THRU 0 --->0.0 (N0. OF LANES) 0.0x--- 0 THRU Amador Valley RIGHT 634 --- 1.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 LEFT RIGHT 395 --- 1.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 LEFT I a---I I" I I -a---I I" ---> I V+E v N 246 248 10 v SIG WARRANTS: NUrb=Y, Rur=Y U+E v 614 849 10 v SIG Urb=Y, Rur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split?N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split?N STREET NAME: Dougherty Road STREET NAME: Dougherty Road . ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME" CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME" CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB THRU (T) 248 248 3440 0.0721 NB THRU (T) 849 849 3440 0.2468 LEFT (L) 246 246 1720 0.1430 0.1430 LEFT (L) 614 614 1720 0.3570 0.3570 SB RIGHT (R) 146 146 1720 0.0849 SB RIGHT (R) 69 69 1720 0.0401 THRU(T) 965 965 3440 0.2805 THRU (T) 515 515 3440 0.1497 T +R 1111 3440 0.3230 0.3230 T+R 584 3440 0.1698 0.1698 EB RIGHT (R) 634 388• 1720 0.2256 0.2256 EB RIGHT (R) 395 0• 1720 0.0000 LEFT (L) 51 51 1720 0.0297 LEFT (L) 140 140 1720 0.0814 0.0814 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.69 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.61 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: B INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: B *ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED •ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.AMV+APPRO.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.PMV+APPRO.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Existing + Approved (AM) 05/23/97 Condition: Existing + Approved (PM) 05/23/97 INTERSECTION 2 Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard City of Dublin INTERSECTION 2 Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 8-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 8-PHASE SIGNAL 1222 322 57 28 A 1 1 1A 1 1 1 A I <--- v ---> I Split? N I <- V ---> I Split? N LEFT 61 --- 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 --- 177 RIGHT LEFT 123 --- 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 --- 462 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 319 ---> 1.0 (NO. OF LANES) 2.0<--- 222 THRU Dublin Boulevard THRU 503 ---> 1.0 (NO. OF LANES) 2.0<--- 487 THRU Dublin Boulevard RIGHT 449 --- 2.5 2.0 2.1 1.1 2.0 --- 105 LEFT RIGHT 891 --- 2.5 2.0 2.1 1.1 2.0 --- 182 LEFT I <---I A -I--> I I < --IG WARRANTS: ^I -I--> Urb=Y,+N E v 670 81I1 240 v v v SIUrb=Y, Rur=Y W N E 760 1042 105 SiG ,ANTS: , Rur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N • STREET NAME: Dougherty Road STREET NAME: Dougherty Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 240 240 1650 0.1455 NB RIGHT (R) 105 105 1650 0.0636 THRU (T) 811 811 3300 0.2458 THRU (T) 1042 1042 3300 0.3158 LEFT (L) 670 670 3000 0.2233 0.2233 LEFT (L) 760 760 3000 0.2533 T + R 1051 3300 0.3185 T + R 1147 3300 0.3476 0.3476 SB RIGHT (R) 68 7 * 1650 0.0042 SB RIGHT (R) 57 0 * 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 1222 1222 3300 0.3703 0.3703 THRU (T) 992 992 3300 0.3006 LEFT (L) 322 322 1650 0.1952 LEFT (L) 528 528 1650 0.3200 0.3200 EB RIGHT (R) 449 0 * 3000 0.0000 EB RIGHT (R) 891 131 * 3000 0.0437 THRU (T) 319 319 1650 0.1933 0.1933 THRU (T) 503 503 1650 0.3048 0.3048 LEFT (L) 61 61 1650 0.0370 LEFT (L) 123 123 1650 0.0745 WB RIGHT (R) 177 0 * 1650 0.0000 WB RIGHT (R) 462 0 * 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 222 222 3300 0.0673 THRU (T) 487 487 3300 0.1476 LEFT (L) 105 105 3000 0.0350 0.0350 LEFT (L) 182 182 3000 0.0607 0.0607 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.82 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 1.03 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: D INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: F * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.AMV+APPRO.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.PMV+APPRO.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB )oftware by TJKM Transportation Consultants ) LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants ) Condition: Existing + Approved (AM) Mitigated 05/23/97 Condition: Existing + Approved (PM) Mitigated 05/23/97 INTERSECTION 2 Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard City of Dublin INTERSECTION 2 Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 8-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 8-PHASE SIGNAL i 1222 322 ^ ^ I I 572 i28^ ^ 1 <--- v ---> 1 Split? N 1 <--- v ---> 1 Split? N LEFT 61 --- 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 --- 177 RIGHT LEFT 123 --- 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 --- 462 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 319 ---> 2.0 (NO. OF LANES) 2.0<--- 222 THRU Dublin Boulevard THRU 503 ---> 2.0 (NO. OF LANES) 2.0<--- 487 THRU Dublin Boulevard RIGHT 449 --- 2.5 2.0 2.1 1.1 2.0 --- 105 LEFT RIGHT 891 --- 2.5 2.0 2.1 1.1 2.0 --- 182 LEFT v <--- ^ ---> N!, <--- ---> N I I SIG WARRANTS: N I SIG WARRANTS: W + E 670 81I 1 240 Urb=Y, Rur=Y W + E v 760 10 2 05 v Urb=Y, Rur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: Dougherty Road STREET NAME: Dougherty Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 240 240 1650 0.1455 NB RIGHT (R) 105 105 1650 0.0636 THRU (T) 811 811 3300 0.2458 THRU (7) 1042 1042 3300 0.3158 LEFT (L) 670 670 3000 0.2233 0.2233 LEFT (L) 760 760 3000 0.2533 0.2533 T + R 1051 3300 0.3185 T + R 1147 3300 0.3476 SB RIGHT (R) 68 7 * 1650 0.0042 SB RIGHT (R) 57 0 * 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 1222 1222 3300 0.3703 0.3703 THRU (T) 992 992 3300 0.3006 0.3006 LEFT (L) 322 322 3000 0.1073 LEFT (L) 528 528 3000 0.1760 EB RIGHT (R) 449 0 * 3000 0.0000 EB RIGHT (R) 891 131 * 3000 0.0437 THRU (T) 319 319 3300 0.0967 0.0967 THRU (T) 503 503 3300 0.1524 LEFT (L) 61 61 1650 0.0370 LEFT (L) 123 123 1650 0.0745 0.0745 WB RIGHT (R) 177 0 * 1650 0.0000 WB RIGHT (R) 462 172 * 1650 0.1042 THRU (T) 222 222 3300 0.0673 THRU (T) 487 487 3300 0.1476 0.1476 LEFT (L) 105 105 3000 0.0350 0.0350 LEFT (L) 182 182 3000 0.0607 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.73 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.78 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: C INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: C * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=MIT.INT,VOL=EXIS.AMV+APPRO.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=MIT.INT,VOL=EXIS.PMV+APPRO.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Existing+Approved (AM) 05/14/97 Condition: Existing+Approved(PM) 05/14/97 INTERSECTION 3 Dougherty Road/I 580 NB Ramps City of Dublin INTERSECTION 3 Dougherty Road/I 580 NB Rams City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THOU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHCO RIGHT THRU LEFTT 3-PHASE SIGNAL 516 1355 0 <--- I -- > I Split? N <--- I I > 1 Split? N LEFT 0 --- 0.0 1.9 2.0 0.0 2.0 --- 598 RIGHT LEFT 0 --- 0.0 1.9 2.0 0.0 2.0 --- 575 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: --->0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU 1580 NB Ramps THRU 0 --->0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0,-- 0 THRU I 580 WE Rasps THRU 0 RIGHT 0 --- 0.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 2.0 --- 366 LEFT RIGHT 0 --- 0.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 2.0 --- 382 LEFT <---- ^ ----> I 1 <---- I I > I G WARRANTS: V N E v 0 115I 4 487 v SIG WARRANTS: NUrb=Y, Rur=Y U.E v 0 1689 1582 v SIUrb=Y, Eur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N S ,:FT THRU RIGHT Split?N STREET NAME:Dougherty Road STREET NAME: Dougherty R3n4 ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME" CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB THRUT (R) 1154 1154 5 60 0.2236NB RIGHT ) �• THRU (T) 1689 1689 5 60 0.3273 (T) SB RIGHT (R) 516 516 1720 0.3000 SB RIGHT (R) 711 711 1720 0.4134 THRU (T) 1355 1355 3440 0.3939 0.3939 THRU (T) 1753 1753 3440 0.5096 0.5096 118 RIGHT (R) 598 598 3127 0.1912 0.1912 WB RIGHT (R) 575 575 3127 0.1839 0.1839 LEFT (L) 366 366 3127 0.1170 LEFT (L) 382 382 3127 0.1222 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.59 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.69 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: A INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: B •ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED •ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED **APPROACHING OR EXCEEDING CAPACITY INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.AMV+APPRO.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.PMV+APPRO.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB b Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants ) LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants ) Condition: Existing+Approved(AM) 05/14/97 Condition: Existing+Approved(PM) 05/14/97 INTERSECTION 4 Hopyard Road/I 580 ES Ramps City of Dublin INTERSECTION 4 Hopyard Road/I 580 ES Ramps City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THOU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL 483 1210 0 664 1400 0 <--- I I > I Split? N 1 <--- I - > I Split?N LEFT 608--- 2.0 1.9 2.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT LEFT 519 --- 2.0 1.9 2.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 0 --->0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU 1580 EB Ramps THRU 0 --->0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU 1580 EB Ramps RIGHT 2176--- 2.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 0.0 --- 0 LEFT RIGHT 1155 --- 2.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 0.0 --- 0 LEFT I I N I SIG WARRANTS: N I SIG WARRANTS: v V v v W+E 10 2 37 Urb=Y, Rur=Y W+E 26 94 Urb=Y, Rur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split?N STREET NAME: Hopyard Road STREET NAME: Hopyard Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 37 37 1720 0.0215 NB RIGHT (R) 94 94 1720 0.0547 THRU (T) 1042 1042 5160 0.2019 THRU(T) 2677 2677 5160 0.5188 0.5188 SR RIGHT (R) 483 483 1720 0.2808 SB RIGHT (R) 664 664 1720 0.3860 THRU (T) 1210 1210 3440 0.3517 0.3517 THRU (T) 1400 1400 3440 0.4070 ES RIGHT (R) 2176 2176 3127 0.6959 0.6959 ES RIGHT (R) 1155 1155 3127 0.3694 0.3694 LEFT (L) 608 608 3127 0.1944 LEFT (L) 519 519 3127 0.1660 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 1.05 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.89 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: F INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: D *ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED *ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.AMV*APPRO.AMV,CAP=0:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.PMV+APPRO.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Existing+Approved(AM) Mitigated 05/23/97 Condition: Existing+Approved(PM) Mitigated 05/23/97 INTERSECTION 4 Hopyard Road/I 580 EB Ramps City of Dublin INTERSECTION 4 Hopyard Road/I 580 EB Ramps City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL 483 1210 0 664 1400 0 <--I I I -> I Split? N I <--- V ---> I Split?N LEFT 608 --- 2.0 1.9 2.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT LEFT 519--- 2.0 1.9 2.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 0 --->0.0 (N0. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU 1580 EB Rasps THRU 0 --->0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU 1580 EB Ramps RIGHT 2176 --- 3.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 0.0 --- 0 LEFT RIGHT 1155 --- 3.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 0.0 --- 0 LEFT W+E v WARRANTS: 0 1042 137 v SIG Urb=Y, Rus=Y G W+E v 0 2677 194 v WARRANT : NSI Urb=Y, Rur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split?N STREET NAME: Hopyard Road STREET NAME: Hopyard Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 37 37 1720 0.0215 NB RIGHT (R) 94 94 1720 0.0547 THRU (T) 1042 1042 5160 0.2019 THRU (T) 2677 2677 5160 0.5188 0.5188 SB RIGHT (R) 483 483 1720 0.2808 SR RIGHT (R) 664 664 1720 0.3860 THRU (T) 1210 1210 3440 0.3517 0.3517 THRU (T) 1400 1400 3440 0.4070 EB RIGHT (R) 2176 2176 4487 0.4850 0.4850 EB RIGHT (R) 1155 1155 4487 0.2574 0.2574 LEFT (L) 608 608 3127 0.1944 LEFT (L) 519 519 3127 0.1660 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.84 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.78 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: D INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: C •ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED *ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=MIT.INT,VOL=EXIS.AMV+APPRO.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=MIT.INT,VOL=EXIS.PMV+APPRO.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB LL Iftware by TJKM Transportation Consultants ) LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants ) Condition: Existing + Approved (AM) 05/23/97 Condition: Existing + Approved (PM) 05/23/97 INTERSECTION 5 Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett Drive City of Dublin INTERSECTION 5 Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett Drive City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour 94 HCM Unsignal N/S CONTROL: STOP 94 HCM Unsignal N/S CONTROL: STOP 0 0 0 E/W CONTROL: NONE 0 0 0 E/W CONTROL: NONE I I MAJ T SAT 1900,FLOW: Th= Rt= 1650 " I I I A MAJ T SAT 1900,FLOW: Th= Rt= 1650 I <--- v ---> I I <--- v ---> I 0 --- 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 CRITICAL GAP ADJUST 0 --- 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 CRITICAL GAP ADJUST 756 ---> 1.1 (NO. OF LANES) 1.1<--- 477 LEFT THRU RIGHT 1244 ---> 1.1 (NO. OF LANES) 1.1<--- 1078 LEFT THRU RIGHT NB 0.0 --- 0.0 NB 0.0 --- 0.0 54 --- 1.1 1.1 0.0 1.1 1.1 --- 45 EB --- --- --- 26 --- 1.1 1.1 0.0 1.1 1.1 --- 10 EB --- --- --- <---I ---> WB 0.0 --- --- v I<--- ---> I WB 0.0 --- --- W N E v 82 IO I22 v SIGNALBWARRANTS: W N E 169 IO I42 v SIGNAALYWARRRANTS: S S ACCEL X X PEAK HOUR ACCEL X X PEAK HOUR LANE X COMBO MOTOR FACTOR LANE % COMBO MOTOR FACTOR FOR LT SU/RV VEH CYCLE LEFT THRU RGHT FOR LT SU/RV VEH CYCLE LEFT THRU RGHT N 0 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 N 0 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 - 0 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 - 0 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 - 0 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 - 0 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 ORIG ADJ ADJ CONFL POT ACT MVMT MVT APP APP ORIG ADJ ADJ CONFL POT ACT MVMT MVT I APP APP MOVEMENT VOL VOL GAP VOL CAP CAP DELAY LOS I DELAY LOS MOVEMENT VOL VOL GAP VOL CAP CAP DELAY LOS I DELAY LOS + + NB L 82 100 6.5 1450 153 139 72.5 F NB L 169 207 6.5 2606 33 30 999+ F T 0 0 6.0 1450 189 166 T 0 0 6.0 2606 47 42 R 22 27 5.5 870 502 502 R 42 51 5.5 1397 271 271 LTR 104 127 72.5 F LTR 211 258 999+ F EB T 756 924 0.0 A EB T 1244 1520 0.0 A R 54 66 I R 26 32 I TR 810 990 0.0 A TR 1270 1552 0.0 A WB L 45 55 5.0 900 639 639 55.8 F WB L 10 12 5.0 1411 364 364 999+ F T 477 583 ( T 1078 1318 LT 522 638 55.8 F LT 1088 1330 999+ F INT TOTAL: 25.5 D INT TOTAL: 756.0 F MINOR MOVEMENTS: ( 67.5) (F) MINOR MOVEMENTS: (999+) (F) INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.AMV+APPRO.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.PMV+APPRO.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB APPENDIX D Results of the Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing plus Approved plus Project Scenario (Without Scarlett Drive Extension) Conditions Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants ) LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants ) Condition: Exist+Approved+Project Alternative 1 (AM) 05/14/97 Condition: Exist+Approved+Project Alternative 1 (PM) 05/14/P7 INTERSECTION 1 Dougherty Road/Amador Valley City of Dublin INTERSECTION 1 Dougherty Road/Amador Valley City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL 146 966 0 69 518 0 <--I I I -> I Split?N I <--I I I--> I Split?N LEFT 51 --- 1.0 1.1 2.1 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT LEFT 140 --- 1.0 1.1 2.1 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 0 --->0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU Amador Valley THRU 0 --->0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU Amador Valley RIGHT 637--- 1.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0--- 0 LEFT RIGHT 409--- 1.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 LEFT I <--I- I^ ---> I I <---IANTS: N I > I W NTS: N E v 259 251 10 v SIUrb=YG ,, Rur=Y W+E v 620 850 10 v SIUrb=Y,ARur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split?N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: Dougherty Road STREET NAME: Dougherty Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME" CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME. CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB THRU (T) 251 251 3440 0.0730 NB THRU(T) 850 850 3440 0.2471 LEFT (L) 259 259 1720 0.1506 0.1506 LEFT (L) 620 620 1720 0.3605 0.3605 SB RIGHT (R) 146 146 1720 0.0849 SB RIGHT (R) 69 69 1720 0.0401 THRU (T) 966 966 3440 0.2808 THRU (T) 518 518 3440 0.1506 T+R 1112 3440 0.3233 0.3233 T+R 587 3440 0.1706 0.1706 EN RIGHT (R) 637 378• 1720 0.2198 0.2198 ER RIGHT (R) 409 0• 1720 0.0000 LEFT (L) 51 51 1720 0.0297 LEFT (L) 140 140 1720 0.0814 0.0814 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.69 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.61 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: B INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: B •ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED •ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.AMV+APPRO.AMV+PROJI.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=ESIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.PMV+APPRO.PHV+PROJ1.