Anaheim City Council
July 23, 2024

A monitoring biologist, acceptable to USFWS/CDFWG will be on site during any clearing of CSS. The landowner or relevant public agency/utility will advise USFWS/CDFWG at least seven (7) calendar days [and preferably fourteen (14) calendar days] prior to the clearing of any habitat occupied by Identified Species to allow USFWS/CDFWG to work with the monitoring biologist in connection with bird flushing/capture activities. The monitoring biologist will flush Identified Species (avian or other mobile Identified Species) from occupied habitat areas immediately prior to brush-clearing and earth-moving activities. If birds cannot be flushed, they will be captured in mist nets, if feasible, and relocated to areas of the site to be protected or to the NCCP/HCP Reserve System. It will be the responsibility of the monitoring biologist to assure that Identified bird or other mobile species will not be directly impacted by brush clearing and earth-moving equipment in a manner that also allows for construction activities on a timely basis. • Following the completion of initial grading/earth movement activities, all areas of CSS habitat to be avoided by construction equipment and personnel will be marked with temporary fencing and other appropriate markers clearly visible to construction personnel. No construction access, parking, or storage of equipment or materials will be permitted within such marked areas. • In areas bordering the NCCP Reserve System or Special Linkage/Special Management areas containing significant CSS identified in the NCCP/HCP for protection, vehicle transportation routes between cut-and-fill locations will be restricted to a minimum number during construction consistent with project construction requirements. Waste dirt or rubble will not be deposited on adjacent CSS identified in the NCCP/HCP for protection. Pre-construction

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 202 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24) 36 meetings involving the monitoring biologist, construction supervisors, and equipment operators will be conducted and documented to ensure maximum practicable adherence to these measures.
• CSS identified in the NCCP/HCP for protection and located within the likely dust drift radius of construction areas shall be periodically sprayed with water to reduce accumulated dust on the leaves as recommended by the monitoring biologist.
• If western spadefoot is not found in suitable habitat areas during initial ground disturbance, the monitoring biologist will spot-check grading activities (on an asneeded basis, as determined by the monitoring biologist) until grading is completed for those areas. If western spadefoot is brought to the surface during grading/excavation, individuals will be collected and relocated following preapproved methods by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) or an approved Western Spadefoot Management Plan
• Conduct focused surveys, by a quailed biologist, in suitable habitat for Crotch bumblebee within the project area and submit a survey report to the Public Works Department/Department of Planning & Building, prior to issuance of a grading permit. The surveys shall be conducted during the months of April through June, consisting of three site visit typically 2 to 4 weeks apart. The survey report shall document the presence or absence of Crotch bumble within the project area. If the survey results are negative, the qualified biologist will submit a summary of findings, and a survey report prepared and submitted to CDFW. If survey results are positive, the applicant will consult with CDFW to determine appropriate measures needed to address potential impacts to the species, prior to the issuance of a grading permit
SC 6-5 Prior to approval of mass or rough grading plans, the property owner/developer shall report the amount of coastal sage scrub that would be impacted by proposed grading activities. The amount of coastal sage scrub impacts shall be noted on plans submitted for grading permits and submitted to the Planning Department and to the Nature Reserve of Orange County (NROC) to ensure that a proper accounting of coastal sage scrub impacts is recorded for purposes of the NCCP/HCP.

SC 6-6 On an annual basis until grading activities are complete, the property owner/developer shall provide the Planning & Building Department and Nature Reserve of Orange County (NROC) with a calculation of the total amount of coastal sage scrub that has been removed during the calendar year.

CONCLUSION
With implementation of the Standard Conditions and mitigation measures set forth in FEIR No. 331, as outlined above, potential impacts to biological resources would be adequately addressed and

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 202 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24) 37 reduced to ensure consistency with local policies related to biological resources and would reduce any impacts on special-status biological resources.

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 202 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24) 38

REFERENCES
Atwood, J.L., and D.R. Bontrager. 2020. California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica), version 1.0. In Birds of the World (A.F. Poole and F.B. Gill, Editors). Ithaca, NY: Cornell Lab of Ornithology.

Website: https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.calgna.01.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2023. State of California, Department of Fish and Wildlife Biogeographic Data Branch. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). Rarefind Version 5. December 2023. Rarefind query of the USGS 7.5-minute quads –Black Star Canyon, Orange, Corona South, Corona North, Prado Dam, Yorba Linda, Tustin, El Toro, andre Santiago Peak.

City of Anaheim. 2004. General Plan Land Use Element. May. _____. 2005. Mountain Park Specific Plan Amendment Final Environmental Impact Report No. 331.

July.

Google Earth. 2023. Current and historical aerial photographs.

Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. 1993. Methods Used to Survey the Vegetation of Orange County Parks and Open Space Areas and The Irvine Company Property. February 10.

Leighton Consulting, Inc. 2019. Geotechnical Engineering Site Feasibility Study, Proposed Gypsum Canyon Cemetery, State Route 91 and Gypsum Canyon Road, Anaheim, California. Prepared for Orange County Cemetery District. October 8.

Mazor, R.D., B. Topping, R. Kwok, T. Nadeau, R. Leidy, K. Fritz, R. Harrington, J. Kelso, A. Allen, J.

Robb, G. David, S. Jensen. 2019. Validation of two streamflow-duration assessment methods (SDAMs) in the Arid Southwest of the United States. Southern California Coastal Water Research Project, Technical Report No. 1100.

Natural Communities Coalition. 2023. Natural Community Conservation Plan & Habitat Conservation Plan. County of Orange Central & Coastal Subregion Parts I & II: NCCP/HCP. Website:
https:// occonservation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/NCCP-Parts-I-II-Plan.pdf (accessed May 2023).

Pierson, E.D., and W.E. Rainey. 1998. Distribution, habitat associations, status, and survey methodologies for three Molossid bat species (Eumops perotis, Nyctinomops femorosaccus, Nyctinomops macrotis) and the Vespertilionid (Euderma maculatum). Final Report, Contract #FG2328WM. California Department of Fish and Game.

Roberts, F.M., Jr. 2008. The Vascular Plants of Orange County, California: An Annotated Checklist.

San Luis Rey, California: F.M. Roberts Publications.

State Water Resources Control Board. (SWRCB). 2021. State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State. July 2023.

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 202 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24) 39 United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2019. Web Soil Survey. Website: http://websoil survey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx (accessed December 2023).

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2019a. Environmental Conservation Online System (ECOS). Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaC) Trust Resources Report. July 2019.

Website: http://ecos. fws.gov/ecp/ (accessed December 2023). _____. 2019b. USFWS Critical Habitat Mapper. July 19. Website: http://ecos.fws.gov/crithab/ (accessed December 2023).
_____. 2019c. USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (NWI), Online Mapper Tool. Website:
https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html (accessed December 2023). _____. 2021. USFWS Threatened & Endangered Species Active Critical Habitat Report. Website:
http://ecos.fws.gov/crithab/ (accessed December 2023).

United States Geological Survey (USGS). 2023. Orange, California topographic quadrangle map.

Weaver, Kenneth L. 1998, Coastal Sage Scrub Variations of San Diego County and their Influence on the Distribution of the California Gnatcatcher. In Western Birds, Volume 29, Issue 4. 392- 405. Website: https://sora.unm.edu/sites/default/files/journals/wb/v29n04/p0392- p0405.pdf.

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 202 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24)

APPENDIX A
FIGURES 1–6
Figure 1: Regional and Project Location
Figure 2: Delineation of Jurisdictional and Non-Jurisdictional Areas Figure 3: Soils
Figure 4: Vegetation and Photo Locations
Figure 5: Site Photographs
Figure 6: Special-Status Species
SOURCE: USGS The National Map (2018)
I:\OCC1901\GIS\Pro\Mountain Park Memorial Park\Mountain Park Memorial Park.aprx (12/18/2023) FIGURE 1
Mountain Park Memorial Park
S A N

B E R N A R D I N O

L O S A N G E L E S C O U N T Y

C O U N T Y

R I V E R S I D E

C O U N T Y

O R A N G E

C O U N T Y
Ã142
Ã261
Ã73
Ã133
Ã22
Ã39
Ã55
Ã71
Ã241
Ã60
Ã57
Ã91
§¨¦ §¨¦5
405
§¨¦15
§¨¦10
Project Vicinity
0 1000 2000
FEET
Biological Study Area
Regional Project Location
Service Layer Credits:
14 13
10 8
9 5
1 3
15 12
11 2
4 7
6 SOURCE: Nearmap (10/12/2020); RJM (10/2020)
I:\OCC1901\GIS\Pro\Mountain Park Memorial Park\Mountain Park Memorial Park.aprx (4/23/2024) FIGURE 2
Delineation of Jurisdictional
and Non-Jurisdictional Areas
LEGEND
Map Sheet Index
Jurisdictional Delineation Study Area
Non-Jurisdictional Overflow Channel
1602/401 Jurisdiction (Streambed and Associated Riparian Habitat/Non-wetland WOTS) 404 Jurisdiction (Non-wetland, Intermittent WOTUS)
Non-Jurisdictional (404/401/1602)
Overview
0 300 600
FEET
Mountain Park Memorial Park
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
!(
!(
1602/401
64'
1602/401
34'
1602/401
35'
404
38'
404
24'
404
20'
404
22'
1602/401
63'
404
8'
404
3'
1602/40
3'
DRAINAGE 1
SP-1
1 SOURCE: Nearmap (9/2023); RJM (10/2021)
I:\OCC1901\GIS\Pro\Mountain Park Memorial Park\Mountain Park Memorial Park.aprx (4/23/2024) FIGURE 2
Gypsum Canyon Cemetery
Delineation of Jurisdictional
and Non-Jurisdictional Areas
LEGEND
Jurisdictional Delineation Study Area
!( Sample Point
!( Hydrogeomorphic Floodplain Units Reference Sheet Number Non-Jurisdictional Overflow Channel
1602/401 Jurisdiction (Streambed and Associated Riparian Habitat/Non-wetland WOTS) 404 Jurisdiction (Non-wetland, Intermittent WOTUS)
Non-Jurisdictional (404/401/1602)
14 13
10 8
9 5
1 3
15 12
11 2
4 7
6 Sheet 1 of 15
0 25 50
FEET
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
!(
!(
404
24'
404
22'
404
8'
404
24'
1602/401
37' 1602/401
35'
404
22'
1602/401
35'
Non-jurisdictional
2'
DRAINAGE 1

ROADSIDE
DITCH
SP-2
SP-3 SOURCE: Nearmap (9/2023); RJM (10/2021)
I:\OCC1901\GIS\Pro\Mountain Park Memorial Park\Mountain Park Memorial Park.aprx (4/23/2024) FIGURE 2
Gypsum Canyon Cemetery
Delineation of Jurisdictional
and Non-Jurisdictional Areas
LEGEND
Jurisdictional Delineation Study Area
!( Sample Point
!( Hydrogeomorphic Floodplain Units Reference Sheet Number Non-Jurisdictional Overflow Channel
1602/401 Jurisdiction (Streambed and Associated Riparian Habitat/Non-wetland WOTS) 404 Jurisdiction (Non-wetland, Intermittent WOTUS)
Non-Jurisdictional (404/401/1602)
14 13
10 8
9 5
1 3
15 12
11 2
4 7
6 Sheet 2 of 15
0 25 50
FEET
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
!(
!(
!(
1602/401
3'
404
24'
1602/401
4'
1602/401
5'
1602/401
6'
1602/401
5'
1602/401
7'
1602/401
4'
1602/401
37'
404
18'
1602/401
35'
404
22'
404
24'
1602/401
39'
1602/401
35'
DRAINAGE 1
DRAINAGE 1A
404
5'
DRAINAGE 1