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Exis + Approved + Project (AM) Alternative 1 05/23/97 Condition: Exis + Approved + Project (PM) Alternative 1 05/23/97 INTERSECTION 2 Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard City of Dublin INTERSECTION 2 Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 8-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 8-PHASE SIGNAL 95 1259 331 70 1010 532 I I I- I I I > I Split? N I <-- I <-- - --> I Split? N LEFT 66 --- 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 --- 179 RIGHT LEFT 150 --- 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 --- 471 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 319 ---> 1.0 (NO. OF LANES) 2.0<--- 222 THRU Dublin Boulevard THRU 503 ---> 1.0 (NO. OF LANES) 2.0<--- 487 THRU Dublin Boulevard RIGHT 449 --- 2.5 2.0 2.1 1.1 2.0 --- 105 LEFT RIGHT 891 --- 2.5 2.0 2.1 1.1 2.0 --- 182 LEFT ---> I <--- ---> I I <---I I I I V N E V 670 819 240 v SIUrb=YG RARur=Y W NTS: '+ E V 760 1080 105 v SIG WARRANTS: S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: Dougherty Road STREET NAME: Dougherty Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 240 240 1650 0.1455 NB RIGHT (R) 105 105 1650 0.0636 THRU (T) 819 819 3300 0.2482 THRU (T) 1080 1080 3300 0.3273 LEFT (L) 670 670 3000 0.2233 0.2233 LEFT (L) 760 760 3000 0.2533 T + R 1059 3300 0.3209 T + R 1185 3300 0.3591 0.3591 SB RIGHT (R) 95 29 * 1650 0.0176 SB RIGHT (R) 70 0 * 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 1259 1259 3300 0.3815 0.3815 THRU (T) 1010 1010 3300 0.3061 LEFT (L) 331 331 1650 0.2006 LEFT (L) 532 532 1650 0.3224 0.3224 EB RIGHT (R) 449 0 * 3000 0.0000 EB RIGHT (R) 891 131 * 3000 0.0437 THRU (T) 319 319 1650 0.1933 0.1933 THRU (T) 503 503 1650 0.3048 0.3048 LEFT (L) 66 66 1650 0.0400 LEFT (L) 150 150 1650 0.0909 WB RIGHT (R) 179 0 * 1650 0.0000 WB RIGHT (R) 471 0 * 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 222 222 3300 0.0673 THRU (T) 487 487 3300 0.1476 LEFT (L) 105 105 3000 0.0350 0.0350 LEFT (L) 182 182 3000 0.0607 0.0607 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.83 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 1.05 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: D INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: F * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.AMV+APPRO.AMV+PROJ1.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.PMV+APPRO.PMV+PROJ1.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB I oftware by TJKM Transportation Consultants ) LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants ) Condition: Exis + App + Project (AM) Alternative 1 Mitig 05/23/97 Condition: Exis + App + Project (PM) Alternative 1 Mitig 05/23/97 INTERSECTION 2 Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard City of Dublin INTERSECTION 2 Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 8-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 8-PHASE SIGNAL 95i 1259I 3I31 A 70i 1010 532 ^ 1 <--- v ---> I Split? N 1 <--- v ---> I Split? N LEFT 66 --- 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 --- 179 RIGHT LEFT 150 --- 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 --- 471 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 319 ---> 2.0 (NO. OF LANES) 2.0<--- 222 THRU Dublin Boulevard THRU 503 ---> 2.0 (NO. OF LANES) 2.0<--- 487 THRU Dublin Boulevard RIGHT 449 --- 2.5 2.0 2.1 1.1 2.0 --- 105 LEFT RIGHT 891 --- 2.5 2.0 2.1 1.1 2.0 --- 182 LEFT <--- ^ ---> 1 1 <--- ^ ---> 1 N v v SIG WARRANTS: N v v SIG WARRANTS: 2 W + E 67 8 9 40 Urb=Y, Rur=Y W + E 76 108 0 105 Urb=Y, Rur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: Dougherty Road STREET NAME: Dougherty Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 240 240 1650 0.1455 NB RIGHT (R) 105 105 1650 0.0636 THRU (T) 819 819 3300 0.2482 THRU (T) 1080 1080 3300 0.3273 LEFT (L) 670 670 3000 0.2233 0.2233 LEFT (L) 760 760 3000 0.2533 0.2533 T + R 1059 3300 0.3209 T + R 1185 3300 0.3591 SB RIGHT (R) 95 29 * 1650 0.0176 SB RIGHT (R) 70 0 * 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 1259 1259 3300 0.3815 0.3815 THRU (T) 1010 1010 3300 0.3061 0.3061 LEFT (L) 331 331 3000 0.1103 LEFT (L) 532 532 3000 0.1773 EB RIGHT (R) 449 0 * 3000 0.0000 EB RIGHT (R) 891 131 * 3000 0.0437 THRU (T) 319 319 3300 0.0967 0.0967 THRU (T) 503 503 3300 0.1524 LEFT (L) 66 66 1650 0.0400 LEFT (L) 150 150 1650 0.0909 0.0909 WB RIGHT (R) 179 0 * 1650 0.0000 WB RIGHT (R) 471 178 * 1650 0.1079 THRU (T) 222 222 3300 0.0673 THRU (T) 487 487 3300 0.1476 0.1476 LEFT (L) 105 105 3000 0.0350 0.0350 LEFT (L) 182 182 3000 0.0607 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.74 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.80 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: C INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: C * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=MIT.INT,VOL=EXIS.AMV+APPRO.AMV+PROJ1.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=MIT.INT,VOL=EXIS.PMV+APPRO.PMV+PROJ1.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Exist + Approved + Project Alternative 1 (AM) 05/14/97 Condition: Exist + Approved + Project Alternative 1 (PM) 05/14/97 INTERSECTION 3 Dougherty Road/I 580 WB Ramps City of Dublin INTERSECTION 3 Dougherty Road/I 580 WB Ramps City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL A 547 13i1 I 0 A 726i 1756 I0 A 1 <--- v ---> 1 Split? N 1 <--- v --> 1 Split? N LEFT 0 --- 0.0 1.9 2.0 0.0 2.0 --- 599 RIGHT LEFT 0 --- 0.0 1.9 2.0 0.0 2.0 --- 580 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 0 ---> 0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU I 580 WB Ramps THRU 0 ---> 0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU 1580 WB Ramps RIGHT 0 --- 0.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 2.0 --- 366 LEFT RIGHT 0 --- 0.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 2.0 --- 382 LEFT 1 1 1 <--- A ---> 1 N I SIG WARRANTS: N SIG WARRANTS: I I v v W + E v 0 1161 487 v Urb=Y, Rur=Y W + E 1 1 2 1 82 Urb=Y, Rur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N • STREET NAME: Dougherty Road STREET NAME: Dougherty Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 487 487 1720 0.2831 NB RIGHT (R) 1582 1582 1720 0.9198 ** THRU (T) 1161 1161 5160 0.2250 THRU (T) 1722 1722 5160 0.3337 SB RIGHT (R) 547 547 1720 0.3180 SB RIGHT (R) 726 726 1720 0.4221 THRU (T) 1361 1361 3440 0.3956 0.3956 THRU (T) 1756 1756 3440 0.5105 0.5105 WB RIGHT (R) 599 599 3127 0.1916 0.1916 WB RIGHT (R) 580 580 3127 0.1855 0.1855 LEFT (L) 366 366 3127 0.1170 LEFT (L) 382 382 3127 0.1222 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.59 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.70 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: A INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: B * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED ** APPROACHING OR EXCEEDING CAPACITY INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.AMV+APPRO.AMV+PROJ1.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.PMV+APPRO.PMV+PROJ1.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB , Lftware by TJKM Transportation Consultants I LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Exist + Approved + Project Alternative 1 (AM) 05/14/97 Condition: Exist + Approved + Project Alternative 1 (PM) 05/14/97 INTERSECTION 4 Hopyard Road/I 580 EB Ramps City of Dublin INTERSECTION 4 Hopyard Road/I 580 EB Ramps City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL 487 1212 0 666 1401 0 <--I I I--> I Split? N I <--I I ! I --> I Split? N LEFT 614 --- 2.0 1.9 2.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT LEFT 551 --- 2.0 1.9 2.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 0 ---> 0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.C,<--- 0 THRU I 580 EB Ramps THRU 0 ---> 0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 9.0<--- 0 THRU I 580 EB Ramps RIGHT 2176 --- 2.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 0.0 --- 0 LEFT RIGHT 1155 --- 2.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 0.0 --- 0 LEFT <--- ^ ---> 1 I <--- ^ ---> 1 N SIG WARRANTS: N I SIG WARRANTS: v 1 I v v v W + E 0I 10 2 37 Urb=Y, Rur=Y W + E 1 26/9 94 Urb=Y, Rur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: Hopyard Road STREET NAME: Hopyard Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 37 37 1720 0.0215 NB RIGHT (R) 94 94 1720 0.0547 THRU (T) 1042 1042 5160 0.2019 THRU (T) 2679 2679 5160 0.5192 0.5192 SB RIGHT (R) 487 487 1720 0.2831 SB RIGHT (R) 666 666 1720 0.3872 THRU (T) 1212 1212 3440 0.3523 0.3523 THRU (T) 1401 1401 3440 0.4073 EB RIGHT (R) 2176 2176 3127 0.6959 0.6959 EB RIGHT (R) 1155 1155 3127 0.3694 0.3694 LEFT (L) 614 614 3127 0.1964 LEFT (L) 551 551 3127 0.1762 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 1.05 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.89 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: F INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: D * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.AMV+APPRO.AMV+PROJI.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.PMV+APPRO.PMV+PROJ1.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Exis+App+Proj Alternative 1 (AM) Mitigated 05/14/97 Condition: Exis+App+Proj Alternative 1 (PM)Mitigated 05/14/97 INTERSECTION 4 Hopyard Road/I 580 EB Ramps City of Dublin INTERSECTION 4 Hopyard Road/I 580 EB Ramps City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL 487 1212 0 666 1401 0 1 <--I I I -> I Split?N I <--I I I--> I Split? N LEFT 614 --- 2.0 1.9 2.0 0.0 0.0--- 0 RIGHT LEFT 551 --- 2.0 1.9 2.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 0 --->0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU 1580 EB Ramps THRU 0 --->0.0 (N0. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU 1580 EB Ramps RIGHT 2176 --- 3.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 0.0--- 0 LEFT RIGHT 1155 --- 3.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 0.0 --- 0 LEFT I I 1 v <...I I I W N E v 0 1042 137 v S1 Urb=Y,G ARuNTS: NNTS: rf W+E 0 2679 194 v SIG Urb=Y,ARur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split?N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: Hopyard Road STREET NAME: Hopyard Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 37 37 1720 0.0215 Ng RIGHT (R) 94 94 1720 0.0547 THRU (T) 1042 1042 5160 0.2019 THRU (T) 2679 2679 5160 0.5192 0.5192 SB RIGHT (R) 487 487 1720 0.2831 SB RIGHT (R) 666 666 1720 0.3872 THRU (T) 1212 1212 3440 0.3523 0.3523 THRU (T) 1401 1401 3440 0.4073 EB RIGHT (R) 2176 2176 4487 0.4850 0.4850 ER RIGHT (R) 1155 1155 4487 0.2574 0.2574 LEFT (L) 614 614 3127 0.1964 LEFT (L) 551 551 3127 0.1762 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.84 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.78 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: D INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: C *ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED *ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=MIT.INT,VOL=EXIS.AMV+APPRO.AMV+PROJ1.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=MIT.INT,VOL=EXIS.PMV+APPRO.PMV+PROJI.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB Li )ftware by TJKM Transportation Consultants ) LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants `L Condition: Exist+Approved+Project (AM)Alternative 1 05/23/97 Condition: Exist+Approved+Project (PM)Alternative 1 05/23/97 INTERSECTION 5 Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett Drive City of Dublin INTERSECTION 5 Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett Drive City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 4-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 4-PHASE SIGNAL 0 i I ID 10 0 Split? N <--I I I-0> 1 Split? N LEFT 0 --- 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT LEFT 0 --- 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 765 ---> 1.1 (NO. OF LANES) 1.0<--- 479 THRU Scarlett Drive THRU 1248---> 1.1 (NO. OF LANES) 1.0<--- 1087 THRU Scarlett Drive RIGHT 54 --- 1.1 1.1 0.0 1.1 1.0 --- 45 LEFT RIGHT 26--- 1.1 1.1 0.0 1.1 1.0 --- 10 LEFT N N E v 82 IO I22 v SIUrb=BG RARur=Y YNTS: +E v 169 10 142 v WARRANTS: Rur•Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N G S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split?N STREET NAME: Dublin Boulevard STREET NAME: Dublin Boulevard ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME" CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 22 22 1650 0.0133 NB RIGHT (R) 42 42 1650 0.0255 LEFT (L) 82 82 1650 0.0497 LEFT (L) 169 169 1650 0.1024 T +R+L 104 1650 0.0630 0.0630 T +R+L 211 1650 0.1279 0.1279 EB RIGHT (R) 54 54 1650 0.0327 ER RIGHT (R) 26 26 1650 0.0158 THRU (T) 765 765 1650 0.4636 THRU (T) 1248 1248 1650 0.7564 T+R 819 1650 0.4964 0.4964 T *R 1274 1650 0.7721 0.7721 WB THRU (T) 479 479 1650 0.2903 UB THRU (T) 1087 1087 1650 0.6588 LEFT (L) 45 45 1650 0.0273 0.0273 LEFT (L) 10 10 1650 0.0061 0.0061 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.59 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.91 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: A INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: E •ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED "ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.AMV+APPRO.AMV+PROJI.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.PMV+APPRO.PMV+PROJI.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Exist+Approved+Project Alternative 1 (AM) 05/14/97 Condition: Exist+Approved+Project Alternative 1 (PM) 05/14/97 INTERSECTION 6 Dougherty Road/Scarlett Drive City of Dublin INTERSECTION 6 Dougherty Road/Scarlett Drive City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT. 4-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 4-PHASE SIGNAL 3 1599 0 16 909 0 <-_I I I 1 > 1 Split? N 1 <--- v ---> 1 Split?N LEFT 16--- 1.1 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT LEFT 8 --- 1.1 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0--- 0 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 0--->0.0 (N0. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU Scarlett Drive THRU 0 --->0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU Scarlett Drive RIGHT 73 --- 1.1 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 LEFT RIGHT 34 --- 1.1 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0--- 0 LEFT I < --I I" I < I I" W N E v 15 494 10 v SIG Urb=N, Rur=Y V N E v 74 1463 10 v SIG Urb=N, Rur=N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split?N STREET NAME: Dougherty Road STREET NAME: Dougherty Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB THRU(T) 494 494 3300 0.1497 NB THRU (7) 1463 1463 3300 0.4433 0.4433 LEFT(L) 15 15 1650 0.0091 0.0091 LEFT (L) 74 74 1650 0.0448 SB RIGHT (R) 3 0• 1650 0.0000 SR RIGHT (R) 16 8* 1650 0.0048 THRU(T) 1599 1599 3300 0.4845 0.4845 THRU (T) 909 909 3300 0.2755 EB RIGHT (R) 73 73 1650 0.0442 ER RIGHT (R) 34 34 1650 0.0206 LEFT(L) 16 16 1650 0.0097 LEFT (L) 8 8 1650 0.0048 T+R+L 89 1650 0.0539 0.0539 T+R+L 42 1650 0.0255 0.0255 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.55 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.47 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: A INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: A *ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN OW RED +ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.AMV+APPRO.AMV+PROJI.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.PMV+APPRO.PMV+PROJI.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB APPENDIX E Results of the Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing plus Approved plus Project Scenario (With Scarlett Drive Extension) Conditions , )oftware by TJKM Transportation Consultants ) LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Exist + Approved + Project Alternative 2 (AM) 05/14/97 Condition: Exist + Approved + Project Alternative 2 (PM) 05/14/97 INTERSECTION 1 Dougherty Road/Amador Valley City of Dublin INTERSECTION 1 Dougherty Road/Amador Valley City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL 146 966 0 69 518 0 <--I I I--> 1 Split? N I <--- I ---> 1Split? N -- LEFT 51 --- 1.0 1.1 2.1 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT LEFT 140 1.0 1.1 2.1 0.0 0.0 - 0 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 0 ---> 0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU Amador Valley THRU 0 ---> 0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU Amador Valley RIGHT 637 --- 1.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 LEFT RIGHT 409 --- 1.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 LEFT <--- ^ ---> 1 I <--- ^ ---> I N I I SIG WARRANTS: N I SIG WARRANTS: W + E v 259 251 10 v Urb=Y, Rur=Y W + E v 620 85I 0 0 v Urb=Y, Rur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: Dougherty Road STREET NAME: Dougherty Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB THRU (T) 251 251 3440 0.0730 NB THRU (T) 850 850 3440 0.2471 LEFT (L) 259 259 1720 0.1506 0.1506 LEFT (L) 620 620 1720 0.3605 0.3605 SB RIGHT (R) 146 146 1720 0.0849 SB RIGHT (R) 69 69 1720 0.0401 THRU (T) 966 966 3440 0.2808 THRU (T) 518 518 3440 0.1506 T + R 1112 3440 0.3233 0.3233 T + R 587 3440 0.1706 0.1706 EB RIGHT (R) 637 378 * 1720 0.2198 0.2198 EB RIGHT (R) 409 0 * 1720 0.0000 LEFT (L) 51 51 1720 0.0297 LEFT (L) 140 140 1720 0.0814 0.0814 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.69 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.61 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: B INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: B * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.AMV+APPRO.AMV+PROJ2.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.PMV+APPRO.PMV+PROJ2.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Exist + Approved + Project (AM) Alternative 2 05/23/97. Condition: Exist + Approved + Project (PM) Alternative 2 05/23/97 INTERSECTION 2 Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard City of Dublin INTERSECTION 2 Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 8-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 8-PHASE SIGNAL 95i 1259 107 70 1010 176 A <--- v ---> 1 Split? N 1 <--- v ---> 1 Split? N LEFT 66 --- 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 --- 59 RIGHT LEFT 150 --- 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 --- 154 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 319 ---> 1.0 (NO. OF LANES) 2.0<--- 222 THRU Dublin Boulevard THRU 503 ---> 1.0 (NO. OF LANES) 2.0<--- 487 THRU Dublin Boulevard RIGHT 449 --- 2.5 2.0 2.1 1.1 2.0 --- 105 LEFT RIGHT 891 --- 2.5 2.0 2.1 1.1 2.0 --- 182 LEFT <---I ,, -I--> I I <---I IA 105 I NTS: W + E v 670 819 240 v SIUrb=Y, Rur=Y W G WARRANTS: + E v 760 1080 v SIUrb=YG ,,ARur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: Dougherty Road STREET NAME: Dougherty Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 240 240 1650 0.1455 NB RIGHT (R) 105 105 1650 0.0636 THRU (T) 819 819 3300 0.2482 THRU (T) 1080 1080 3300 0.3273 LEFT (L) 670 670 3000 0.2233 0.2233 LEFT (L) 760 760 3000 0.2533 0.2533 T + R 1059 3300 0.3209 T + R 1185 3300 0.3591 SB RIGHT (R) 95 29 * 1650 0.0176 SB RIGHT (R) 70 0 * 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 1259 1259 3300 0.3815 0.3815 THRU (T) 1010 1010 3300 0.3061 0.3061 LEFT (L) 107 107 1650 0.0648 LEFT (L) 176 176 1650 0.1067 EB RIGHT (R) 449 0 * 3000 0.0000 EB RIGHT (R) 891 131 * 3000 0.0437 THRU (T) 319 319 1650 0.1933 0.1933 THRU (T) 503 503 1650 0.3048 0.3048 LEFT (L) 66 66 1650 0.0400 LEFT (L) 150 150 1650 0.0909 WB RIGHT (R) 59 0 * 1650 0.0000 WB RIGHT (R) 154 0 * 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 222 222 3300 0.0673 THRU (T) 487 487 3300 0.1476 LEFT (L) 105 105 3000 0.0350 0.0350 LEFT (L) 182 182 3000 0.0607 0.0607 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.83 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.92 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: D INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: E * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXAPP2.AMV+PROJ2.