ROADSIDE
DITCH
SP-2
SP-3
2 SOURCE: Nearmap (9/2023); RJM (10/2021)
I:\OCC1901\GIS\Pro\Mountain Park Memorial Park\Mountain Park Memorial Park.aprx (4/23/2024) FIGURE 2
Gypsum Canyon Cemetery
Delineation of Jurisdictional
and Non-Jurisdictional Areas
LEGEND
Jurisdictional Delineation Study Area
!( Sample Point
!( Hydrogeomorphic Floodplain Units Reference Sheet Number Non-Jurisdictional Overflow Channel
1602/401 Jurisdiction (Streambed and Associated Riparian Habitat/Non-wetland WOTS) 404 Jurisdiction (Non-wetland, Intermittent WOTUS)
Non-Jurisdictional (404/401/1602)
14 13
10 8
9 5
1 3
15 12
11 2
4 7
6 Sheet 3 of 15
0 25 50
FEET
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
!(
404
38'
1602/401
49'
DRAINAGE 1
1602/401
34'
1602/401
33'
404
27'
404
29'
404
42'
3 SOURCE: Nearmap (9/2023); RJM (10/2021)
I:\OCC1901\GIS\Pro\Mountain Park Memorial Park\Mountain Park Memorial Park.aprx (4/23/2024) FIGURE 2
Gypsum Canyon Cemetery
Delineation of Jurisdictional
and Non-Jurisdictional Areas
LEGEND
Jurisdictional Delineation Study Area
!( Sample Point
!( Hydrogeomorphic Floodplain Units Reference Sheet Number Non-Jurisdictional Overflow Channel
1602/401 Jurisdiction (Streambed and Associated Riparian Habitat/Non-wetland WOTS) 404 Jurisdiction (Non-wetland, Intermittent WOTUS)
Non-Jurisdictional (404/401/1602)
14 13
10 8
9 5
1 3
15 12
11 2
4 7
6 Sheet 4 of 15
0 25 50
FEET
BASIN 6
SOURCE: Nearmap (9/2023); RJM (10/2021)
I:\OCC1901\GIS\Pro\Mountain Park Memorial Park\Mountain Park Memorial Park.aprx (4/23/2024) FIGURE 2
Gypsum Canyon Cemetery
Delineation of Jurisdictional
and Non-Jurisdictional Areas
LEGEND
Jurisdictional Delineation Study Area
!( Sample Point
!( Hydrogeomorphic Floodplain Units Reference Sheet Number Non-Jurisdictional Overflow Channel
1602/401 Jurisdiction (Streambed and Associated Riparian Habitat/Non-wetland WOTS) 404 Jurisdiction (Non-wetland, Intermittent WOTUS)
Non-Jurisdictional (404/401/1602)
14 13
10 8
9 5
1 3
15 12
11 2
4 7
6 Sheet 5 of 15
0 25 50
FEET
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
!(
404
42'
1602/401
116'
1602/401
48'
404
5'
404
6'
404
42'
2'
404
6'
DRAINAGE 1
4 SOURCE: Nearmap (9/2023); RJM (10/2021)
I:\OCC1901\GIS\Pro\Mountain Park Memorial Park\Mountain Park Memorial Park.aprx (4/23/2024) FIGURE 2
Gypsum Canyon Cemetery
Delineation of Jurisdictional
and Non-Jurisdictional Areas
LEGEND
Jurisdictional Delineation Study Area
!( Sample Point
!( Hydrogeomorphic Floodplain Units Reference Sheet Number Non-Jurisdictional Overflow Channel
1602/401 Jurisdiction (Streambed and Associated Riparian Habitat/Non-wetland WOTS) 404 Jurisdiction (Non-wetland, Intermittent WOTUS)
Non-Jurisdictional (404/401/1602)
14 13
10 8
9 5
1 3
15 12
11 2
4 7
6 Sheet 6 of 15
0 25 50
FEET
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
1602/401 13'
404 7'
404
15'
404
18'
1602/401
71'
1602/401
163'
404
5'
DRAINAGE 1
DRAINAGE 1B
SOURCE: Nearmap (9/2023); RJM (10/2021)
I:\OCC1901\GIS\Pro\Mountain Park Memorial Park\Mountain Park Memorial Park.aprx (4/23/2024) FIGURE 2
Gypsum Canyon Cemetery
Delineation of Jurisdictional
and Non-Jurisdictional Areas
LEGEND
Jurisdictional Delineation Study Area
!( Sample Point
!( Hydrogeomorphic Floodplain Units Reference Sheet Number Non-Jurisdictional Overflow Channel
1602/401 Jurisdiction (Streambed and Associated Riparian Habitat/Non-wetland WOTS) 404 Jurisdiction (Non-wetland, Intermittent WOTUS)
Non-Jurisdictional (404/401/1602)
14 13
10 8
9 5
1 3
15 12
11 2
4 7
6 Sheet 7 of 15
0 25 50
FEET
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
!(
!(
1602/401 13'
404 7'
DRAINAGE 1B
1602/401 10'
404 7'
1602/401 12'
404 8'
1602/401 6'
404 4'
1602/401
71'
1602/401
163'
SP-4
5 SOURCE: Nearmap (9/2023); RJM (10/2021)
I:\OCC1901\GIS\Pro\Mountain Park Memorial Park\Mountain Park Memorial Park.aprx (4/23/2024) FIGURE 2
Gypsum Canyon Cemetery
Delineation of Jurisdictional
and Non-Jurisdictional Areas
LEGEND
Jurisdictional Delineation Study Area
!( Sample Point
!( Hydrogeomorphic Floodplain Units Reference Sheet Number Non-Jurisdictional Overflow Channel
1602/401 Jurisdiction (Streambed and Associated Riparian Habitat/Non-wetland WOTS) 404 Jurisdiction (Non-wetland, Intermittent WOTUS)
Non-Jurisdictional (404/401/1602)
14 13
10 8
9 5
1 3
15 12
11 2
4 7
6 Sheet 8 of 15
0 25 50
FEET
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
!(
DRAINAGE 1B
1602/401 6'
404 4' 1602/401 3'
404 2'
1602/401 6'
404 4'
6 SOURCE: Nearmap (9/2023); RJM (10/2021)
I:\OCC1901\GIS\Pro\Mountain Park Memorial Park\Mountain Park Memorial Park.aprx (4/23/2024) FIGURE 2
Gypsum Canyon Cemetery
Delineation of Jurisdictional
and Non-Jurisdictional Areas
LEGEND
Jurisdictional Delineation Study Area
!( Sample Point
!( Hydrogeomorphic Floodplain Units Reference Sheet Number Non-Jurisdictional Overflow Channel
1602/401 Jurisdiction (Streambed and Associated Riparian Habitat/Non-wetland WOTS) 404 Jurisdiction (Non-wetland, Intermittent WOTUS)
Non-Jurisdictional (404/401/1602)
14 13
10 8
9 5
1 3
15 12
11 2
4 7
6 Sheet 9 of 15
0 25 50
FEET
¯
¯
DRAINAGE 3
1602/401/404
1'
SOURCE: Nearmap (9/2023); RJM (10/2021)
I:\OCC1901\GIS\Pro\Mountain Park Memorial Park\Mountain Park Memorial Park.aprx (4/23/2024) FIGURE 2
Gypsum Canyon Cemetery
Delineation of Jurisdictional
and Non-Jurisdictional Areas
LEGEND
Jurisdictional Delineation Study Area
!( Sample Point
!( Hydrogeomorphic Floodplain Units Reference Sheet Number Non-Jurisdictional Overflow Channel
1602/401 Jurisdiction (Streambed and Associated Riparian Habitat/Non-wetland WOTS) 404 Jurisdiction (Non-wetland, Intermittent WOTUS)
Non-Jurisdictional (404/401/1602)
14 13
10 8
9 5
1 3
15 12
11 2
4 7
6 Sheet 10 of 15
0 25 50
FEET
¯
¯
¯
¯
!(
DRAINAGE 2
1602/401/404
1'
1602/401/404
2'
8 SOURCE: Nearmap (9/2023); RJM (10/2021)
I:\OCC1901\GIS\Pro\Mountain Park Memorial Park\Mountain Park Memorial Park.aprx (4/23/2024) FIGURE 2
Gypsum Canyon Cemetery
Delineation of Jurisdictional
and Non-Jurisdictional Areas
LEGEND
Jurisdictional Delineation Study Area
!( Sample Point
!( Hydrogeomorphic Floodplain Units Reference Sheet Number Non-Jurisdictional Overflow Channel
1602/401 Jurisdiction (Streambed and Associated Riparian Habitat/Non-wetland WOTS) 404 Jurisdiction (Non-wetland, Intermittent WOTUS)
Non-Jurisdictional (404/401/1602)
14 13
10 8
9 5
1 3
15 12
11 2
4 7
6 Sheet 11 of 15
0 25 50
FEET
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
¯
!(
DRAINAGE 2
1602/401/404
2'
1602/401/404
8'
1602/401/404
6'
1602/401/404
9'
7 SOURCE: Nearmap (9/2023); RJM (10/2021)
I:\OCC1901\GIS\Pro\Mountain Park Memorial Park\Mountain Park Memorial Park.aprx (4/23/2024) FIGURE 2
Gypsum Canyon Cemetery
Delineation of Jurisdictional
and Non-Jurisdictional Areas
LEGEND
Jurisdictional Delineation Study Area
!( Sample Point
!( Hydrogeomorphic Floodplain Units Reference Sheet Number Non-Jurisdictional Overflow Channel
1602/401 Jurisdiction (Streambed and Associated Riparian Habitat/Non-wetland WOTS) 404 Jurisdiction (Non-wetland, Intermittent WOTUS)
Non-Jurisdictional (404/401/1602)
14 13
10 8
9 5
1 3
15 12
11 2
4 7
6 Sheet 12 of 15
0 25 50
FEET
!(
!(
BASIN 4
BASIN 5
SP-8
SP-7
SOURCE: Nearmap (9/2023); RJM (10/2021)
I:\OCC1901\GIS\Pro\Mountain Park Memorial Park\Mountain Park Memorial Park.aprx (4/23/2024) FIGURE 2
Gypsum Canyon Cemetery
Delineation of Jurisdictional
and Non-Jurisdictional Areas
LEGEND
Jurisdictional Delineation Study Area
!( Sample Point
!( Hydrogeomorphic Floodplain Units Reference Sheet Number Non-Jurisdictional Overflow Channel
1602/401 Jurisdiction (Streambed and Associated Riparian Habitat/Non-wetland WOTS) 404 Jurisdiction (Non-wetland, Intermittent WOTUS)
Non-Jurisdictional (404/401/1602)
14 13
10 8
9 5
1 3
15 12
11 2
4 7
6 Sheet 13 of 15
0 25 50
FEET
(!
BASIN 2
BASIN 3

OVERFLOW CHANNEL
SP-6
SOURCE: Nearmap (9/2023); RJM (10/2021)
I:\OCC1901\GIS\Pro\Mountain Park Memorial Park\Mountain Park Memorial Park.aprx (4/23/2024) FIGURE 2
Gypsum Canyon Cemetery
Delineation of Jurisdictional
and Non-Jurisdictional Areas
LEGEND
Jurisdictional Delineation Study Area
!( Sample Point
!( Hydrogeomorphic Floodplain Units Reference Sheet Number Non-Jurisdictional Overflow Channel
1602/401 Jurisdiction (Streambed and Associated Riparian Habitat/Non-wetland WOTS) 404 Jurisdiction (Non-wetland, Intermittent WOTUS)
Non-Jurisdictional (404/401/1602)
14 13
10 8
9 5
1 3
15 12
11 2
4 7
6 Sheet 14 of 15
0 25 50
FEET
(!
(!
1602/401
64'
BASIN 1
BASIN 2

OVERFLOW CHANNEL
SP-5
SP-6
SOURCE: Nearmap (9/2023); RJM (10/2021)
I:\OCC1901\GIS\Pro\Mountain Park Memorial Park\Mountain Park Memorial Park.aprx (4/23/2024) FIGURE 2
Gypsum Canyon Cemetery
Delineation of Jurisdictional
and Non-Jurisdictional Areas
LEGEND
Jurisdictional Delineation Study Area
!( Sample Point
!( Hydrogeomorphic Floodplain Units Reference Sheet Number Non-Jurisdictional Overflow Channel
1602/401 Jurisdiction (Streambed and Associated Riparian Habitat/Non-wetland WOTS) 404 Jurisdiction (Non-wetland, Intermittent WOTUS)
Non-Jurisdictional (404/401/1602)
14 13
10 8
9 5
1 3
15 12
11 2
4 7
6 Sheet 15 of 15
0 25 50
FEET
ÄÆ241
ÄÆ91
145
145
224
146
225
226
224
163
W
224
226
191
224
185
145
224
146
192
224
SOURCE: USGS (2023), Nearmap (2023)
I:\OCC1901\GIS\Pro\Mountain Park Memorial Park\Mountain Park Memorial Park.aprx (12/18/2023) FIGURE 3
Mountain Park Memorial Park
Biological Study Area
Soils
145 - Cieneba-Rock outcrop complex, 30 to 75 percent slopes 146 - Corralitos loamy sand
163 - Metz loamy sand
185 - Pits
191 - Riverwash
192 - Rock outcrop-Cieneba complex, 30 to 75 percent slopes 224 - Yorba cobbly sandy loam, 9 to 30 percent slopes
225 - Yorba cobbly sandy loam, 9 to 30 percent slopes, eroded 226 - Yorba cobbly sandy loam, 30 to 50 percent slopes
W - Water
0 280 560
FEET Soils
ÄÆ241
ÄÆ91
SOURCE: Nearmap (10/2020); Fuscoe (2019); Jones & Stokes (2002 & 2004) I:\OCC1901\GIS\Pro\Mountain Park Memorial Park\Mountain Park Memorial Park.aprx (12/18/2023) FIGURE 4
Mountain Park Memorial Park
Vegetation
Biological Study Area
Vegetation Type
Buckwheat (8.45 acres)
Buckwheat/Brittlebush Scrub (12.96
acres) Cactus Scrub (7.22 acres)
Deerweed Population (1.72 acres)
Disturbed (31.15 acres)
Brittlebush (1.52 acres)
Gypsum Creek (0.89 acres)
Mule Fat (0.78 acres)
Oak/Mexican Elderberry (7.03 acres)
Remnant Coastal Sage Scrub (1.91 acres)
Riparian (1.72 acres)
Ruderal (181.88 acres)
Tarweed Population (22.16 acres)
Toyon/Sumac (3.85 acres)
0 275 550
FEET
I:\OCC1901\G\PhotosPage1223.cdr (12/18/2023)
Site Photographs
Gypsum Canyon Cemetery
FIGURE 5
Photo 1: View looking west over the disturbed habitat as noted on the vegetation map, Gypsum Canyon Nature
Preserve hillsides are in the foreground, February 9, 2023.