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXAPP2.PMV+PROJ2.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants I LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants I Condition: Exis + App + Proj Alternative 2 (AM) Mitigated 05/14/97 Condition: Exis + App + Proj Alternative 2 (PM) Mitigated 05/14/97 INTERSECTION 2 Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard City of Dublin INTERSECTION 2 Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 6-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 6-PHASE SIGNAL 95 1259 107 70 1010 176 I <--I I IA A I I IA --> I Split? N I <- - I Split? N LEFT 66 --- 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 --- 59 RIGHT LEFT 150 --- 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 --- 154 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 319 ---> 2.0 (NO. OF LANES) 2.0<--- 222 THRU Dublin Boulevard THRU 503 ---> 2.0 (NO. OF LANES) 2.0<--- 487 THRU Dublin Boulevard RIGHT 449 --- 2.5 2.0 3.1 1.1 2.0 --- 105 LEFT RIGHT 891 --- 2.5 2.0 3.1 1.1 2.0 --- 182 LEFT I <--- A -- > I I <--- A ---> I V v v v N SIG WARRANTS: N SIG WARRANTS: W + E 67 8 105 9 40 Urb=Y, Rur=Y W + E 76 10 0 Urb=Y, Rur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N S LC'T THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: Dougherty Road STREET NAME: Dougherty Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 240 240 1650 0.1455 NB RIGHT (R) 105 105 1650 0.0636 THRU (T) 819 819 4950 0.1655 THRU (T) 1080 1080 4950 0.2182 LEFT (L) 670 670 3000 0.2233 0.2233 LEFT (L) 760 760 3000 0.2533 0.2533 T + R 1059 4950 0.2139 T + R 1185 4950 0.2394 SB RIGHT (R) 95 29 * 1650 0.0176 SB RIGHT (R) 70 0 * 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 1259 1259 3300 0.3815 0.3815 THRU (T) 1010 1010 3300 0.3061 0.3061 LEFT (L) 107 107 1650 0.0648 LEFT (L) 176 176 1650 0.1067 EB RIGHT (R) 449 0 * 3000 0.0000 EB RIGHT (R) 891 131 * 3000 0.0437 THRU (T) 319 319 3300 0.0967 0.0967 THRU (T) 503 503 3300 0.1524 LEFT (L) 66 66 1650 0.0400 LEFT (L) 150 150 1650 0.0909 0.0909 WB RIGHT (R) 59 0 * 1650 0.0000 WB RIGHT (R) 154 0 * 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 222 222 3300 0.0673 THRU (T) 487 487 3300 0.1476 0.1476 LEFT (L) 105 105 3000 0.0350 0.0350 LEFT (L) 182 182 3000 0.0607 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.74 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.80 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: C INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: C * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=MIT.INT,VOL=EXAPP2.AMV+PROJ2.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=MIT.INT,VOL=EXAPP2.PMV+PROJ2.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Exist+Approved+Project Alternative 2 (AM) 05/14/97 Condition: Exist+Approved+Project Alternative 2 (PM) 05/14/97 INTERSECTION 3 Dougherty Road/I 580 WB Ramps City of Dublin INTERSECTION 3 Dougherty Road/I 580 WB Ramps City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Cant Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL 547 1361 0 726 1756 0 <--- I I > I Split?N I <--- I I > I Split? N LEFT 0 --- 0.0 1.9 2.0 0.0 2.0--- 599 RIGHT LEFT 0--- 0.0 1.9 2.0 0.0 2.0--- 580 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 0 --->0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU 1580 WB Ramps THRU 0 --->0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU 1580 WB Ramps RIGHT 0 --- 0.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 2.0 --- 366 LEFT RIGHT 0 --- 0.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 2.0--- 382 LEFT WARRANTS: W NE v 0 1161 487 v SIG Urb=Y,ANTS:Rur=Y W N E v 0 1722 1582 v SIG Urb=T, Rur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: Dougherty Road STREET NAME: Dougherty Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME' CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 487 487 1720 0.2831 NB RIGHT (R) 1582 1582 1720 0.9198** THRU(T) 1161 1161 5160 0.2250 THRU(T) 1722 1722 5160 0.3337 SB RIGHT (R) 547 547 1720 0.3180 SB RIGHT (R) 726 726 1720 0.4221 THRU(T) 1361 1361 3440 0.3956 0.3956 THRU (T) 1756 1756 3440 0.5105 0.5105 WB RIGHT (R) 599 599 3127 0.1916 0.1916 WB RIGHT (R) 580 580 3127 0.1855 0.1855 LEFT (L) 366 366 3127 0.1170 LEFT (L) 382 382 3127 0.1222 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.59 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.70 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: A INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: B *ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED *ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED **APPROACHING OR EXCEEDING CAPACITY INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.AMV+APPRO.AMV+PROJ2.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.PMV+APPRO.PMV+PROJ2.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB ) ) )Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants ) LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants ) Condition: Exist+Approved+Project Alternative 2 (AM) 05/14/97 Condition: Exist+Approved+Project Alternative 2 (PM) 05/14/97 INTERSECTION 4 Hopyard Road/I 580 EB Ramps City of Dublin INTERSECTION 4 Hopyard Road/I 580 EB Ramps City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL 487 1212 0 666 1401 0 I <--- I -- > I Split?N I <--- I -- > I Split?N LEFT 614 --- 2.0 1.9 2.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT LEFT 551 --- 2.0 1.9 2.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 0 --->0.o vn. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU 1580 EB Ramps THRU 0--->0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU 1580 EB Ramps RIGHT 2176--- 2.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 0.0 --- 0 LEFT RIGHT 1155 --- 2.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 0.0--- 0 LEFT I <---- I ---> 1 1 <---I I" 1 V+N E v vWARRANTS: v v 0 0 1042 I37 SIUri T. Rur=Y W N E 2679 I94 SIG Urb=T, Rur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: Hopyard Road STREET NAME: Hopyard Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME. CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 37 37 1720 0.0215 NB RIGHT (R) 94 94 1720 0.0547 THRU (T) 1042 1042 5160 0.2019 THRU (T) 2679 2679 5160 0.5192 0.5192 58 RIGHT (R) 487 487 1720 0.2831 SB RIGHT (R) 666 666 1720 0.3872 THRU (T) 1212 1212 3440 0.3523 0.3523 THRU (T) 1401 1401 3440 0.4073 EB RIGHT (R) 2176 2176 3127 0.6959 0.6959 EB RIGHT (R) 1155 1155 3127 0.3694 0.3694 LEFT (L) 614 614 3127 0.1964 LEFT (L) 551 551 3127 0.1762 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 1.05 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.89 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: F INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: D •ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED •ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.AMV+APPRO.AMV+PROJ2.ANV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=EXIST.INT,VOL=EXIS.PMV+APPRO.PMV+PROJ2.PMV,CAPaD:..LOSCAP.TAB LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Exis+App+Proj Alternative 2 (AM)Mitigated 05/14/97 Condition: Exis+App+Proj Alternative 2 (PM) Mitigated 05/14/97 INTERSECTION 4 Hopyard Road/I 580 EB Ramps City of Dublin INTERSECTION 4 Hopyard Road/I 580 EB Ramps City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL 487 1212 0 666 1401 I 0 I < - I I > I Split? N 1 <--- v --> 1 Split? N LEFT 614 --- 2.0 1.9 2.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT LEFT 551 --- 2.0 1.9 2.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT STREET NAME: NAME: THRU 0 --->0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU 1580 EB Ramps THRU 0 --->0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU 1580 EB Ramps RIGHT 2176--- 3.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 0.0 --- 0 LEFT RIGHT 1155 --- 3.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 0.0 --- 0 LEFT 1 <- I I 1 1 < INTS: N I > NTS: W N E v 11 1042 137 v SIUrb=YG I,ARur=Y W+E v 0 2679 I94 v SIG Urb=YI,ARur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split?N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: Hopyard Road STREET NAME: Hopyard Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 37 37 1720 0.0215 NB RIGHT (R) 94 94 1720 0.0547 THRU (T) 1042 1042 5160 0.2019 THRU (T) 2679 2679 5160 0.5192 0.5192 SB RIGHT (R) 487 487 1720 0.2831 SB RIGHT (R) 666 666 1720 0.3872 THRU (T) 1212 1212 3440 0.3523 0.3523 THRU (T) 1401 1401 3440 0.4073 EB RIGHT (R) 2176 2176 4487 0.4850 0.4850 EB RIGHT CR) 1155 1155 4487 0.2574 0.2574 LEFT (L) 614 614 3127 0.1964 LEFT (L) 551 551 3127 0.1762 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.84 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.78 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: D INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: C *ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED •ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=MIT.INT,VOL=PROJ2.AMV+EKIS.AMV+APPRO.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=MIT.INT,VOL=PROJ2.PMV+EXIS.PMV+APPRO.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB L )iftware by TJKM Transportation Consultants ) LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Exist+Approved+Project Alterantive 2 (AM) 05/23/97 Condition: Exist+Approved+Project Alterantive 2 (PM) 05/23/97 INTERSECTION 5 Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett Drive City of Dublin INTERSECTION 5 Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett Drive City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 5-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 5-PHASE SIGNAL 0 12 224 0 3 356 I I I I Split? N I <-- I I <__ __> --> I Split?N LEFT 0 --- 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.0 --- 120 RIGHT LEFT 0 --- 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.0 --- 317 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 880 ---> 1.1 (NO. OF LANES) 1.0<--- 659 THRU Scarlett Drive THRU 756 ---> 1.1 (NO. OF LANES) 1.0<--- 378 THRU Scarlett brive RIGHT 42 --- 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.0 --- 45 LEFT RIGHT 23 --- 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.0 --- 10 LEFT I < - > I I <...IANTS: I > I N N E v 80 13 122 v SIG Urb=Y,, Rur=Y W N E v 157 72 I42 v SIG Urb=Y, Rur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: Dublin Boulevard STREET NAME: Dublin Boulevard ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 22 22 1650 0.0133 NB RIGHT (R) 42 42 1650 0.0255 THRU (T) 3 3 1650 0.0018 THRU(T) 12 12 1650 0.0073 LEFT (L) 80 80 1650 0.0485 LEFT (L) 157 157 1650 0.0952 T a R 25 1650 0.0152 T+R 54 1650 0.0327 T+L 83 1650 0.0503 T+ L 169 1650 0.1024 T+R+L 105 1650 0.0636 0.0636 T+R+ L 211 1650 0.1279 0.1279 SR RIGHT (R) 0 0 1650 0.0000 SR RIGHT (R) 0 0 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 12 12 1650 0.0073 THRU (T) 3 3 1650 0.0018 LEFT (L) 224 224 1650 0.1358 0.1358 LEFT (L) 356 356 1650 0.2158 0.2158 T+R 12 1650 0.0073 T+R 3 1650 0.0018 T+L 236 1650 0.1430 I+L 359 1650 0.2176 T+R+L 236 1650 0.1430 T+R a L 359 1650 0.2176 EB RIGHT (R) 42 42 1650 0.0255 EB RIGHT (R) 23 23 1650 0.0139 THOU(T) 880 880 1650 0.5333 THRU (T) 756 756 1650 0.4582 LEFT (L) 0 0 1650 0.0000 LEFT (L) 0 0 1650 0.0000 T+R 922 1650 0.5588 0.5588 T+R 779 1650 0.4721 0.4721 NB RIGHT (R) 120 0* 1650 0.0000 WB RIGHT (R) 317 0* 1650 0.0000 THRU(T) 659 659 1650 0.3994 THOU(T) 378 378 1650 0.2291 LEFT (L) 45 45 1650 0.0273 0.0273 LEFT (L) 10 10 1650 0.0061 0.0061 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.79 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.82 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: C INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: p *ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED *ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=SCEN56.INT,VOL*EXIS.AMV+APP2.AMV+PROJ2.AMV,CAP*D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=SCEN56.INT,VOL=EXIS.PMV+APP2.PMV+PROJ2.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Exist + Approved + Project Alternative 2 (AM) 05/23/97 Condition: Exist + Approved + Project Alternative 2 (PM) 05/23/97 INTERSECTION 6 Dougherty Road/Scarlett Drive City of Dublin INTERSECTION 6 Dougherty Road/Scarlett Drive City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 5-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 5-PHASE SIGNAL A 3 1587 227 A 16A i 9i6 3i55 I <--- v ---> I Split? N I <--- v ---> I Split? N LEFT 16 --- 1.1 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 --- 121 RIGHT LEFT 8 --- 1.1 1.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 --- 320 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 9 ---> 1.1 (NO. OF LANES) 1.1<--- 2 THRU Scarlett Drive THRU 4 ---> 1.1 (NO. OF LANES) 1.1<--- 9 THRU Scarlett Drive RIGHT 64 --- 1.1 1.0 2.1 1.1 1.1 --- 0 LEFT RIGHT 30 --- 1.1 1.0 2.1 1.1 1.1 --- 0 LEFT NTS: W + E v 13 491 10 v G N SIG WARRANTS: NUrb=N, Rur=Y W + E v 65 1451 10 v SIUrb=YWAR,�Rur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: Dougherty Road STREET NAME: Dougherty Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 0 0 1650 0.0000 NB RIGHT (R) 0 0 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 491 491 3300 0.1488 THRU (T) 1451 1451 3300 0.4397 0.4397 LEFT (L) 13 13 1650 0.0079 0.0079 LEFT (L) 65 65 1650 0.0394 T + R 491 3300 0.1488 T + R 1451 3300 0.4397 SB RIGHT (R) 3 0 * 1650 0.0000 SB RIGHT (R) 16 8 * 1650 0.0048 THRU (T) 1587 1587 3300 0.4809 0.4809 THRU (T) 906 906 3300 0.2745 LEFT (L) 227 227 1650 0.1376 LEFT (L) 355 355 1650 0.2152 0.2152 EB RIGHT (R) 64 64 1650 0.0388 EB RIGHT (R) 30 30 1650 0.0182 THRU (T) 9 9 1650 0.0055 THRU (T) 4 4 1650 0.0024 LEFT (L) 16 16 1650 0.0097 LEFT (L) 8 8 1650 0.0048 I + R 73 1650 0.0442 T + R 34 1650 0.0206 I + L 25 1650 0.0152 T + L 12 1650 0.0073 I + R + L 89 1650 0.0539 0.0539 T + R + L 42 1650 0.0255 0.0255 WB RIGHT (R) 121 0 * 1650 0.0000 WB RIGHT (R) 320 0 * 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 2 2 1650 0.0012 THRU (T) 9 9 1650 0.0055 LEFT (L) 0 0 1650 0.0000 0.0000 LEFT (L) 0 0 1650 0.0000 0.0000 T + L 2 1650 0.0012 T + L 9 1650 0.0055 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.54 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.68 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: A INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: B * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=SCENS6.INT,VOL=EXIS.AMV+APP2.AMV+PROJ2.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=SCEN56.INT,VOL=EXIS.PMV+APP2.PMV+PROJ2.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB ) APPENDIX F Results of the Intersection Capacity Analysis Cumulative (2010) plus Project Scenarios L bftware by TJKM Transportation Consultants ) LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants )-__-- Condition: Cumulative Year 2010 plus Project (AM) 05/14/97 Condition: Cumulative Year 2010 plus Project (PM) 05/14/97 INTERSECTION 1 Dougherty Road/Amador Valley City of Dublin INTERSECTION 1 Dougherty Road/Amador Valley City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL 168 1112 0 69 521 0 1 < -I I I- I Split? N I < I I I--> I Split? N LEFT 59--- 1.0 1.1 2.1 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT LEFT 140 --- 1.0 1.1 2.1 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 0 --->0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU Amador Valley THRU 0 --->0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU Amador Valley RIGHT 736--- 1.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 LEFT RIGHT 423 --- 1.0 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 LEFT W N E v 311 292 10 v SIG Urb=YI,ANTS:Rur=Y W N E v 626 851 10 v SIG Urb=Y, RurnY S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split?N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split?N STREET NAME: Dougherty Road STREET NAME: Dougherty Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB THRU (T) 292 292 3440 0.0849 NB THRU (T) 851 851 3440 0.2474 LEFT (L) 311 311 1720 0.1808 0.1808 LEFT (L) 626 626 1720 0.3640 0.3640 SB RIGHT (R) 168 168 1720 0.0977 SB RIGHT (R) 69 69 1720 0.0401 THRU (T) 1112 1112 3440 0.3233 THRU (T) 521 521 3440 0.1515 T+R 1280 3440 0.3721 0.3721 T•R 590 3440 0.1715 0.1715 ER RIGHT (R) 736 425• 1720 0.2471 0.2471 EB RIGHT (R) 423 0• 1720 0.0000 LEFT (L) 59 59 1720 0.0343 LEFT (L) 140 140 1720 0.0814 0.0814 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.80 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.62 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: C INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: B •ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED *ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=2010.INT,VOL=2010.AMV*PROJ2.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=2010.INT,VOL=2010.PMV+PROJ2.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Cumulative Year 2010 plus Project (AM) 05/14/97 Condition: Cumulative Year 2010 plus Project (PM) 05/14/97 INTERSECTION 2 Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard City of Dublin INTERSECTION 2 Dougherty Road/Dublin Boulevard City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 6-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 6-PHASE SIGNAL 258i 1379i 196 47 225 131 II I "<--- v ---> 1 Split? N I <--- v ---> 1 Split., N LEFT 160 --I 2.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 --- 255 RIGHT LEFT 233 --- 2.