Photo 2: View looking south at Gypsum Creek, July 2, 2021.

Photo 3 : View looking northwest, Gypsum Creek is to the west in the photo and the vegetation in this area is
dominated by brittlebush, July 2, 2021.

Photo 4: View looking northwest at one of the constructed basin within the project area with pooled water, February 4, 2022
ÄÆ241
ÄÆ91
SOURCE: Nearmap (2023), LSA (2023)
I:\OCC1901\GIS\Pro\Mountain Park Memorial Park\Mountain Park Memorial Park.aprx (12/20/2023) Biological Study Area FIGURE 6
Supplemental Study Area
Western Spadefoot Observation
California Gnatcatcher Territories
2019 Territory
2021 Territories
0 280 560
FEET
Mountain Park Memorial Park
Special-Status Species
January 24, 2022.

Western spadefoot larvae observed
in Supplemental Study Area.

Western spadefoot larvae observed during
2022-2023 fairy shrimp surveys.

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 2 0 2 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24) B-1

APPENDIX B

PLANT AND ANIMAL SPECIES OBSERVED

PLANT SPECIES OBSERVED
The following vascular plant species were observed in the specified study area by LSA biologists. * Introduced species not native to California

CERATOPHYLLALES
Ceratophyllaceae Hornwart family
Ceratophyllum demersum Hornwort

EUDICOTS
Adoxaceae Muskroot Family
Sambucus nigra ssp. caerulea Blue elderberry
Amaranthaceae Amaranth Family
Amaranthus blitoides Prostrate pigweed
Anacardiaceae Sumac Family
Malosma laurina Laurel sumac
Rhus integrifolia Lemonade berry
Toxicodendron diversilobum Poison oak
Apocynaceae Dogbane Family
Asclepias fascicularis Narrow-leaf milkweed
Asteraceae Sunflower Family
Ambrosia acanthicarpa Annual bur-sage
Artemisia californica California sagebrush
Baccharis pilularis ssp. consanguinea Coyote brush
Baccharis salicifolia ssp. salicifolia Mule fat
Baccharis sarothroides Broom baccharis
* Bidens pilosa Common beggar-ticks
Brickellia californica California brickellbush
* Centaurea melitensis Tocalote
Chaenactis glabriuscula var. glabriuscula Yellow pincushion Deinandra fasciculata Fascicled tarweed
Encelia californica California encelia
Encelia farinosa Brittlebush
Erigeron canadensis Common horseweed
* Hedypnois cretica Crete hedypnois
Helianthus annuus Western sunflower
Heterotheca grandiflora Telegraph weed
* Hypochaeris glabra Smooth cat’s-ear

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 2 0 2 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24) B-2 Isocoma menziesii var. vernonioides Coastal goldenbush
* Lactuca serriola Prickly lettuce
* Logfia gallica Narrow-leaved filago
Malacothrix saxatilis var. tenuifolia Cliff malacothrix * Pseudognaphalium luteoalbum Weedy cudweed
* Pulicaria paludosa Spanish sunflower
* Silybum marianum Milk thistle
* Sonchus oleraceus Common sow-thistle
Stephanomeria diegensis San Diego wreath-plant
Uropappus lindleyi Silver puffs
Xanthium strumarium Common cocklebur
Boraginaceae Borage Family
Amsinckia intermedia Common fiddleneck
Cryptantha intermedia Common cryptantha
Eriodictyon crassifolium Thick-leaved yerba santa
Eriodictyon trichocalyx var. trichocalyx Hairy yerba santa Heliotropium curassavicum Salt heliotrope
Phacelia cicutaria var. hispida Caterpillar phacelia
Brassicaceae Mustard Family
* Brassica nigra Black mustard
* Hirschfeldia incana Shortpod mustard
Cactaceae Cactus Family
Opuntia littoralis Coastal prickly pear
Caryophyllaceae Pink Family
* Spergularia bocconei Boccone’s sandspurry
Chenopodiaceae Goosefoot Family
Atriplex canescens var. canescens Fourwing saltbush
* Salsola tragus Russian-thistle
Convolvulaceae Morning-glory Family
Calystegia macrostegia Morning-glory
Cuscuta californica California witch’s hair
Cucurbitaceae Gourd Family
Cucurbita foetidissima Calabazilla
Marah macrocarpa Wild cucumber
Euphorbiaceae Spurge Family
* Chamaesyce maculata Spotted spurge
Croton californicus California croton
Croton setigerus Doveweed
* Ricinus communis Castor bean
Fabaceae Legume Family
Acmispon americanus var. americanus Spanish lotus
Acmispon glaber Coastal deerweed
Lupinus bicolor Miniature lupine
Lupinus succulentus Arroyo lupine
* Medicago polymorpha Common burclover