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 --- 235 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 583 ---> 3.0 (NO. OF LANES) 3.0<--- 1101 THRU Dublin Boulevard THRU 1110 ---> 3.0 (NO. OF LANES) 3.0<--- 795 THRU Dublin Boulevard RIGHT 951 --- 2.5 3.1 3.1 1.0 2.0 --- 444 LEFT RIGHT 1105 --- 2.5 3.1 3.1 1.0 2.0 --- 493 LEFT 1 <---I "I -I--> I I < -I "I -I- > W +N E v 1237 438 280 v SIUrb=YG ,�Rur=Y W N E v 1963 1047 555 v SIG WARRANTS: Rur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? N STREET NAME: Dougherty Road STREET NAME: Dougherty Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 280 36 * 1650 0.0218 NB RIGHT (R) 555 284 * 1650 0.1721 THRU (T) 438 438 4950 0.0885 THRU (T) 1047 1047 4950 0.2115 LEFT (L) 1237 1237 4304 0.2874 0.2874 LEFT (L) 1963 1963 4304 0.4561 0.4561 T + L 1675 7604 0.2203 T + L 3010 7604 0.3958 SB RIGHT (R) 258 170 * 1650 0.1030 SB RIGHT (R) 47 0 * 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 1379 1379 4950 0.2786 0.2786 THRU (T) 225 225 4950 0.0455 0.0455 LEFT (L) 196 196 3000 0.0653 LEFT (L) 131 131 3000 0.0437 EB RIGHT (R) 951 89 * 3000 0.0297 EB RIGHT (R) 1105 0 * 3000 0.0000 THRU (T) 583 583 4950 0.1178 THRU (T) 1110 1110 4950 0.2242 0.2242 LEFT (L) 160 160 3000 0.0533 0.0533 LEFT (L) 233 233 3000 0.0777 WB RIGHT (R) 255 147 * 1650 0.0891 WB RIGHT (R) 235 163 * 1650 0.0988 THRU (T) 1101 1101 4950 0.2224 0.2224 THRU (T) 795 795 4950 0.1606 LEFT (L) 444 444 3000 0.1480 LEFT (L) 493 493 3000 0.1643 0.1643 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.84 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.89 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: D INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: D * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=2010.INT,VOL=2010.AMV+PROJ2.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=2010.INT,VOL=2010.PMV+PROJ2.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB L Dftware by TJKM Transportation Consultants ) LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Cumulative Year 2010 plus Project (AM) 05/14/97 Condition: Cumulative Year 2010 plus Project (PM) UW14/97 INTERSECTION 3 Dougherty Road/I 580 WE Ramps City of Dublin INTERSECTION 3 Dougherty Road/I 580 NB Ramps City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL 771 2238 0 547 1423 0 ^ <--I I I--> I Split?N I <--I I ---> I Split?N LEFT 0 --- 0.0 1.9 3.0 0.0 2.0 --- 600 RIGHT LEFT 0 --- 0.0 1.9 3.0 0.0 2.0 --- 1053 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 0 --->0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU 1580 WB Ramps THRU 0 ---> 0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU 1580 WB Ramps RIGHT 0 --- 0.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 2.0 --- 460 LEFT RIGHT 0 --- 0.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 2.0 --- 366 LEFT W+E v WARRANTS: 0 1551 10 v NSIG Urb=Y,ARur=Y W NTS: N E v 0 2652 10 v SI Urb=Y, Rur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split?N - S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split?N STREET NAME: Dougherty Road STREET NAME: Dougherty Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME' CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 0 0 1720 0.0000 NB RIGHT (R) 0 0 1720 0.0000 THRU (T) 1551 1551 5160 0.3006 THRU (T) 2652 2652 5160 0.5140 0.5140 SB RIGHT (R) 771 771 1720 0.4483 SB RIGHT (R) 547 547 1720 0.3180 THRU (T) 2238 2238 5160 0.4337 0.4337 THRU (T) 1423 1423 5160 0.2758 NB RICHT (R) 600 600 3127 0.1919 0.1919 WB RIGHT (R) 1053 1053 3127 0.3367 0.3367 LEFT (L) 460 460 3127 0.1471 LEFT (L) 366 366 3127 0.1170 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.63 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.85 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: B INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED *ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=2010.INT,VOL=2010.AMV+PROJ2.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=2010.INT,VOL=2010.PMV+PROJ2.PMV,CAP D:..L0SCAP.TAB LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Cumulative Year.2010 plus Project (AM) 05/14/97 Condition: Cumulative Year 2010 plus Project (PM) 05/14/97 INTERSECTION 4 Hopyard Road/I 580 EB Ramps City of Dublin INTERSECTION 4 Hopyard Road/I 580 EB Ramps City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 3-PHASE SIGNAL 4 1600 0 2 1299 0 <--I I I--> I Split?N I <--I I I > I Split? N LEFT 766--- 2.0 1.9 3.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT LEFT 1083 --- 2.0 1.9 3.0 0.0 0.0 --- 0 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 0 --->0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU 1580 EB Ramps THRU 0 ---> 0.0 (NO. OF LANES) 0.0<--- 0 THRU 1580 EB Ramps RIGHT 1200 --- 2.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 0.0 --- 0 LEFT RIGHT 1159--- 2.0 0.0 3.0 1.9 0.0--- 0 LEFT N SIG WARRANTS: N SIG WARRANTS: v V W a E v 0 1056 239 v Urb=Y, Rur=Y W*E 25 0 77 Urb=Y, Rur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split?N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split?N STREET NAME: Hopyard Road STREET NAME: Hopyard Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 239 239 1720 0.1390 NB RIGHT (R) 477 477 1720 0.2773 THRU(T) 1056 1056 5160 0.2047 THRU (T) 2530 2530 5160 0.4903 0.4903 SB RIGHT (R) 4 4 1720 0.0023 SR RIGHT (R) 2 2 1720 0.0012 THRU(T) 1600 1600 5160 0.3101 0.3101 THRU (T) 1299 1299 5160 0.2517 ER RIGHT (R) 1200 1200 3127 0.3838 0.3838 EB RIGHT (R) 1159 1159 3127 0.3706 0.3706 LEFT(L) 766 766 3127 0.2450 LEFT (L) 1083 1083 3127 0.3463 TOTAL VOL1ME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.69 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.86 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: B INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: D 'ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED *ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=2010.INT,VOL=2010.AMV♦PROJ2.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=2010.INT,V0L=2010.PMV*PROJ2.PMV,CAP=0:..LOSCAP.TAB 1 `Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants ) LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Cumulative Year 2010 plus Project (AM) 05/14/9/ Condition: Cumulative Year 2010 plus Project (PM) JS/14/97 INTERSECTION 5 Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett Drive City of Dublin INTERSECTION 5 Dublin Boulevard/Scarlett Drive City of Dublin Cant Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOO RIGHT THRU LEFT 6-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHCO RIGHT THRU LEFT 6-PHASE SIGNAL 0 14 437 0 5 244 <--I I I- 1 Split? N I <--I I I- > 1 Split?N LEFT 0 --- 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 --- 382 RIGHT LEFT 0 --- 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 --- 679 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 1058--->3.0 (NO. OF LANES) 3.0<--- 1742 THRU Scarlett Drive THRU 1793 --->3.0 (NO. OF LANES) 3.0<--- 1595 THRU Scarlett Drive RIGHT 60 --- 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.0 --- 55 LEFT RIGHT 52 --- 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.0 --- 50 LEFT W N E v 20 13 122 v SIG WARRANTS: G WARRANTS: Urb=Y, Rur=Y W N E v 111 19 104 v SIUrb=Y, Rur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split?N S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split?N STREET NAME: Dublin Boulevard STREET NAME: Dublin Boulevard ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME. CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME. CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 22 22 1650 0.0133 NB RIGHT (R) 104 104 1650 0.0630 THRU(T) 3 3 1650 0.0018 THRU (T) 19 19 1650 0.0115 LEFT (L) 20 20 1650 0.0121 LEFT (L) 118 118 1650 0.0715 T+R 25 1650 0.0152 0.0152 T+R 123 1650 0.0745 0.0745 SB RIGHT (R) 0 0 1650 0.0000 SB RIGHT (R) 0 0 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 14 14 1650 0.0085 THRU (T) 5 5 1650 0.0030 LEFT (L) 437 437 1650 0.2648 0.2648 LEFT (L) 244 244 1650 0.1479 0.1479 T+R 14 1650 0.0085 T+R 5 1650 0.0030 EB RIGHT (R) 60 40* 1650 0.0242 EB RIGHT (R) 52 0* 1650 0.0000 THRU (T) 1058 1058 4950 0.2137 THRU (T) 1793 1793 4950 0.3622 0.3622 LEFT (L) 0 0 1650 0.0000 0.0000 LEFT (L) 0 0 1650 0.0000 WB RIGHT (R) 382 0• 1650 0.0000 WB RIGHT (R) 679 435* 1650 0.2636 THRU (T) 1742 1742 4950 0.3519 0.3519 THRU (T) 1595 1595 4950 0.3222 LEFT (L) 55 55 1650 0.0333 LEFT (L) 50 50 1650 0.0303 0.0303 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.63 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.61 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: B INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: B *ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED •ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=2010.INT,VOL=2010.AMV+PROJ2.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=2010.INT,VOL=2010.PMV+PROJ2.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants LOS Software by TJKM Transportation Consultants Condition: Cumulative Year 2010 plus Project (AM) 05/14/97 Condition: Cumulative Year 2010 plus Project (PM) 05/14/97 INTERSECTION 6 Dougherty Road/Scarlett Drive City of Dublin INTERSECTION 6 Dougherty Road/Scarlett Drive City of Dublin Count Date Time Peak Hour Count Date Time Peak Hour CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 5-PHASE SIGNAL CCTA METHOD RIGHT THRU LEFT 5-PHASE SIGNAL A 3 1584 442 A 16i 4i1 i45 I <--- v ---> I Split? N I <- v ---> I Split? N LEFT 16 --- 1.0 1.1 3.1 1.0 1.0 --- 383 RIGHT LEFT 8 --- 1.0 1.1 3.1 1.0 1.0 --- 688 RIGHT STREET NAME: STREET NAME: THRU 9 ---> 1.1 (NO. OF LANES) 1.1<--- 2 THRU Scarlett Drive THRU 4 ---> 1.1 (NO. OF LANES) 1.1<--- 9 THRU Scarlett Drive RIGHT 64 --- 1.1 1.0 3.0 1.0 1.1 --- 0 LEFT RIGHT 30 --- 1.1 1.0 3.0 1.0 1.1 --- 0 LEFT I � ---> 1 I <--- W +N E v 13 55I 0 10 v SIG WARRANTS: 65I 14/9 0 Urb=Y ^ ---> I ARur=Y W + E v 1 v SIG WARRANTS: Rur=Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? Y S LEFT THRU RIGHT Split? Y STREET NAME: Dougherty Road STREET NAME: Dougherty Road ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL ORIGINAL ADJUSTED V/C CRITICAL MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C MOVEMENT VOLUME VOLUME* CAPACITY RATIO V/C NB RIGHT (R) 0 0 1650 0.0000 NB RIGHT (R) 0 0 1650 ° 0.0000 THRU (T) 550 550 4950 0.1111 0.1111 THRU (T) 1479 1479 4950 0.2988 0.2988 LEFT (L) 13 13 1650 0.0079 LEFT (L) 65 65 1650 0.0394 SB RIGHT (R) 3 3 1650 0.0018 SB RIGHT (R) 16 16 1650 0.0097 THRU (T) 1584 1584 4950 0.3200 THRU (T) 431 431 4950 0.0871 LEFT (L) 442 442 1650 0.2679 LEFT (L) 245 245 1650 0.1485 0.1485 T + R 1587 4950 0.3206 0.3206 T + R 447 4950 0.0903 EB RIGHT (R) 64 64 1650 0.0388 EB RIGHT (R) 30 30 1650 0.0182 THRU (T) 9 9 1650 0.0055 THRU (T) 4 4 1650 0.0024 LEFT (L) 16 16 1650 0.0097 LEFT (L) 8 8 1650 0.0048 0.0048 T + R 73 1650 0.0442 0.0442 T + R 34 1650 0.0206 WS RIGHT (R) 383 0 * 1650 0.0000 WB RIGHT (R) 688 443 * 1650 0.2685 0.2685 THRU (T) 2 2 1650 0.0012 THRU (T) 9 9 1650 0.0055 LEFT (L) 0 0 1650 0.0000 0.0000 LEFT (L) 0 0 1650 0.0000 T + L 2 1650 0.0012 T + L 9 1650 0.0055 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.48 TOTAL VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY RATIO: 0.72 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: A INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: C * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED * ADJUSTED FOR RIGHT TURN ON RED INT=2010.INT,V0L=2010.AMV+PROJ2.AMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB INT=2010.INT,VOL=2010.PMV+PROJ2.PMV,CAP=D:..LOSCAP.TAB M ! r Acoustic Study Dublin Planning Department Draft Page 49 Park Sierra Apartment Project October,1997 PA 97-019 • • EDWARD L. PACK ASSOCIATES, INC. 13980 BLOSSOM HILL ROAD,SUITE 100 Acoustical Consultants TEL:408-723-8900 I LOS GATOS,CA 95032 FAX 408-723-8099 May 16,1997 Project No.29-042 Mr.Don Gause Shea Business Properties 667 Brea Canyon Road Suite 30 Walnut,CA 91788 Subject: Noise Assessment Study For the Planned"Park Sierra"Multi-Family Development,Dougherty Road,Dublin Dear Mr.Gause: This report presents the results of a noise assessment study for the planned"Park Sierra" multi-family development along Dougherty Road in Dublin,as shown on the Site Plan, Ref.(a). The noise exposures at the site were evaluated against the standards of the City of Dublin Noise Element,Ref.(b),the State of California Code of Regulations,Title 24, Ref.(c). The analysis of the on-site sound level measurements reveals that the existing noise environment is due primarily to vehicular traffic sources on Dougherty Road and operations at the adjacent industrial facilities to the south. The results of this study indicate that noise exposure excesses occur and mitigation measures will be required. Sections I and II of this report contain a summary of our findings and recommendations, respectively. Subsequent sections contain the site, traffic, industrial operations and project descriptions,analyses and evaluations. Attached hereto are Appendices A,B and C, which include the list of references, descriptions of the applicable standards, definitions of the terminology,descriptions of the acoustical instrumentation used for the field survey, ventilation requirements, general building shell controls, and the on-site noise measurement data and calculation tables. MEMBER:ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA AUDIO ENGINEERING SOCIETY -2- I. Summary of Findings The noise assessment results presented in the findings were evaluated against the standards of the City of Dublin Noise Element, which utilizes the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) noise descriptor. The CNEL is a 24-hour time-weighted average noise descriptor commonly used to define community noise environments. The standards specify an exterior noise exposure limit of 60 dB CNEL for residential land use. Residential interiors are limited to 45 dB CNEL or less. Commercial/Industrial uses are limited to 75 dB CNEL at the property line. Title 24 standards also utilize the CNEL descriptor, and establish an exterior criterion of 60 dB CNEL to determine the mitigation required to limit interior noise exposures to 45 dB CNEL or less in multi-family living spaces. The Title 24 standards also specify minimum requirements for the sound insulation performance of common interior partitions separating different dwelling units and dwelling units from interior common spaces. These standards are described in detail in Appendix B. Title 24 requires that common interior partitions achieve a Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of 50. In addition, common floor/ceiling assemblies must also achieve an Impact Insulation Class (IIC) rating of 50. As details of the common partitions were not available at the time of this study, an evaluation of the common interior partitions has not been made. The analysis of industrial operations presented in this study make two assumptions; 1)the noise exposure at the south property line is,and will remain at 75 dB CNEL, as this is the limit for commercial/industrial land uses, and 2) the primary industrial noise source (Ron Nunes Manufacturing) is located 40 ft. from the south property line. The noise levels shown below are without the application of mitigation measures and represent the noise environment for the undeveloped site. -3- A. Exterior Noise Exposures • The existing noise exposure at the planned minimum building setback from Dougherty Road (75 ft. from the centerline of the road) is 64 dB CNEL. Under future traffic conditions,the noise exposure will increase to 67 dB CNEL. Thus,the noise exposures will be up to 7 dB in excess of the City of Dublin Noise Element standards and the Title 24 criterion. • The noise exposures at the south property line separating the planned project site from the adjacent industrial uses ranges from 56 dB CNEL (measured) to 75 dB CNEL (assumed worst-case). At the nearest building setback(50 ft. from the property line),the noise exposures range from 49 to 68 dB CNEL. Thus, the noise exposures are up to 8 dB in excess of the City of Dublin Noise Element standards and the Title 24 criterion. • The noise exposure at the planned recreation area ranges from 60 dB CNEL toward Dougherty Road to 66 dB CNEL closest to the south property line. Thus,the noise exposures will be up to 6 dB in excess of the standards. • Inspections and noise level measurements of the Ron Nunes Company and the Federal Express operations revealed that very high levels of noise are created. The types of noise included rumbles from heavy truck and fork lift movements,the sounds of backing horns,the"pounding"of the Ron Nunes Company punch press and"squeals"from the wheels of containers that are moved around the rear of the Ron Nunes Company facility. The noise levels at the property line ranged from 55 dBA from the employees talking and working in the rear of the facility to 84 dBA for the backing horns. The diesel trucks generated 91 dBA of noise. The forklifts created 87 dBA of noise. The punch press generated 72 dBA of noise. The wheels squeals generated 100 dBA of noise. -4- These noises are not only high in level but may also be annoying and irritating. Presently, the Ron Nunes facility and the Federal Express facility operate primarily during the day when impacts to nearby neighbors would be minimal. However, should nighttime operations occur,complaints of noise annoyance are likely. B. Interior Noise Exposures • In the most impacted living spaces of houses closest to Dougherty Road, the interior noise exposure will be 49 and 52 dB CNEL under existing and future traffic conditions,respectively. Thus,the noise exposures will be up to 7 dB in excess of the City of Dublin Noise Element and Title 24 standards. ^ • In the most impacted living spaces of houses closest to the industrial facilities,the interior noise exposures will range from 41 dB CNEL (measured) to 53 dB CNEL (worst-case). Thus, the noise exposure will be up to 8 dB in excess of the City of Dublin Noise Element and Title 24 standards. • The peak noise levels in the most impacted living spaces due to noise sources at the Ron Nunes Company facility will range from 18 to 78 dBA with windows closed. • The peak noise levels in the most impacted living spaces due to noise sources at the Federal Express facility will range from 33 to 69 dBA with windows closed. As shown above, exterior and interior noise exposure excesses will occur and mitigation measures will be required to comply with the applicable standards. The recommended measures are described in Section II,below. . -5- II. Recommendations To achieve compliance with the City of Dublin and Title 24 standards, the following exterior and interior noise controls are recommended. In addition, general construction measures affecting the building shell are also recommended and are described in Appendix B. A. Exterior Noise Controls • • Construct 6.5 ft. high acoustically-effective patio fences at all patios within 100 ft.of the centerline of Dougherty Road and with a direct or side view of the roadway. The patio fence height is in reference to the nearest patio pad elevation. • Construct 48 in.high acoustically-effective balcony railings at all second-floor balconies within 100 ft. of the centerline of In Dougherty Road and with a direct or side view of the roadway. The balcony railing height is in reference to the nearest balcony floor elevation. • Construct 42 in. high acoustically-effective balcony railings at all third-floor balconies within 100 ft.of the centerline of Dougherty Road and with a direct or side view of the roadway. The balcony railing height is in reference to the nearest balcony floor elevation. • Construct a 12 ft. high acoustically-effective barrier along the property line contiguous with the industrial uses to the south. The barrier shall extend the full length of the south property line. The barrier height may be reduced to 10 ft. around the jog (pump station)at the southeast corner. The barrier height is in reference to the nearest project building pad elevation. -6- • At the secondary entry, the south property line barrier shall turn towards the industrial uses to reduce the flanking of noise through the opening. On the west side of the opening the flanking segment must continue for a distance of 35 ft.from the main barrier. On the east side of the opening, the flanking segment must extend a minimum of 20 ft.from the main barrier. • Construct 60 in.high acoustically-effective balcony railings at all second-floor balconies within 70 ft.of the south property line and with a direct or side view of the industrial uses. The balcony railing height is in reference to the nearest balcony floor elevation. • Construct 54 in. high acoustically-effective balcony railings at all third-floor balconies within 70 ft. of the south property line and with a direct or side view of the industrial uses.The balcony railing height is in reference to the nearest balcony floor elevation • Construct 48 in.high acoustically-effective balcony railings at all second-floor balconies between 70 ft. and 125 ft. of the south property line and with a direct or side view of the industrial uses. The balcony railing height is in reference to the nearest balcony floor elevation. • Construct 42 in. high acoustically-effective balcony railings at all third-floor balconies between 70 ft. and 125 ft. of the south property line and with a direct or side view of the industrial uses. The balcony railing height is in reference to the nearest balcony floor elevation. • Construct 42 in.high acoustically-effective balcony railings at all second-and third-floor balconies between 125 ft.and 225 ft.of the south property line and with a direct or side view of the industrial uses. The balcony railing height is in reference to the nearest balcony floor elevation. • -7- • The height of the soundwalls (including flanking segments) assumes that the industrial noise exposures will not exceed 75 dB CNEL at the south property line. The above recommended barriers were under the assumption that the building pads will be at-grade with the Dougherty Road and the adjacent industrial properties. Changes'in grading,however,may affect the heights of the required barriers. Please see Figure 1 for the locations and heights of the recommended noise control barriers. • To achieve an acoustically-effective barrier,it must be made air-tight,i.e.,without cracks,gaps,or other openings,including the balcony floor,and must provide for long- term durability. The barrier can be constructed of wood,concrete,stucco,masonry,earth berm or a combination thereof. Barriers under 10 ft.high must have a minimum surface weight of 2.5 lbs. per sq. ft. Barriers 10 ft. or higher shall have a minimum surface weight of 4.0 lbs.per sq. ft. If wood fencing is used,homogeneous sheet materials are preferable to conventional wood fencing as the latter has a tendency to warp and form openings with age. However, high quality, air-tight, tongue-and-groove, shiplap, or board and batten construction can be used, provided the minimum surface weight requirement is met and the construction is air-tight. Clear glass,Lexan,Plexiglas or other translucent materials may be incorporated into the barriers to provide for light and views. Drainage openings in the barriers are to be kept to a minimum size and should face away from the noise source. Downspouts and scuppers are preferable over sheet draining. The noise control barriers must be constructed so that all joints, including connections with posts,pilasters and the building shell are sealed air-tight and no openings are permitted between the upper barrier components and the ground,patio pad or balcony floor. The implementation of the above recommended barriers will reduce noise in the patios and balconies to 60 dB CNEL or less. -8- B. Interior Noise Control To achieve acceptable interior noise exposures,window controls will be required as described below. • Maintain closed at all times all windows and glass doors of second- floor and unshielded first floor living spaces of units within 200 ft. of the centerline of Dougherty Road and with a direct or side view of the roadway. Windows within 150 ft.of the centerline shall be rated minimum Sound Transmission Class (STC) 28. Windows between 150 ft.and 200 ft.of the centerline may have any type of glass. • Maintain closed at all times all windows and glass doors of second- floor living spaces of units located within 225 ft. of the south property line with a direct or side view of the industrial uses. Windows within 160 ft. of the south property line shall be rated minimum Sound Transmission Class(STC)28. Window between 160 ft.and 225 ft.of the south property line may have any type of glass. When windows are maintained closed for noise control,some type of mechanical ventilation to assure a habitable environment must be provided. The mechanical ventilation requirements specified by the Uniform Building Code(UBC)are described in Appendix B. The windows specified to be maintained closed are to be operable, as the requirement does not imply a"fixed"condition. All other windows of the project and all bathroom windows may have any type of glazing and may be kept opened as desired unless the bathroom is an integral part of a living space without a closable door,such as those sometimes found in master bedroom suites. -9- In addition to the required STC ratings,the windows and doors shall be installed in an acoustically-effective manner. To achieve an acoustically-effective window construction,the sliding window panels must form an air-tight seal when in the closed position and the window frames must be caulked to the wall opening around their entire perimeter with a non-hardening caulking compound to prevent sound infiltration. Exterior doors must seal air-tight around the full perimeter when in the closed position. III. Site.Traffic.Industrial Operations and Project Description The planned development site is an 8.31 acre parcel located along Dougherty Road north of Dublin Boulevard in Dublin. Presently, the site is vacant and approximately 1-2 ft. below the grade of Dougherty Road. The industrial/commercial uses to the south consist of a small strip industrial/retail building along Dougherty Road, and the MCE Corporation behind it to the west. Ron Nunes Enterprises,Allied Movers, Home Savings,Federal Express,General Pool&Spa and RI(Larabee are located along the southern property line of the development site. The on-site noise environment is controlled primarily by traffic sources on Dougherty Road and operations at the adjacent industrial uses. Dougherty Road carries an Average Daily Traffic(ADT)of 19,500 vehicles,Ref.(d). The industrial operations generate various types of noise, including heavy truck movement,forklifts and steel fabrication. The Ron Nunes Company operates from 6:00 a.m.to 9:00 p.m.,however,is planning to increase operations to 24 hours per day,7 days per week,Ref. (e). The Federal Express facility uses its trucks from 8:30 a.m.to 5:15 p.m.weekdays. Future plan information from Federal Express was not available,Ref.(f). Other industrial/commercial uses south of the site did not generate significant noise levels at the time of the site analysis. The development site is planned for 209 apartment units in nine buildings. A recreation area is also planned to be located between Buildings 1 and 2. Ingress and egress to the development will be by way of a project street off of Dougherty Road and a secondary access through the industrial park. -10- IV. Analyses of the Noise Levels A. Foci.ting Noise Levels To determine the existing noise environment at the site,continuous recordings of the sound levels were on made on July 24-25, 1995 for continuous 24-hour periods at two locations; 1) 73 ft. from the centerline of Dougherty Road and,2) at the property line separating the development site and the industrial property at the Federal Express office. This location was chosen for security of the sound recording equipment. Additional measurements were made of individual operations of the Ron Nunes Company facility. The sound levels were recorded and processed by a Larson-Davis LDL 812 Precision Integrating Sound Level Meter at Location 1 and a Larson-Davis LDL 700 Precision Integrating Sound Level Meter at Location 2. The meters yield, by direct readout,a series of descriptors of the sound levels versus time,as described in Appendix B. The results of the on-site noise measurements are shown in the data tables in Appendix C. The descriptors shown in the tables include the LI,L10,L50,and L90,i.e., those levels exceeded for 1%, 10%, 50%, and 90% of the time. Also shown are the maximum and minimum levels and the continuous equivalent-energy levels(Leq),which are used to calculate the CNEL. At the Dougherty Road measurement location,the Leq values ranged from 60.0 to 64.5 dBA during the daytime period,58.6 to 60.5 dBA during the evening,and from 50.4 to 60.7 dBA during the nighttime period. At the industrial property line measurement location,the Leg's ranged from 49.0 to 60.0 dBA during the daytime period,44.5 to 48.5 dBA during the evening,and from 45.0 to 52.0 dBA during the nighttime period. In addition to the above described long-term noise measurements, noise level measurements of short-term noise occurrences were made at the property line contiguous with the Ron Nunes Company. These measurements were made with a Bruel &Kjaer 2231 Precision Integrating Sound Level Meter. The maximum noise levels created by the various operations are shown below. -11- Operation Sound Level.dBA Distance.ft. Forklift 87 35 Backing Horns 84 40 Talking/Working 55 40 Punch Press 72 40(from rear facade) Container Wheel Squeal 100 40 Traffic noise diminishes at the rate of 3 to 6 dB for each doubling of the distance from the source to the receiver. Stationary industrial source noise diminishes at the rate of 6 dB for each doubling of the distance from the source to the receiver. Therefore, other locations on the site at greater distances from Dougherty Road and/or the industrial uses will have lower levels of noise. Additional noise shielding will be provided by interposed buildings of the project. Roadway noise contains a wide spectrum of frequency components(from 100 to 10,000 Hertz), which is associated with engine, tire, drive-train, exhaust, and other sources. The predominate traffic noise frequencies are centered primarily in the 250 and 500 Hz octave bands. The industrial uses generate noise as low as 80 Hz. The frequency component information was used in determining the noise control measures recommended for this study. B. Future Noise Levels Under future traffic conditions (Year 2010), the traffic volume for Dougherty Road is projected to increase from 19,500 to 37,000 ADT, Ref. (d). This increase in traffic yields an increase of 3 dB in the existing noise levels. Future noise exposures from the adjacent industrial uses cannot be predicted at this time as the noise levels will be dependent upon many unforeseen factors. -12- V. Evaluations of the Noise Expos ires A. Exterior Noise Exposures To evaluate the on-site noise levels against the City of Dublin standards, the CNEL's were calculated from the measured noise levels as a decibel average of the Leg values for the daily time periods. Evening and nighttime weighting factors were applied to account for the increased human sensitivity to noise during these hours. The mathematical formula used to calculate the CNEL is shown in Appendix B. The results of the calculations are shown in Appendix C. As shown,the CNEL at a distance of 73 ft. from the centerline of the road is 64 dB. Adjustments were made to the measured noise exposures to account for the increased distance between the building setbacks and on-site measurement locations,using methods established by The Highway Research Board,Ref. (g). The existing noise exposure due to Dougherty Road traffic sources is 64 dB CNEL at 73 ft.from the centerline of the road. Under future traffic conditions,this noise exposure will increase to 67 dB. The planned building setback will be 75 ft. from the centerline of the road,thus,no adjustment is applied. The noise exposures at the planned building setback will be 64 and 67 dB CNEL under existing and future traffic conditions, respectively, and will be up to 7 dB in excess of the City of Dublin Noise Element standards and the Title 24 criterion. The existing noise exposure at the industrial property line adjacent to the Federal Express facility is 56 dB CNEL. This noise exposure is within the limits of the City of Dublin Noise Element standard. However, due to the variation in noise sources and levels along the industrial property line, and to guard against possible increases in the noise environment with future changes in operations, the maximum allowable noise exposure of 75 dB CNEL for commercial/industrial land use was used as the existing noise exposure along the entire south property line. -13- At a minimum building setback of 50 ft. from the south property line,the noise exposure will reduce to 68 dB CNEL. This noise exposure is 8 dB in excess of the City of Dublin Noise Element standard and the Title 24 criterion. B. Interior Noise Exposures To evaluate the interior CNEL values against the 45 dB CNEL interior limit of the City of Dublin and Title 24 standards,a 15 dB reduction was applied to the exterior noise exposures to account for the attenuation provided by the building shell under annual average conditions. The annual average condition assumes that windows with single- strength glass are maintained open for up to 50%of the time for natural ventilation and kept closed the remaining 50%of the time. In the most noise impacted living spaces closest to Dougherty Road,the interior noise exposures will be 49 and 52 dB CNEL under existing and existing and future traffic conditions,respectively. These noise exposures are up to 7 dB in excess of the standards. In the most noise impacted living spaces along the industrial property line, the noise exposures will be 53 dB CNEL. Thus,the noise exposures will be up to 8 dB in excess of the City of Dublin Noise Element and Title 24 standards. The peak interior noise levels generated by the Ron Nunes facility will be 18 dBA from employees in the rear parking area of the facility,47 dBA from the backing horns of forklifts,65 dBA from engine and exhaust noise of forklifts,approximately 50 dBA from the punch press and up to 78 dBA from the container wheel squeals. Typically,interior noise levels in excess of 35-40 dBA during the day and 25-30 dBA at night will be noticeable and will cause complaints,particularly if the noise source is incessant. As shown by the above evaluations,exterior and interior noise exposure excesses will occur and mitigation measures will be required. The recommended.measures are described in Section II of this report. -14- The above report presents the results of the noise assessment study for the planned"Park Sierra"multi-family development along Dougherty Road in Dublin. The study findings and recommendations for present conditions are based on field measurements and other data and are correct to the best of our knowledge. However, significant deviations in roadway traffic volumes under future conditions or future changes in motor vehicle technology, speed limits, noise regulations or other changes beyond our control may produce long-range noise results different from our estimates. If you have any questions or would like an elaboration of this report,please call me. Sincerely, EDWARD L.PACK ASSOC.,INC. Jeffrey K.Pack President JKP:j Attachments: Appendices A,B and C APPENDIX A References: (a) Site Plan,Dougherty Apartments,by the Thomas P.Cox Architect,Inc.,undated (b) Noise Element of the General Plan,City of Dublin (c) California Code of Regulations,Title 24,Part II,"Sound Transmission Control", September 1988 (d) Information on Existing and Future Traffic Volumes Provided by Mr. Mehran Sepehri, City of Dublin Traffic Engineering, by Telecon to Edward L. Pack Associates,Inc.,July 28,1995 (e) Information on Ron Nunes Company Operations Provided by Mr. Jerry Harrington,by Telecon to Edward L.Pack Associates,Inc.,July 28,1995 (f) Information on Federal Express Company Operations Provided by the Federal Express Company,by Telecon to Edward L.Pack Associates,Inc.,July 28,1995 (g) Highway Research Board, "Highway Noise - A Design Guide for Highway Engineers",Report 117,1971 /'1 APPENDIX B Noise Standards.Terminology.Instrumentation. Ventilation,and Building Shell Requirements 1. Noise Standards A. City of Dublin Noise Element Standards The noise level standards specified in the City of Dublin Noise Element identify an exterior noise goal of 60 dB CNEL for new residential construction. The Noise Element standards also establish a limit level of 45 dB CNEL