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 2 0 2 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24) B-3 * Melilotus albus White sweetclover
* Melilotus indicus Yellow sweetclover
Fagaceae Oak Family
Quercus agrifolia var. agrifolia Coast live oak
Geraniaceae Geranium Family
* Erodium cicutarium Redstem filaree
Lamiaceae Mint Family
* Marrubium vulgare Horehound
Salvia mellifera Black sage
Malvaceae Mallow Family
Malacothamnus fasciculatus Chaparral mallow
Nyctaginaceae Four O’clock Family
Mirabilis laevis var. crassifolia Wishbone bush
Papaveraceae Poppy Family
Eschscholzia californica California poppy
Romneya coulteri Coulter’s matilija poppy
Phrymaceae Lopseed Family
Diplacus aurantiacus Bush monkey flower
Plantaginaceae Plantain Family
Plantago erecta California plantain
Polygonaceae Buckwheat Family
Eriogonum fasciculatum California buckwheat
* Polygonum aviculare Prostrate knotweed
* Rumex crispus Curly dock
Rhamnaceae Buckthorn Family
Rhamnus ilicifolia Hollyleaf redberry
Rosaceae Rose Family
Heteromeles arbutifolia Toyon
Rubiaceae Madder Family
Galium angustifolium ssp. angustifolium Narrowly leaved bedstraw Galium aparine Goose grass
Salicaceae Willow Family
Populus fremontii ssp. fremontii Fremont cottonwood
Salix gooddingii Goodding’s black willow
Salix lasiolepis Arroyo willow
Scrophulariaceae Figwort Family
Scrophularia californica California figwort
Solanaceae Nightshade Family
Datura wrightii Jimsonweed
* Nicotiana glauca Tree tobacco
Solanum douglasii Douglas’ nightshade
Solanum xanti Chaparral nightshade
Tamaricaceae Tamarisk Family
* Tamarix ramosissima Saltcedar

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 2 0 2 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24) B-4

MONOCOTS
Agavaceae Century Plant Family
Hesperoyucca whipplei Our Lord’s candle
Poaceae Grass Family
* Avena barbata Slender wild oat
* Avena fatua Wild oat
* Bromus diandrus Ripgut grass
* Bromus hordeaceus Soft chess
* Bromus madritensis ssp. rubens Red brome
Elymus condensatus Giant wild-rye
* Festuca myuros var. myuros Rattail fescue
* Festuca perennis Perennial rye
* Gastridium phleoides Nit grass
* Hordeum murinum ssp. leporinum Hare barley
* Pennisetum setaceum Crimson fountain grass
* Polypogon monspeliensis Rabbitfoot grass
Stipa lepida Foothill needle grass
Typhaceae Cattail Family
Typha sp. Cattail
Common names for each taxa generally conform to Roberts, F.M., Jr. (2008; The Vascular Plants of Orange County, California: An Annotated Checklist; F.M. Roberts Publications, San Luis Rey, California) except where Abrams, L. (1923, 1944, and 1951; Illustrated Flora of the Pacific States:

Washington, Oregon, and California, vols. I–III; Stanford University Press, Stanford, California) and Abrams, L. and Ferris, R.S. (1960; Illustrated Flora of the Pacific States: Washington, Oregon, and California, vol. IV; Stanford University Press, Stanford, California) were used, particularly when species-specific common names were not identified in Roberts, F.M., Jr. (2008).

ANIMAL SPECIES DETECTED
This is a list of the conspicuous aerial insects (i.e., damselflies, dragonflies, and butterflies), bony fishes, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals noted in the study area by LSA biologists. Presence may be noted if a species is seen or heard, or identified by the presence of tracks, scat, or other signs. Please note that most species are listed in phylogenetic order of relation. * Species not native to the study area

LEPIDOPTERA BUTTERFLIES
Pieridae Whites and Sulphurs
* Pieris rapae Cabbage white
Lycaenidae Gossamer-Wing Butterflies
Plebejus acmon Acmon blue

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 2 0 2 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24) B-5

REPTILIA REPTILES
Phrynosomatidae Phrynosomatid Lizards
Sceloporus occidentalis Western fence lizard
Uta stansburiana Common side-blotched lizard
Viperidae Vipers
Crotalus oreganus Western rattlesnake

AVES BIRDS
Odontophoridae New World Quail
Callipepla californica California quail
Columbidae Pigeons and Doves
Zenaida macroura Mourning dove
Cuculidae Cuckoos, Roadrunners, and Anis
Geococcyx californianus Greater roadrunner
Caprimulgidae Nightjars
Chordeiles acutipennis Lesser nighthawk
Apodidae Swifts
Aeronautes saxatilis White-throated swift
Trochilidae Hummingbirds
Archilochus alexandri Black-chinned hummingbird
Calypte anna Anna’s hummingbird
Calypte costae Costa’s hummingbird
Selasphorus rufus/sasin Rufous/Allen’s hummingbird
Charadriidae Plovers and Lapwings
Charadrius vociferus Killdeer
Phalacrocoracidae Cormorants
Phalacrocorax auritus Double-crested cormorant
Cathartidae New World Vultures
Cathartes aura Turkey vulture
Accipitridae Hawks, Kites, Eagles, and Allies
Circus hudsonius Northern harrier
Accipiter cooperii Cooper’s hawk
Buteo lineatus Red-shouldered hawk
Buteo jamaicensis Red-tailed hawk
Picidae Woodpeckers and Allies
Melanerpes formicivorus Acorn woodpecker
Dryobates nuttallii Nuttall’s woodpecker
Falconidae Caracaras and Falcons
Falco sparverius American kestrel
Psittacidae African and New World Parrots
* Amazona viridigenalis Red-crowned parrot
Tyrannidae Tyrant Flycatchers
Empidonax traillii Willow flycatcher
Sayornis nigricans Black phoebe
Sayornis saya Say’s phoebe