for interior living spaces. Commercial and Industrial land use is limited to 75 dB CNEL at the property line. B-1 B. Title 24 Noise Standards The California Code of Regulations,"Sound Transmission Control",Title 24,Part II, applies to all new multi-family dwellings including condominiums, townhouses, apartments,hotels and motels. The standards,which utilize the Day-Night Level(DNL) descriptor,establish an exterior reference or criterion level of 60 dB DNL, and specify that multi-family buildings to be located within an annual DNL zone of 60 dB or greater require an acoustical analysis. The analysis report must show that the planned buildings provide adequate attenuation to limit intruding noise from exterior sources to an annual DNL of 45 dB or less in any habitable space. The Community Noise Equivalent Level (DNL)descriptor,which is similar to the DNL,may also be used,as the DNL and DNL are considered to be equivalent. The Title 24 standards also establish minimum sound insulation requirements for interior partitions separating different dwelling units from each other and dwelling units from common spaces such as garages, corridors,equipment rooms, etc. The common interior walls and floor/ceiling assemblies must achieve a minimum Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of 50 for airborne noise. Common floor/ceiling assemblies must achieve an Impact Insulation Class(IIC)rating of 50 for impact noise. These ratings are based on laboratory tested partitions. Field tested partitions must achieve ratings of NIC and FIIC 45. B-2 2. Terminology A. Statistical Noise Levels Due to the fluctuating character of urban traffic noise, statistical procedures are needed to provide an adequate description of the environment. A series of statistical descriptors have been developed which represent the noise levels exceeded a given percentage of the time. These descriptors are obtained by direct readout of the Community Noise Analyzer. Some of the statistical levels used to describe community noise are defined as follows: L10 - A noise level exceeded for 10%of the time,considered to be an "intrusive"level. LSa - The noise level exceeded 50%of the time representing an "average"sound level. L90 - The noise level exceeded 90%of the time,designated as a "background"noise level. Ley - The continuous equivalent-energy level is that level of a steady state noise having the same energy as a given time-varying noise. The Ley represents the decibel level of the time-averaged value of sound energy or sound pressure squared. The Ley is used to calculate the CNEL and DNL. B-3 B. Community Noise Equivalent Level(CNEL1 The CNEL is a measure of the cumulative noise exposure over a 24 hour period. The CNEL index divides the 24 hour day into three subperiods,i.e.,the daytime(7:00 am to 7:00 p.m.), the evening period (7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.), and the nighttime period (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 am). Also, weighting factors of 5 and 10 dBA are applied to the evening and nighttime periods, respectively, to account for the greater sensitivity of people to noise during those periods. The CNEL values are calculated from the measured Leg values in accordance with the following mathematical formula: CNEL = [(Ld+10logi012)&(Le+5+10log103)&(L„+10+10log109)]-101og1o24 where: Ld= Ley for the daytime(7:00 a.m.to 7:00 p.m.) Le= Leg for the evening(7:00 p.m.to 10:00 p.m.) L„= Ley for the nighttime(10:00 p.m.to 7:00 a.m.) 24 indicates the 24 hour period & denotes decibel addition • B-4 • C. A-Weighted Sound Level The decibel measure of the sound level utilizing the"A"weighted network of a sound level meter is referred to as"dBA". The"A"weighting is the accepted standard weighting system used when noise is measured and recorded for the purpose of determining total noise levels and conducting statistical analyses of the environment so that the output correlates well with the response of the human ear. 3. Instrumentation The on-site field measurement data were acquired by the use of one or more of the sound measuring instruments listed below. The meters provide a direct readout of the L exceedance statistical levels including the equivalent-energy level (Leg). Input to the meters were provided by microphones extended to a height of 5 ft. above the ground. The"A"weighting network and the"Fast"response setting of the meters were used in conformance with the applicable IEC and ISO standards. The Larson-Davis LDL 700 meter was factory modified to conform with the Type 1 performance standards of ANSI S1.4. All instrumentation was acoustically calibrated before and after field tests to assure accuracy. Bruel&Kjaer 2231 Larson Davis LDL 700 Larson Davis LDL 812 GenRad 1945 Community Noise Analyzer Larson Davis 2900 Real Time Analyzer B-5 4. Ventilation Requirements Ventilation requirements to be applied when windows are maintained closed for noise control are specified in the Uniform Building Code(UBC), 1985 edition, Section 1205 as follows: • • "In lieu of required exterior openings for natural ventilation, a mechanical ventilating system may be provided. Such system shall be capable of providing two air changes per hour in all guest rooms,dormitories,habitable rooms,and in public corridors. One- fifth of the air supply shall be taken from the outside". Based on our previous experience, a "summer switch" on the furnace fan is normally considered acceptable as a ventilation system by FHA and other agencies. Air- conditioning is also an acceptable system. B-6 5. Building Shell Controls The following additional precautionary measures are required to assure the greatest potential for exterior-to-interior noise attenuation by the recommended mitigation measures. These measures apply at those units where closed windows are required: • Unshielded entry doors having a direct or side orientation toward the primary noise source must be 1-5/8"or 1-3/4"thick,insulated metal or solid-core wood construction with effective weather seals around the full perimeter. Mail slots should not be used in these doors or in the wall of a living space,as a significant noise leakage can occur through them. • • If any penetrations in the building shell are required for vents, piping,conduit,etc.,sound leakage around these penetrations can be controlled by sealing all cracks and clearance spaces with a non- hardening caulking compound. • Fireplaces should be provided with tight-fitting dampers. B-7 APPENDIX C On-Site Noise Measurement Data and Calculation Tables SHEA BUSINESS PROPERTIES FILE: 29-042.DTA .. DATE: 7/24-25/1995 PARK SIERRA • INDUSTRIAL FACILITY NOISE LEVELS SOUTH PROPERTY LINE AT FEDERAL EXPRESS Cnt LVL SEL Lmax Lpk Lmin Date Time Dur Ex Pk Ov 1 55.0 90.5 91.0 100.5 43.0 24 JUL 8:52:45 1:00 h:m 1 1 0 LO1 = 66.0 L10 = 53.5 L50 = 47.5 L90 = 45.5 2 50.0 85.5 75.5 86.0 43.5 24 JUL 9:52:45 1:00 h:m 0 0 0 LO1 = 60.5 L10 = 51.0 L50 = 47.0 L90 = 45.5 3 49.0 85.0 72.5 83.5 42.5 24 JUL 10:52:45 1:00 h:m 0 0 0 LO1 = 60.5 L10 = 50.0 L50 = 46.0 L90 = 44.5 4 49.5 85.0 71.0 95.5 41.0 24 JUL 11:52:45 1:00 h:m 0 0 0 LO1 = 62.0 L10 = 49.5 L50 = 45.0 L90 = 43.5 5 50.0 85.5 86.5 105.0 41.0 24 JUL 12:52:45 1:00 h:m 0 0 0 LO1 = 58.0 L10 = 48.0 L50 = 45.0 L90 = 44.0 6 56.0 91.5 79.0 92.0 42.5 24 JUL 13:52:45 1:00 h:m 0 0 0 LO1 = 69.5 L10 = 57.5 L50 = 48.0 L90 = 45.5 7 49.5 85.5 69.0 88.5 44.0 24 JUL 14:52:45 1:00 h:m 0 0 0 LO1 = 59.5 L10 = 51.5 L50 = 48.0 L90 = 46.5 8 55.5 91.0 85.0 97.5 43.0 24 JUL 15:52:45 1:00 h:m 0 0 0 LO1 = 69.5 L10 = 53.5 L50 = 47.5 L90 = 45.5 9 54.5 90.0 79.0 92.5 45.0 24 JUL 16:52:45 1:00 h:m 0 0 0 LO1 = 64.0 L10 = 57.0 L50 = 51.5 L90 = 48.5 10 55.5 91.5 82.5 100.0 43.5 24 JUL 17:52:45 1:00 h:m 0 0 0 LO1 = 67.0 L10 = 58.5 L50 = 48.0 L90 = 46.0 11 48.5 84.0 74.5 89.0 42.0 24 JUL 18:52:45 1:00 h:m 0 0 0 L01 = 59.0 L10 = 49.0 L50 = 45.5 L90 = 44.0 12 44.5 80.0 61.5 76.0 40.5 24 JUL 19:52:45 1:00 h:m 0 0 0 LO1 = 51.0 L10 = 46.0 L50 = 44.0 L90 = 42.5 13 48.0 83.5 64.0 81.5 43.5 24 JUL 20:52:45 1:00 h:m 0 0 0 LO1 = 52.5 L10 = 48.5 L50 = 47.5 L90 = 46.0 14 48.0 83.5 57.5 74.5 42.5 24 JUL 21:52:45 1:00 h:m 0 0 0 LO1 = 51.0 L10 = 50.0 L50 = 47.0 L90 = 44.5 15 47.5 83.0 51.0 71.0 42.5 24 JUL 22:52:45 1:00 h:m 0 0 0 LO1 = 49.5 L10 = 48.5 L50 = 47.5 L90 = 45.5 PARK SIERRA PG. 2 16 47.5 83.5 65.0 76.5 42.5 24 JUL 23:52:45 1:00 h:m 0 0 0 LO1 = 51.5 L10 = 49.0 L50 = 47.0 L90 = 45.5 17 47.0 82.5 54.0 69.5 42.0 25 JUL 0:52:45 1:00 h:m 0 0 0 LO1 = 50.0 L10 = 48.5 L50 = 46.5 L90 = 45.0 18 47.0 82.5 52.5 68.0 41.0 25 JUL 1:52:45 1:00 h:m 0 0 0 LO1 = 49.5 L10 = 48.0 L50 = 47.0 L90 = 45.5 19 45.0 80.5 64.0 77.0 40.0 25 JUL 2:52:45 1:00 h:m 0 0 0 L01 = 51.5 L10 = 45.5 L50 = 44.0 L90 = 42.5 20 48.0 84.0 76.5 90.5 39.0 25 JUL 3:52:46 1:00 h:m 0 0 0 LO1 = 62.5 L10 = 45.0 L50 = 43.0 L90 = 41.0 21 46.5 82.0 76.5 91.0 39.5 25 JUL 4:52:46 1:00 h:m 0 0 0 LO1 = 55.5 L10 = 46.5 L50 = 44.0 L90 = 42.0 22 52.0 87.5 81.0 93.5 42.0 25 JUL 5:52:46 1:00 h:m 0 0 0 LO1 = 62.5 L10 = 51.5 L50 = 46.0 L90 = 44.0 23 60.0 95.5 91.0 100.5 44.5 25 JUL 6:52:46 1:00 h:m 0 0 0 LO1 = 71.5 L10 = 63.0 L50 = 51.0 L90 = 47.5 24 55.0 91.0 79.0 90.5 42.5 25 JUL 7:52:46 1:00 h:m 0 0 0 LO1 = 69.5 L10 = 54.0 L50 = 48.0 L90 = 45.5 PARK SIERRA 73 ft. from the DOUGHERTY ROAD CL INTV 1 24JUL1995 09:00:00 Duration 1:00:00 Leq 62.5 SEL 98.0 Min 52.5 Max 77.9 Peak 91.6 UWPk 104.8dB Excd's: RMS 0 Peak 0 UWPk 0 Ovlds 0 L 1 71.3 L10 64.9 L50 60.5 L90 56.8dBA INTV 2 24JUL1995 10:00:00 Duration 1:00:00 Leq 61.6 SEL 97.1 Min 52.6 Max 81.4 Peak 95.2 UWPk 102.2dB Excd's: RMS 0 Peak 0 UWPk 0 Ovlds 0 L 1 69.9 L10 63.7 L50 59.8 L90 56.9dBA INTV 3 24JUL1995 11:00:00 Duration 1:00:00 Leq 61.8 SEL 97.3 Min 51.8 Max 80.3 Peak 92.4 UWPk 100.6dB Excd's: RMS 0 Peak 0 UWPk 0 Ovlds 0 L 1 72.1 L10 63.6 L50 58.8 L90 55.2dBA INTV 4 24JUL1995 12:00:00 Duration 1:00:00 Leq 61.0 SEL 96.6 Min 52.1 Max 80.0 Peak 96.5 UWPk 100.1dB Excd's: RMS 0 Peak 0 UWPk 0 Ovlds 0 L 1 69.9 L10 63.3 L50 59.0 L90 55.5dBA ^ PARK SIERRA PG. 3 INTV 5 24JUL1995 13:00:00 Duration 1:00:00 Leq 61.1 SEL 96.7 Min 50.8 Max 81.6 Peak 98.0 UWPk 101.4dB Excd's: RMS 0 Peak 0 UWPk 0 Ovlds 0 . L 1 71.1 L10 63.0 L50 57.8 L90 53.9dBA INTV 6 24JUL1995 14:00:00 Duration 1:00:00 Leq 60.0 SEL 95.6 Min 51.4 Max 78.7 Peak 91.5 UWPk 103.3dB Excd's: RMS 0 Peak 0 UWPk 0 Ovlds 0 L 1 68.7 L10 62.4 L50 57.8 L90 54.3dBA INTV 7 24JUL1995 15:00:00 Duration 1:00:00 Leq 61.3 SEL 96.8 Min 52.1 Max 82.5 Peak 103:9 UWPk 102.9dB Excd's: RMS 0 Peak 0 UWPk 0 Ovlds 0 L 1 70.7 L10 63.4 L50 58.9 L90 55.4dBA INTV 8 24JUL1995 16:00:00 Duration 1:00:00 Leq 60.7 SEL 96.3 Min 50.7 Max 77.1 Peak 91.2 UWPk 103.3dB Excd's: RMS 0 Peak 0 UWPk 0 Ovlds 0 L 1 68.5 L10 63.5 L50 59.0 L90 55.0dBA INTV 9 24JUL1995 17:00:00 Duration 1:00:00 Leq 61.3 SEL 96.9 Min 51.7 Max 76.7 Peak 91.5 UWPk 101.8dB Excd's: RMS 0 Peak 0 UWPk 0 Ovlds 0 L 1 68.2 L10 63.8 L50 60.1 L90 56.5dBA INTV 10 24JUL1995 18:00:00 Duration 1:00:00 Leq 61.8 SEL 97.3 Min 51.6 Max 77.8 Peak 91.0 UWPk 101.0dB Excd's: RMS 0 Peak 0 UWPk 0 Ovlds 0 L 1 69.8 L10 64.6 L50 60.0 L90 55.4dBA INTV 11 24JUL1995 19:00:00 Duration 1:00:00 Leq 60.5 SEL 96.1 Min 50.9 Max 79.8 Peak 92.9 UWPk 101.4dB Excd's: RMS 0 Peak 0 UWPk 0 Ovlds 0 L 1 67.3 L10 63.3 L50 58.9 L90 54.3dBA INTV 12 24JUL1995 20:00:00 Duration 1:00:00 Leq 59.7 SEL 95.3 Min 47.7 Max 77.6 Peak 87.6 UWPk 103.3dB Excd's: RMS 0 Peak 0 UWPk 0 Ovlds 0 L 1 67.1 L10 62.8 L50 57.7 L90 52.5dBA INTV 13 24JUL1995 21:00:00 Duration 1:00:00 Leq 58.6 SEL 94.2 Min 48.7 Max 75.0 Peak 89.7 UWPk 97.9dB Excd's: RMS 0 Peak 0 UWPk 0 Ovlds 0 L 1 65.7 L10 62.0 L50 56.6 L90 52.1dBA INTV 14 24JUL1995 22:00:00 Duration 1:00:00 Leq 57.3 SEL 92.9 Min 47.1 Max 77.1 Peak 87.8 UWPk 97.3dB Excd's: RMS 0 Peak 0 UWPk 0 Ovlds 0 L 1 65.3 L10 61.2 L50 54.4 L90 50.0dBA PARK SIERRA PG. 4 INTV 15 25JUL1995 23:00:00 Duration 1:00:00 Leq 55.2 SEL 90.8 Min 45.2 Max 70.9 Peak 85.8 UWPk 90.5dB Excd's: RMS 0 Peak 0 UWPk 0 Ovlds 0 L 1 64.0 L10 59.1 L50 51.4 L90 48.1dBA INTV 16 25JUL1995 00:00:00 Duration 1:00:00 Leq 53.8 SEL 89.3 Min 45.5 Max 69.6 Peak 89.3 UWPk 90.5dB Excd's: RMS 0 Peak 0 UWPk 0 Ovlds 0 L 1 63.4 L10 57.6 L50 49.5 L90 47.3dBA INTV 17 25JUL1995 01:00:00 Duration 1:00:00 Leq 50.9 SEL 86.5 Min 43.6 Max 68.1 Peak 81.0 UWPk 93.0dB Excd's: RMS 0 Peak 0 UWPk 0 Ovids 0 L 1 61.1 L10 53.2 L50 47.9 L90 46.2dBA INTV 18 25JUL1995 02:00:00 Duration 1:00:00 Leq 50.4 SEL 85.9 Min 43.9 Max 67.9 Peak 84.8 UWPk 95.0dB Excd's: RMS 0 Peak 0 UWPk 0 Ovlds 0 L 1 60.3 L10 52.0 L50 47.6 L90 46.0dBA INTV 19 25JUL1995 03:00:00 Duration 1:00:00 Leq 50.5 SEL 86.0 Min 42.7 Max 68.6 Peak 81.1 UWPk 93.0dB Excd's: RMS 0 Peak 0 UWPk 0 Ovlds 0 L 1 61.1 L10 51.8 L50 47.2 L90 45.4dBA INTV 20 25JUL1995 04:00:00 Duration 1:00:00 Leq 52.2 SEL 87.8 Min 43.5 Max 70.1 Peak 84.3 UWPk 91.9dB Excd's: RMS 0 Peak 0 UWPk 0 Ovlds 0 L 1 62.8 L10 54.5 L50 48.5 L90 46.3dBA INTV 21 25JUL1995 05:00:00 Duration 1:00:00 Leq 56.2 SEL 91.8 Min 47.2 Max 72.1 Peak 86.6 UWPk 93.0dB Excd's: RMS 0 Peak 0 UWPk 0 Ovlds 0 L 1 64.6 L10 60.0 L50 52.9 L90 49.9dBA INTV 22 25JUL1995 06:00:00 Duration 1:00:00 Leg 60.7 SEL 96.3 Min 49.6 Max 75.6 Peak 92.7 UWPk 96.6dB Excd's: RMS 0 Peak 0 UWPk 0 Ovlds 0 • L 1 68.2 L10 64.1 L50 58.4 L90 53.1dBA INTV 23 25JUL1995 07:00:00 Duration 1:00:00 Leq 64.5 SEL 100.1 Min 54.4 Max 82.7 Peak 94.5 UWPk 107.0dB Excd's: RMS 0 Peak 0 UWPk 0 Ovlds 0 L 1 71.0 L10 67.1 L50 63.3 L90 58.7dBA INTV 24 25JUL1995 08:00:00 Duration 1:00:00 Leg 63.8 SEL 98.8 Min 52.6 Max 84.1 Peak 99.9 UWPk 105.1dB Excd's: RMS 0 Peak 0 UWPk 0 Ovlds 0 L 1 71.8 L10 66.9 L50 62.1 L90 56.2dBA -- ) ) ) CNEL CALCULATIONS I CLIENT: SHEA BUSINESS PROPERTIES FILE: 29-042 PROJECT: PARK SIERRA DATE: 7124-25/1995 SOURCE: DOUGHERTY RD.TRAFFIC&INDUSTRIAL OPERATIONS . LOCATION 1 Dougherty Rd. LOCATION 2 Industrial Property Line at Federal Express d to Source= 73 from CL d to Source= 20 ft. TIME Leq 10"Leq/10 TIME Leq 10"Leq/10 7:00a.m. 64.50 2818382.93 7:00a.m. 60.00 1000000.00 8:00 a.m. 63.80 2398832.92 8:00 a.m. 55.00 316227.77 9:00a.m. 62.50 1778279.41 9:00a.m. 55.00 316227.77 10:00a.m. 61.60 1445439.77 10:00a.m. 50.00 100000.00 11:00 a.m. 61.80 1513561.25 11:00 a.m. 49.00 79432.82 12:00noon 61.00 1258925.41 12:00noon 49.50 89125.09 1:00p.m. 61.10 1288249.55 1:00p.m. 50.00 100000.00 2:00 p.m. 60.00 1000000.00 2:00 p.m. 56.00 398107.17 3:00 p.m. 61.30 1348962.88 3:00 p.m. 49.50 89125.09 4:00 p.m. 60.70 1174897.55 4:00 p.m. 55.50 354813.39 5:00 p.m. 61.30 1348962.88 5:00 p.m. 54.50 281838.29 6:00 p.m. 61.80 1513561.25 SUM= 18888055.81 6:00 2 m. 55.50 354813.39 SUM= 3479710.79 7:00 p.m. 60.50 1122018.45 Ld= 61.97 7:00 p.m. 48.50 70794.58 Ld= 54.62 8:00 p.m. 59.70 933254.30 8:00 p.m. 44.50 28183.83 9:00 p.m. 58.60 724435.96 SUM= 2779708.72 9:00 p.m. 48.00 63095.73 SUM= 162074.14 10:00 p.m. 57.30 537031.80 Le= 59.67 10:00 p.m. 48.00 63095.73 Le= 47.33 11:00 p.m. 55.20 _ 331131.12 11:00 p.m. 47.50 56234.13 12:00mdnt 53.80 239883.29 12:00mdnt 47.50 56234.13 1:00 a.m. 50.90 123026.88 1:00 a.m. 47.00 50118.72 2:00 a.m. 50.40 109647.82 2:00 a.m. 47.00 50118.72 3:00 a.m. 50.50 112201.85 3:00 a.m. 45.00 31622.78 4:00 a.m. 52.20 165958.69 4:00 a.m. 48.00 63095.73 5:00 a.m. 56.20 416869.38 5:00 a.m. 46.50 44668.36 6:00 a.m. . 60.70 1174897.55 SUM= 3210648.38. 6:00 a.m. 52.00 158489.32 SUM= 573677.64 Ln= 55.52 Ln= 48.04 Daytime Level= 72.77 Daytime Level= 65.42 Evening Level= 69.47 Evening Level= 57.13 Nighttime Level= 75.02 Nighttime Level= 67.54 CNEL= 63.95 CNEL= 56.06 24-Hour Leq= 60.16 24-Hour Leq= 52.45 • \ \.\ • ...c n• /it .sa1 11111,-4LI_a_____a 1 ' . 1 - •, ,..,.‘ I-4 -" a 1 "-,2*-"F 6.5' .111117* • --.. 1Tn, .` . . '' * to � . limit 1_ na a o i . _Q(�I�_ j .Kw, --'n �:Li�. s -_ice_ Fat sBOB ion '� J LL t, 711 C ' ■ 'i■ • 1* t. _�,E�� }a d + t'1 111111 �I y i J T � '.,, ;��� view • - �.P�LOttt■ na s,..o i� •- 11�1 IIIIIN.11 111/!1 IIH1119111 HC IIU n 11 Trir 1 1111611 11 NI 1 N111m'_ . -- _ — • �"° Ir / t1 /mini 1 iIiin aitiiiiiiinika iinilliliiiiiiidiiiindr ■iiiiiiindi ilisjiti ii i /}�t !!ui rl ql nifisii/rh/ /t� ` FIGURE 1 saanasesii Locations and heights of the noise control barriers needed to reduce exterior noise exposures to 60 dB CNEL. The barrier heights x=3rd Floor Balcony Railing Height are in reference to the nearest building pad,patio pad or balcony \ x=2nd Floor Balcony Railing Height floor elevation. x=1st Floor Patio Fence Height eltn.r, na=Patio fence not required due to property line barrier Source: Edward L.Pack Assoc., Inc. May 19, 1997 e= -tc F�lf,4PA77(4 7f n n ) ) ) . CITY OF DUBLIN PUBLIC WORKS STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR PARK SIERRA APARTMENTS The Developer and it's representatives(engineer,contractor,etc.)must meet and follow all the City's requirements and policies,including the Urban Runoff Program and Water Efficient Landscaped Ordinance. ARCHAEOLOGY: 1. If,during construction,archaeological materials are encountered,construction within 100 feet of these materials,shall be halted until a professional Archaeologist who is certified by the Society of California Archaeology(SCA)or the Society of Professional Archaeology(SOPA)has had an opportunity to evaluate the significance of the find and suggest appropriate mitigation measures, if they are deemed necessary. BONDS: 2. Developer shall provide Performance(100%),labor and material(50%)securities and a cash monumentation bond to guarantee the installation of subdivision improvements,including streets,drainage,grading,utilities and landscaping subject to approval by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer prior to approval of the Final or Parcel Map. 3. Prior to acceptance of the project as complete and the release of securities by the City: a) All improvements shall be installed as per the approved Improvement Plans and Specifications. b) All required landscaping shall be installed. c) An as-built landscaping plan prepared by the project Landscape Architect and a declaration by the Project Landscape Architect that all work was done under his supervision and in accordance with the recommendations contained in the landscape and soil erosion and sedimentation control plans shall be submitted to the Director of Public Works/City Engineer/City Engineer. d)Photo mylar and AutoCAD(or approved equal)electronic copies of the Improvement, Grading and Storm Drain plans along with the Final or Parcel and Annexation Maps,if any, which are tied to the City's existing mapping coordinates including all as-built plans prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. e) A complete record,including location and elevation of all field density tests,and a summary of all field and laboratory tests. ATrAC 1F.NT3 Rev: 9-97 1 PACE Of whop 0IT f) A declaration by the Project Civil Engineer and Project Geologist that all work was done in accordance with the recommendations contained in the soil and geologic investigation reports and the approved plans and specifications. 