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 2 0 2 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24) B-6 Myiarchus cinerascens Ash-throated flycatcher
Tyrannus vociferans Cassin’s kingbird
Tyrannus verticalis Western kingbird
Vireonidae Vireos
Vireo gilvus Warbling vireo
Corvidae Crows and Jays
Aphelocoma californica California scrub-jay
Corvus brachyrhynchos American crow
Corvus corax Common raven
Alaudidae Larks
Eremophila alpestris Horned lark
Hirundinidae Swallows
Hirundo rustica Barn swallow
Aegithalidae Long-Tailed Tits and Bushtits
Psaltriparus minimus Bushtit
Troglodytidae Wrens
Thryomanes bewickii Bewick’s wren
Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus Cactus wren
Polioptilidae Gnatcatchers and Gnatwrens
Polioptila caerulea Blue-gray gnatcatcher
Polioptila californica californica Coastal California gnatcatcher Sylviidae Sylviid Warblers
Chamaea fasciata Wrentit
Turdidae Thrushes
Sialia mexicana Western bluebird
Catharus guttatus Hermit thrush
Mimidae Mockingbirds and Thrashers
Toxostoma redivivum California thrasher
Mimus polyglottos Northern mockingbird
Ptilogonatidae Silky-flycatchers
Phainopepla nitens Phainopepla
Fringillidae Fringilline and Cardueline Finches and Allies Haemorhous mexicanus House finch
Spinus psaltria Lesser goldfinch
Spinus lawrencei Lawrence’s goldfinch
Passerellidae New World Sparrows
Ammodramus savannarum Grasshopper sparrow
Chondestes grammacus Lark sparrow
Spizella passerina Chipping sparrow
Zonotrichia leucophrys White-crowned sparrow
Pooecetes gramineus Vesper sparrow
Passerculus sandwichensis Savannah sparrow
Melospiza melodia Song sparrow
Melospiza lincolnii Lincoln’s sparrow
Melozone crissalis California towhee

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 2 0 2 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24) B-7 Pipilo maculatus Spotted towhee
Icteridae Blackbirds
Sturnella neglecta Western meadowlark
Icterus cucullatus Hooded oriole
Icterus bullockii Bullock’s oriole
Agelaius phoeniceus Red-winged blackbird
Parulidae Wood Warblers
Leiothlypis celata Orange-crowned warbler
Geothlypis trichas Common yellowthroat
Setophaga petechia Yellow warbler
Cardellina pusilla Wilson’s warbler
Cardinalidae Cardinals and Allies
Piranga ludoviciana Western tanager
Pheucticus melanocephalus Black-headed grosbeak
Passerina caerulea Blue grosbeak
Passerina amoena Lazuli bunting

MAMMALIA MAMMALS
Leporidae Hares and Rabbits
Sylvilagus audubonii Audubon’s cottontail
Canidae Foxes, Wolves, and Allies
Canis latrans Coyote
Cervidae Deer, Elk, and Allies
Odocoileus hemionus Mule deer
Cricetidae Hamsters, Voles, Lemmings, and New World Rats and Mice
Peromyscus maniculatus North American deermouse
Taxonomy and nomenclature are based primarily on the following:
• Butterflies: North American Butterfly Association (2001, NABA Checklist and English Names of North American Butterflies, Second Edition, North American Butterfly Association, Morristown, New Jersey, 2003 update in American Butterflies 11: 24-27; see http://www.naba.org/pubs/ checklst.html).
• Amphibians and Reptiles: Crother, B.I. ed. (2017, Scientific and Standard English Names of Amphibians and Reptiles of North America North of Mexico, with Comments Regarding Confidence in our Understanding. Eighth Edition. Herpetological Circular 43.) for species taxonomy and nomenclature; AmphibiaWeb (https://amphibiaweb.org/) and The Reptile Database (www.reptile-database.org/) for higher order taxonomy; see also California Herps (http://www.californiaherps.com/index.html).
• Birds: American Ornithological Society (1998, The A.O.U. Checklist of North American Birds, Seventh Edition, American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, D.C.; and supplements; see http://checklist.aou.org/taxa).

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 2 0 2 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24) B-8 • Mammals: Bradley, R. D. et al. (2014, Revised Checklist of North American Mammals North of Mexico, 2014. Museum of Texas Tech University Occasional Papers No. 327).

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 2 0 2 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24)

APPENDIX C

SUMMARY OF SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 2 0 2 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24) C-1

SUMMARY OF SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES
Species Status Habitat and Distribution Activity Period Occurrence Probability Plants
Abronia villosa var. aurita
Chaparral sand-verbena
US: –
CA: 1B
NCCP: NC
Sandy areas (generally flats and benches along
washes) in chaparral and coastal sage scrub, and
improbably in desert dunes or other sandy areas,
below 1,600 meters (5,300 feet) elevation. In
California, reported from Riverside, San Diego,
Imperial, Los Angeles, and Ventura counties. Believed
extirpated from Orange County. Also reported from
Arizona and Mexico (Baja California). Plants reported
from desert communities are likely misidentified.

Blooms mostly March
through August (annual
or perennial herb)
Not Expected. No open sandy
areas on site. Not observed
during focused plant survey.

Astragalus brauntonii
Braunton’s milk-vetch
US: FE
CA: 1B
NCCP: NC
Generally shallow calcium carbonate soils derived
from marine substrates, although it is occasionally
found downstream of known occurrences on
noncarbonate soils, where survivorship of plants may
be reduced. Usually on sandstone with carbonate
layers in openings in chaparral or coastal sage scrub
following fire but may follow other disturbance and
occur on stiff gravelly clay soils over granite. Typically associated with the fire-dependent chaparral habitat
on limestone and on down-wash sites below 640
meters (2,100 feet) elevation. Known only from Los
Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and Ventura counties.

Blooms January
through August
(perennial herb)
Not Expected. No carbonate
soils on site.

Atriplex coulteri
Coulter’s saltbush
US: –
CA: 1B
NCCP: NC
Alkaline or clay soils in ocean bluffs and ridge tops and alkaline low places in coastal bluff scrub, coastal
dunes, coastal sage scrub, and valley and foothill
grasslands below 460 meters (1,500 feet) elevation. In
California, known only from Los Angeles, Orange,
Santa Barbara, San Bernardino, San Luis Obispo,
Ventura, and San Diego counties. Also occurs in
Mexico. Reports of this species from Riverside County
are based on misidentification of Atriplex serenana
ssp. davidsonii (The Vascular Plants of Western
Riverside County, California, F.M. Roberts et al., 2008).

Blooms March through
October (perennial
herb)
Not Expected. No alkaline or
clay soils.

Calochortus weedii var.
intermedius
Intermediate mariposa-lily
US: –
CA: 1B
NCCP: CC
Dry, open rocky slopes and rock outcrops in chaparral,
coastal sage scrub, and grassland, at 105 to 855
meters (340 to 2,800 feet) elevation. Known only from
Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino
Blooms May through
July (perennial herb)
Not Expected. Not observed
during focused plant survey.