4. Upon acceptance of the improvements and receipt of required submittals,the performance security may be replaced with a maintenance bond that is 25%of the value of the performance security. The maintenance bond is released one year after acceptance of the project and after the repair of deficiencies,if any,are completed. 5. The labor and materials security is released in accordance with the City's Subdivision Ordinance and the Subdivision Map Act. DRAINAGE: 6. All lots shall be graded so as not to drain on any other lot or adjoining property prior to being deposited to an approved drainage system. 7. 18"minimum diameter reinforced concrete pipe(RCP)shall be used for all public storm drain main lines and 12"minimum diameter RCP shall be used for laterals connecting inlets to main drain line. 8. Storm drainage facilities shall be designed to meet the following capacity: Drainage area Design Storm less that 1 sq.mile 15 year 1 to 5 sq.miles 25 year over 5 sq.miles 100 year 9. All streets shall be designed so that the 15-year storm is contained within the gutter and shoulder area. In addition arterial streets shall have one lane of traffic in both directions of travel above the 100-year storm level 10. No buildings or other structures shall be constructed within a storm drain easement. 11. Developer shall provide"trash racks"where storm drainage improvements intercept natural drainage channels. An all-weather maintenance road shall be constructed to the trash racks. 12. Drainage in all concrete ditches shall be picked up and directed to the bottom of an approved drainage channel.The slope on these ditches in open space areas shall not be less than 5%. 13. All subdrains shall tie into storm drain catch basins or manholes at the downstream end of the subdrain. There shall be a clean-out at the upper end of all subdrains. 14. Streets and parking areas designed with sump areas shall have a curb inlet at the low spot and two additional inlets shall be installed in street areas within 50 feet of the low area. a PAGE_—OF- Rev: 9-97 15. No drainage shall be directed over slopes. 16. The storm drainage system shall be designed and constructed to the standards and policies of the City of Dublin. Design calculations shall be submitted to the City,reviewed by staff and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any approvals,grading permits,etc. 17. All concentrated storm drain flow shall be discharged into established drainage channels,not onto slopes. Concentrated flow on-site shall be conveyed overland(not in paved areas in pipes) via concrete swales,ditches or curb and gutter to an approved drainage facility. 18. All public streets shall drain into storm drain systems before being discharged into established drainage channels. 19. All median islands which will have landscaping installed shall include subdrains to capture and convey water away from the adjacent street. DUST: 20. Areas undergoing grading,and all other construction activities,shall be watered,or other dust- palliative measures may be used,to control dust,as conditions warrant or as directed by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. NPDES: General Construction: 21. For projects disturbing five(5)acres or more,the applicant shall submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan(SWPPP)for review by the City prior to the issuance of any building or grading permits. The SWPPP shall be implemented by the general contractor and all subcontractors and suppliers of material and equipment. Construction site cleanup and control of construction debris shall also be addressed in the SWPPP. The developer is responsible for complying with the SWPPP. Failure to do so will result in the issuance of correction notices,citations or a project stop work order. For projects disturbing less than five(5)acres an erosion control plan shall be submitted with the grading plan(169&201). 22. Prior to the commencement of any clearing,grading or excavation resulting in a land disturbance greater than five acres,the developer shall provide evidence that a Notice of Intent(NOI)has been sent to the California State Water Resources Control Board. 23. Construction access routes shall be limited to those approved by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer and shall be shown on the approved grading plan. 24. Gather all construction debris daily and place them in a covered dumpster or other container which is emptied or removed on a weekly basis. A secondary containment berm shall be a - PACE OF Rev: 9-97 constructed around the dumpster. When appropriate,use tarps on the ground to collect fallen debris or splatters that could contribute to storm water pollution. 25. Remove all debris from the sidewalk,street pavement and storm drain system adjoining the project site daily or as required by the City inspector. During wet weather,avoid driving vehicles off paved areas. 26. Broom sweep the sidewalk and public street pavement adjoining the project site on a daily basis. Caked on mud or dirt shall be scraped from these areas before sweeping. 27. Install filter materials(e.g.gravel filters,filter fabric,etc.)at all on-site storm drain inlets and existing inlets in the vicinity of the project site prior to: 1)start of the rainy season(October 15) 2)site de-watering activities, 3)street washing activities, 4)saw cutting asphalt or concrete Filter materials shall be cleaned or replaced as necessary to maintain effectiveness and prevent street flooding. Dispose of filter particles in an appropriate manner. 28. Create a contained and covered area on the site for the storage of bags of cement,paints, flammable,oils,fertilizers,pesticides or any other materials used on the project site that have the potential for being discharged to the storm drain system.Never clean machinery,tools,brushes, etc.or rinse containers into a street,gutter,storm drain or stream. See"Building Maintenance/Remodeling"flyer for more information. 29. Concrete/gunite supply trucks or concrete/plasters or similar finishing operations shall not discharge wash water into street gutters or drains. 30. Minimize the removal of natural vegetation or ground cover from the site in order to reduce the potential for erosion and sedimentation problems. All cut and fill slopes shall be stabilized as soon as possible after completion of grading. No site grading shall occur between October 15 and April 15 unless a detailed erosion control plan is reviewed by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer and implemented by the contractor. 31. Fueling and maintenance of vehicles shall be done off-site unless an approved fueling and maintenance area has been approved as part of the SWPPP. Commercial/Industrial Developments: 32. The project plans shall include storm water pollution prevention measures for the operation and maintenance of the project for the review and approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. The project plan shall identify Best Management Practices(BMPs)appropriate to the uses conducted on-site to effectively prohibit the entry of pollutants into storm water runoff. PAGE_Or'- Rev: 9-97 33. The project plan BMPs shall also include erosion control measures described in the latest version of the ABAG Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook or State Construction Best Management Practices Handbook,to prevent soil,dirt and debris from entering the storm drain system. 34. The developer is responsible for ensuring that all contractors are aware of,and implement,all storm water pollution prevention measures. Failure to comply with the approved construction BMPs will result in the issuance of correction notices,citations and/or a project stop order. 35. All washing and/or steam cleaning must be done at an appropriately equipped facility which drains to the sanitary sewer. Any outdoor washing or pressure washing must be managed in such a way that there is no discharge of soaps or other pollutants to the storm drain system. Wash waters should discharge to the sanitary sewer. Sanitary connections are subject to the review, approval,and conditions of the Dublin-San Ramon Services District(DSRSD). 36. All loading dock areas must be designed to minimize"run-on"to or runoff from the area. Accumulated waste water that may contribute to the pollution of storm water must be drained to the sanitary sewer,or filtered for ultimate discharge to the storm drain system. BMPs should be implemented to prevent potential storm water pollution. Implement appropriate BMPs such as, but not limited to,a regular program of sweeping,litter control and spill clean-up. 37. All metal roofs and roof mounted equipment(including galvanized),shall be coated with a rust- inhibitive paint. 38. Trash enclosures and/or recycling area(s)must be completely covered;no other area shall drain onto this area. Drains in any wash or process area shall not discharge to the storm drain system. Drains should connect to the sanitary sewer. Sanitary connections are subject to the review, approval,and conditions of the DSRSD. 39. All paved outdoor storage areas must be designed to eliminate the potential for runoff to carry pollutants to the storm drain system. Bulk materials stored outdoors may need to be covered and contained as required by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. 40. All landscaping shall be properly maintained and shall be designed with efficient irrigation practices to reduce runoff,promote surface filtration,and minimize the use of fertilizers and pesticides which contribute to runoff pollution. 41. Sidewalks and parking lots must be swept weekly,at a minimum,to prevent the accumulation of litter and debris. If pressure washed,debris must be trapped and collected to prevent entry to the storm drain system. No cleaning agent may be discharged to the storm drain. If any cleaning agent or degreaser is used,wash water shall not discharge to the storm drains;wash waters should be collected and discharged to the sanitary sewer. Discharges to the sanitary sewer are subject to the review, approval and conditions of the DSRSD. 42. A structural control,such as an oil/water separator,sand filter,or approved equal,may be required to be installed,on site,to intercept and pre-treat storm water prior to discharging to the storm drain system. The design,location,and a maintenance schedule must be submitted to the PAGE—OF- Rev: 9-97 Director of Public Works/City Engineer for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit.. 43. Restaurants must be designed with contained areas for cleaning mats,equipment and containers. This wash area must be covered or designed to prevent"run-on"to,or runoff from,the area. The area shall not discharge to the storm drains;wash waters should drain to the sanitary sewer,or collected for ultimate disposal to the sanitary sewer. Employees must be instructed and signs posted indicating that all washing activities be conducted in this area. Sanitary connections are subject to the review,approval,and conditions of the DSRSD. 44. commercial Car Washes: No wash water shall discharge to the storm drains. Wash waters should discharge to the sanitary sewer. Sanitary connections are subject to the review,approval, and conditions of the DSRSD. 45. Vehicle/Equipment Washers. No vehicle or equipment washing activity associated with this facility shall discharge to the storm drain system. Wash areas should be limited to areas that drain to the sanitary sewer collection system,or the wash water collected for ultimate disposal to the sanitary sewer. This wash area must be covered and designed to prevent"run-on"to,and runoff from,the area. A sign must be posted indicating the designated wash area. Sanitary connections are subject to the review,approval and conditions of the DSRSD. 46. Fuel dispensing areas must be paved with concrete extending a minimum of 8'-0"from the face of the fuel dispenser and a minimum of 4'-0"from the nose of the pump island. Fuel dispensing areas must be degraded and constructed to prevent"run-on"to,or runoff from,the area. Fuel dispensing facilities must have canopies;canopy roof down spouts must be routed to prevent drainage flow through the fuel dispensing area. The facility must have a spill cleanup plan. The fuel dispensing area must be dry swept routinely. Dispensing equipment must be inspected routinely for proper functioning and leak prevention. 47. All on-site storm drain inlets must be labeled"No Dumping-Drains to Bay"using thermoplastic lettering or as approved by the Public Works Director/City Engineer. 48. All on-site storm drains must be cleaned at least twice a year and fossil fuel filters shall be replaced annually;once immediately prior to the rainy season(October 15)and once in January. Additional cleaning may be required by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. GENERAL DESIGN: 49. The developer is responsible for the construction site and construction safety. 50. All public sidewalks must be within City right-of-way or in a pedestrian easement except as specifically approved by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. 51. Special paving or concrete paving a minimum of ten feet wide shall be installed an private streets where they intersect public streets. No special paving or concrete paving will be allowed in public streets. PAGE_. - 6 - Rev: 9-97 52. All of the plans,including Improvement and Grading Plans,and subdivision maps,must be designed to the City of Dublin's standards plans and specifications,policies and requirements using standard City title block and format. Minimum lettering size on all plans submitted shall be 1/8". All engineering plans must be designed and signed by a Registered Civil Engineer. Plans are subject to the review and approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer,and after his approval,original mylars or photo mylars with three sets of blue prints must be submitted to the City. 53. All approved Plans,Maps,etc.shall be submitted to the City of Dublin in electronic files. The files shall be AutoCAD release 12 format or approved equal. 54. The minimum uniform street gradient shall be 1%. The structure design of the road shall be subject to approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. Parking lots shall have a minimum gradient of 1%and a maximum gradient of 5%unless approved otherwise by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. 55. A registered civil or structural engineer shall design all retaining walls over three feet in height (or over two feet in height with a surcharge)and a building permit shall be required for their construction. A maintenance and inspection program shall be implemented by the developer or homeowners'association for the periodic inspection and maintenance of all retaining walls that could possibly affect the public right-of-way. 56. Minimum sight distance for public streets,including intersection sight distance,shall meet the CALTRANS Highway Design Manual. 57. Prior to filing for building permits,precise plans for street improvements,grading,drainage (including size,type and location of drainage facilities both on and off-site)and erosion and sedimentation control shall be submitted and subject to the review and approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. 58. The Contractor shall be responsible for acquiring permits required by other agencies.(Fish& Game,Anny Corps of Engineers,Zone 7,Etc.) 59. The design shall include a twenty foot(20')wide maintenance road constructed at the toe of all slopes and behind single family home fences(when applicable)to allow future access. EROSION: 60. Prior to any grading of the site and filing of the Final Map or Parcel Map,a detailed construction grading/erosion control plan(including phasing);and a drainage,water quality,and erosion and sedimentation control plan,for the post-construction period,both prepared by the Project Civil Engineer and/or Engineering Geologist;shall be approved by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. Said plans shall include detailed design,location,and maintenance criteria,of all erosion and sediment control measures. The plans shall provide,to the maximum extent practicable,that no increase in sediment or pollutants from the site will occur. The post- Rev: 9-97 construction plan shall provide for long-term maintenance of all permanent erosion and sediment control measures such as slope vegetation. The construction grading/erosion control plan shall be implemented in place by October 15th and shall be maintained in place until April 15th unless otherwise allowed in writing by the City Engineer. It shall be the developer's responsibility to maintain the erosion and sediment control measures for the year following acceptance of the subdivision improvements by the City Council. FINAL MAP/PARCEL MAP: 61. Prior to filing the Final Map or Parcel Map,precise plans and specifications for street improvements,grading,drainage(including size,type,and location of drainage facilities both on-and off-site),and erosion and sedimentation control,shall be approved by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. 62. Submit three(3)sets of approved blueprints and approved original mylars or photo mylars of improvement plans,grading plans,and recorded Final/Parcel Map to the City of Dublin Public Works Department. Upon completion of construction,the City's mylar shall be modified to an "as-built"plan(mylar)prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer. A declaration by a Civil Engineer and Soils Engineer that all work was done under his supervision and in accordance with recommendations contained in the soils report shall be submitted to the Public Works Department. 63. For storm drains outside the public right-of-way,a"Storm Drain Easement"or"Private Storm Drain Easement"shall be dedicated on the final/parcel map. 64. A current title report and copies of the recorded deed of all parties having any recorded title interest in the property to be divided,copies of the deeds and the Final/Parcel Maps for adjoining properties and easements shall be submitted at the time of the submittal of the final subdivision maps. 65. Existing and proposed access and public utility easements shall be submitted for review and approval by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer prior to approval of the Final/Parcel Map. These easements shall allow for vehicular and utility service access. 66. A 10-foot public services easement shall be shown on the Final/Parcel Map along all street frontages,in addition to all other easements required by the utility companies or governmental agencies as required by the City Director of Public Works/City Engineer. 67. The boundary of all lots and the exterior boundary of the Subdivision,as well as the centerline of the streets,shall be survey monumented. At least three(3)permanent benchmarks shall be established. Plats and elevation data shall be provided to the City in a form acceptable to the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. FIRF: - 8 - PAGE_OF Rev: 9-97 68. Install fire hydrants at the locations approved by the Dougherty Regional Fire Authority in accordance with the standards in effect at the time of development. A raised blue reflectorized traffic marker shall be epoxied to the center of the paved street opposite each hydrant. 69. All materials and workmanship for fire hydrants,gated connections,and appurtenances thereto, necessary to provide water supply for fire protection,must be installed by the developer and conform to all requirements of the applicable provisions of the Standard Specifications of Dublin San Ramon Services District and Dougherty Regional Fire Authority. All such work will be subject to the joint field inspection of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer and Dublin San Ramon Services District. 70. The improvement plans must be approved by the Alameda County Fire Department as indicated by their signature on the title sheet. FLOOD CONTROL: 71. The developer shall comply with Alameda County Flood Control District requirements. 72. In the 100-year Flood Hazard Zone,all residential units shall have their finished floor elevation a minimum of one foot(1') above the 100-year flood level. Commercial buildings shall either provide flood-proofing,or have their finished floor elevation above the 100-year flood level. FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENT$: 73. Dedication of land shall be made to the City of Dublin such that it conveys land sufficient for the approved streets'right-of-way. Improvements shall be made,by the applicant,along all streets within the development and as required off-site including curb,gutter,sidewalk,paving, drainage,and work on the existing paving,if necessary,from a structural or grade continuity standpoint. FUTURE CONFORMANCE: 74. The design and improvements of the Subdivision shall be in conformance with the design and improvements indicated graphically,or as modified by the Conditions of Approval. The improvements and design shall include street locations,grades,alignments,and widths,the design of storm drainage facilities inside and outside the Subdivision,grading of lots,the boundaries of the Tract,and shall show compliance with City standards for roadways. GRADING: 75. Grading shall be designed in conformance with the approved tentative map and the approved soils report. Final plans shall be signed by the Civil Engineer and the Soils Engineer prior to final approval of the City Engineer. The grading plan shall incorporate the recommendations of the soil report. The grading plan shall conform with the City specifications and ordinances,City policies and the Uniform Building Code(UBC). In case of conflict between the soil engineer's recommendations and City ordinances the City Engineer shall determine which shall apply. PAGE Rev: 9-97 OF 76. Prior to final preparation of the subgrade and placement of base materials,all underground utilities shall be installed and service connections stubbed out to property lines. Public utilities, Cable TV,sanitary sewers,and water lines,shall be installed in a manner which will not disturb the street pavement,curb,gutter and sidewalk,when future service connections or extensions are made. All public and private utilities shall be undergrounded. 77. Grading shall be done under the continuous inspection of the Project Soils Engineer. Grading shall be completed in compliance with the construction grading plans and recommendations of the Project Soils Engineer and/or Engineering Geologist,and the approved erosion and sedimentation control plan,and shall be done under the supervision of the Project Soils Engineer and/or Engineering Geologist,who shall,upon its completion,submit a declaration to the Director of Public Works/City Engineer that all work was done in accordance with the recommendations contained in the soils and geologic investigation reports and the approved plans and specifications. Inspections that will satisfy final subdivision map requirements shall be arranged with the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. 78. If grading is commenced prior to filing the Final Map or Parcel Map,a surety or guarantee shall be filed with the City of Dublin. The surety shall be equal to the amount approved by the City Director of Public Works/City Engineer as necessary to insure restoration of the site to a stable and erosion resistant state if the project is terminated prematurely. 79. Any grading,stockpiling,storing of equipment or material on adjacent properties will require written approval of those property owners affected.Copies of the rights-of-entry shall be furnished to the Director of Public Works/City Engineer prior to the start of work. 80. Street grades shall be designed and built in accordance with the General Plan,unless otherwise approved by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. 81. No cut and fill slopes shall exceed 2:1 unless recommended by the project soils engineer and approved by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. 82. The developer shall keep adjoining public streets free and clean of project dirt,mud,materials, and debris. 83. Where soil or geologic conditions encountered in grading operations are different from that anticipated in the soil and geologic investigation report,or where such conditions warrant changes to the recommendations contained in the original soil investigation,a revised soil or geologic report shall be submitted for approved by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. It shall be accompanied by an engineering and geological opinion as to the safety of the site from hazards of land slippage,erosion,settlement,and seismic activity. 84. Grading plans shall indicate the quantity of soil that must be imported or off-hauled. If soil must be imported or off-hauled,the Applicant shall submit details as to how it will be done and routes of travel for the Director of Public Work's approval. - 10 - PAGE_OF- Rev: 9-97 85. All unsuitable material found at the site shall be removed from the site or stockpiled for later use in landscape areas. 86. The project civil engineer shall certify that the finished graded building pads are within± 0.1 feet in elevation of those shown on approved plans. HANDICAPPED ACCESS: 87. Handicapped ramps and parking shall be provided as specified in the American Disability Act (ADA). IMPROVEMENT PLANS.AGREEMENTS.AND SECURITIES: 88. Obtain copies of and comply with conditions as noted on"City of Dublin General Notes on Improvement Plans"and"City of Dublin Improvement Plan Review Check List." 89. All improvements within the public right-of-way,including curb,gutter,sidewalks,driveways, paving,and utilities,must be constructed prior to occupancy and in accordance with approved City Standards and/or Plans. 90. Complete improvement plans,specifications,and calculations shall be submitted to,and be approved by,the Director of Public Works/City Engineer and other affected agencies having jurisdiction over public improvements,prior to execution of the Subdivision Improvement Agreement. Improvement plans shall show the existing and proposed improvements along adjacent public street(s)and property that relate to the proposed improvements. 91. The Developer shall enter into an Improvement Agreement with the City for all subdivision improvements prior to issuance of improvement permit. Complete improvement plans, specifications and calculations shall be submitted to,and approved by,the Director of Public Works/City Engineer and other affected agencies having jurisdiction over public improvements prior to execution of the Improvement Agreement. Improvement plans shall show the existing and proposed improvements along the adjacent public street and property that relate to the proposed improvements. 92. All required securities,in an amount equal to 100%of the approved estimates of construction costs of improvements,and a labor and material security,equal to 50%of the construction cost, shall be submitted to,and be approved by,the City and affected agencies having jurisdiction over public improvements,prior to execution of the Subdivision Improvement Agreement. MISCELLANEOUS: 93. Copies of the Final Map and improvement plans,indicating all lots,streets,and drainage facilities within the subdivision shall be submitted at 1"=400'scale,and 1"=200'scale for City mapping purposes. - 11 - Rev: 9-97 -OF- 94. The developer shall be responsible for controlling any rodent,mosquito,or other pest problem due to construction activities. 95. All construction traffic and parking may be subject to specific requirements as determined by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. 96. The developer shall defend,indemnify,and hold harmless the City of Dublin and its agents, officers,and employees,from any claim,action,or proceeding against the City of Dublin or its agents,officers,or employees,to attack,set aside,void,or annul,an approval of the City of Dublin or its advisory agency,appeal board,or legislative body concerning a subdivision,which action is brought within the time period provided for in Section 66499.37 of the Government Code of the State of California. The City of Dublin shall promptly notify the developer of any claim,action,or proceedings. 97. In submitting subsequent plans for review and approval,each set of plans shall have attached an annotated copy of the project's conditions of approval. The notations shall clearly indicate how all conditions of approval will be complied with. Construction plans will not be accepted without the annotated conditions attached to each set of plans. The Applicant will be responsible for obtaining the approval of all participating non-City agencies prior to the issuance of building permits. 98. Bicycle racks shall be provided at each facility on site. PERMIT: 99. Applicant shall obtain Caltrans'approval and permit for any work performed within their right- of-way or impacting their facilities. 100. An encroachment permit shall be secured from the Director of Public Works/City Engineer for any work done within the public right-of-way where this work is not covered under the improvement plans. 101. The developer and/or their representatives shall secure all necessary permits for work including, but not limited to,grading,encroachment,Fish and Game Department,County Flood Control District,Corps.of Engineers and State water quality permits and show proof of it to the City of Dublin,Department of Public Works. NOISE: 102. Construction and grading operations,including the maintenance and warming of equipment, shall be limited to weekdays,Monday through Friday,and non-City holidays,between the hours of 7:30 a.m.and 5:30 p.m. The Director of Public Works/City Engineer may approve days and hours beyond the above mentioned days and hours. The developer is responsible for the additional cost of the Public Works inspectors'overtime. - 12 - Rev: 9-97 PAGE__OF 103. During the construction,noise control and construction traffic mitigation measures within residential neighborhoods or on public streets must be taken to reduce noise and use of public streets by construction traffic as directed by Public Works officials. PARKLAND DEDICATION: 104. Park land shall be dedicated or in-lieu fees shall be paid,or a combination of both shall be provided prior to issuance of building permits or prior to recordation of the Final Map or Parcel Map,whichever occurs first,in accordance with the Subdivision Ordinance. STREETS: 105. The street surfacing shall be asphalt concrete paving. The Director of Public Works/City Engineer/City Engineer shall review the project's Soils Engineer's structural pavement design. The developer shall,at his sole expense,make tests of the soil over which the surfacing and base are to be constructed and furnish the test reports to the Director of Public Works/City Engineer/City Engineer. The Developer's soils engineer shall determine a preliminary structural design of the road bed. After rough grading has been completed,the developer shall have soil tests performed to determine the final design of the road bed. In lieu of these soil tests,the road may be designed and constructed based on an R-value of 5. STREET LIGHTS: 106. Street light standards and luminaries shall be designed and installed per approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. The maximum voltage drop for street lights is 5%. STREET_SIGNS: 107. The developer shall furnish and install street name signs,bearing such names as are approved by the Planning Director,and traffic safety signs in accordance with the standards of the City of Dublin. Addresses shall be assigned by the City Building Official. 108. Street names shall be submitted and processed through the Planning Department and shall be indicated on the Final Map. 109. The Developer shall furnish and install street name signs,in accordance with the standards of the City of Dublin,bearing such names as are approved by the City. The developer shall furnish and install traffic safety signs in accordance with the standards of the City of Dublin. STREET TREES: 110. Street trees,of at least a 15-gallon size,shall be planted along the street frontages. Trees shall be planted in accordance with a planting plan,including tree varieties and locations,approved by 13 - PAGE OF Rev: 9-97 the Planning Director and Director of Public Works/City Engineer. Trees planted within,or adjacent to,sidewalks or curbs shall be provided with root shields. TRAFFIC: 111. The City of Dublin is currently studying the adoption and implementation of a regional traffic impact fee for roadway and street improvements in the Tri-Valley area. This fee will provide for Public Works projects to improve traffic circulation for accommodating new development within the City. If a regional traffic impact fee ordinance is approved and enacted prior to issuance of any building permits,the Applicant shall pay its fair share of this regional traffic impact fee. 112. All new traffic signals shall be interconnected with other new signals within the development and to the existing City traffic signal system by hard wire. In addition,conduits with pull ropes shall be installed along the project frontage to accommodate future extension of the interconnect system. The extent of this work shall be determined by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. 113. Multi-family and non-residential facilities shall provide bike racks. In addition industrial and office centers shall provide car and van pool preferential parking spaces as required by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. 114. Non-residential facilities shall provide pedestrian access from the public street to building entrances as required by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. UTILITIES: 115. Electrical,gas,telephone,and Cable TV services,shall be provided underground to each lot in accordance with the City policies and existing ordinances. All utilities shall be located and provided within public utility easements and sized to meet utility company standards. All utilities to and within the project shall be undergrounded. 116. Prior to the filing of the Final Map or Parcel Map,the developer shall furnish the Director of Public Works/City Engineer/City Engineer with a letter from Dublin San Ramon Services District(DSRSD)stating that the District has agreed to furnish water and sewer service to each of the dwelling units and/or lot included on the Final Map of the subdivision. 117. The Dublin San Ramon Services District shall review and approve the improvement plans prior to issuance of a building permit as evidenced by their representative's signature on the appropriate plan sheets. 118. Any relocation of improvements or public facilities shall be accomplished by the developer and at no expense to the City. WATER: - 14 - Rev: 9-97 PAGE OF__ 119. Water facilities must be connected to the DSRSD or other approved water system,and must be installed at the expense of the developer,in accordance with District standards and specifications. All material and workmanship for water mains,and appurtenances thereto,must conform with all of the requirements of the officially adopted Water Code of the District and will be subject to field inspection by the District. 120. Any water well,cathodic protection well,or exploratory boring shown on the map,that is know to exist,is proposed,or is located during the course of field operations,must be properly abandoned,backfilled,or maintained in accordance with applicable groundwater protection ordinances. For additional information contact Flood control,Zone 7. 121. Developer shall design,incorporate,and institute water conservation measures for the entire project. Refer to"Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance#18-92." 122. Developer shall design and provide infrastructure for recycled water use for landscaping in accordance with DSRSD and to the satisfaction of the Public Work Director. 123. Developer shall design and construct the water and sewer system in accordance with the DSRSD requirements. TRANSIT 124. All commercial,office and multifamily projects shall provide bus passes for employees and/or residents per Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority(LAVTA)requirements. G:\FORMS\DEVELOP\STCOA997.DOC is - PAGE_Of Rev: 9-97