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 2 0 2 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24) C-2

SUMMARY OF SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES
Species Status Habitat and Distribution Activity Period Occurrence Probability counties, California. In the western Riverside County
area, this species is known from the hills and valleys
west of Lake Skinner and Vail Lake (The Vascular Plants of Western Riverside County, California, F.M. Roberts
et al., 2008). Appears to intergrade with Calochortus
plummerae, which is mostly east and north of the
Santa Ana Mountains.

Calystegia felix
Lucky morning-glory
US: –
CA: 1B
NCCP: NC
Wetland and marshy areas, sometimes alkaline,
sometimes artificially watered, from 30 to 215 meters
(100 to 700 feet) elevation. All of the known extant
occurrences are associated with well-watered
landscaping on recently completed industrial,
commercial, and residential developments in the city
of Chino within a historical area of artesian springs.

Older collections are from areas that are now heavily
urbanized (including one from South Los Angeles and
another from Pico Rivera in Los Angeles County).

Known to occur only in western San Bernardino
County. Presumed extirpated from Riverside and Los
Angeles counties.

Blooms March through
September (annual or
perennial rhizomatous
herb)
Not Expected. Not observed
during focused plant survey.

Centromadia parryi ssp.
australis
Southern tarplant
US: –
CA: 1B
NCCP: NC
In vernally wet areas such as edges of marshes and
vernal pools, at edges of roads and trails, and in other areas of compacted, poorly drained, or alkaline soils
where competition from other plants is limited, often
due to disturbance, below 425 meters (1,400 feet)
elevation. In California, known only from Santa
Barbara, Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange, and San Diego
counties. Also occurs in Mexico.

Blooms May through
November (annual
herb)
Not Expected. Not observed
during focused plant survey.

Centromadia pungens ssp.
laevis
Smooth tarplant
US: –
CA: 1B
NCCP: NC
Generally alkaline areas in chenopod scrub, meadows,
playas, riparian woodland, and valley and foothill
grassland below 480 meters (1,600 feet) elevation.

Known from Riverside and San Bernardino counties,
extirpated from San Diego County.

Blooms April through
November (annual
herb)
Not Expected. No alkaline soils
on site
Chorizanthe polygonoides
var. longispina
Long-spined spineflower
US: –
CA: 1B
NCCP: NC
Generally clay soils in chaparral, coastal sage scrub,
and grassland at 30 to 1,530 meters (100 to 5,000
feet) elevation. In California, known only from Orange, Blooms April through
July (annual herb)
Not Expected. No clay soils on
site.

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 2 0 2 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24) C-3

SUMMARY OF SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES
Species Status Habitat and Distribution Activity Period Occurrence Probability Riverside, Santa Barbara, and San Diego counties. Also
occurs in Mexico.

Dudleya multicaulis
Many-stemmed dudleya
US: –
CA: 1B
NCCP: NC
Heavy, often clay soils or around granitic outcrops in
chaparral, coastal sage scrub, and grassland below 790
meters (2,600 feet) elevation. Known only from Los
Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and San
Diego counties.

Blooms April through
July (perennial herb)
Not Expected. Not observed
during focused plant survey. No
clay soils or other typical habitat
on site.

Eriastrum densifolium ssp.
sanctorum
Santa Ana River woollystar
US: FE
CA: SE/1B
NCCP: NC
Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub and chaparral in
sandy or gravelly soils of floodplains and terraced
fluvial deposits of the Santa Ana River and larger
tributaries (Lytle and Cajon creeks, lower portions of
City and Mill creeks) at 90 to 625 meters (300 to 2,100 feet) elevation in San Bernardino and Riverside
counties. Presumed extirpated from Orange County.

Blooms April through
September (perennial
herb)
Not Expected. No large
tributaries to the Santa Ana
River on site, nor suitable scrub
or chaparral on sandy or gravelly
soils.

Lepechinia cardiophylla
Heart-leaved pitcher sage
US: –
CA: 1B
NCCP: C
Closed cone coniferous forest, chaparral, cismontane
woodland at 550 to 1,370 meters (1,800 to 4,500 feet)
elevation. Occurs in the Santa Ana Mountains in
Riverside and Orange counties. Also reported from San
Diego County and Baja California.

Blooms April through
July (perennial herb)
Not Expected. Site is outside
expected elevational range of
species. Not observed during
focused plant survey.

Monardella australis ssp.
jokerstii
Jokerst’s monardella
US: –
CA: 1B
NCCP: NC
Steep scree or talus slopes between breccia and
secondary alluvial benches along drainages and
washes, in lower montane coniferous forest and
chaparral at 1,350 to 1,750 meters (4,430 to 5,740
feet). Known only from the San Gabriel Mountains of
San Bernardino County, California.

Blooms July through
September (perennial
rhizomatous herb)
Not Expected. No scree or talus
slopes on site.

Monardella hypoleuca ssp.
intermedia
Intermediate monardella
US: –
CA: 1B
NCCP: NC
Understory of chaparral, oak woodland, and
occasionally coniferous forest at 200 to 1,250 meters
(660 to 4,100 feet) elevation. Known only from the
Santa Ana Mountains area of Orange, Riverside, and
San Diego counties, California.

Blooms primarily June
through August
(perennial rhizomatous
herb)
Not Expected. Habitat on site is
marginal. Not observed during
focused plant survey.

Nolina cismontana
Chaparral nolina
US: –
CA: 1B
NCCP: NC
Sandstone or gabbro in chaparral and coastal sage
scrub at 140 to 1,275 meters (500 to 4,200 feet)
elevation. Known from Orange, Riverside, San Diego,
and Ventura counties, California.

Blooms May through
July (perennial shrub)
Not Expected. Not observed
during focused survey.

Penstemon californicus
California beardtongue
US: –
CA: 1B
NCCP: NC
Sandy or granitic soils on stony slopes and shrubby
openings in chaparral, lower montane coniferous
forest, and pinyon-juniper woodlands at 1,160 to
Blooms May through
August (perennial herb)
Not Expected. Site is outside
expected elevational range of

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 2 0 2 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24) C-4

SUMMARY OF SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES
Species Status Habitat and Distribution Activity Period Occurrence Probability 2,320 meters (3,800 to 7,600 feet) elevation. Known in
California only from Riverside County.
species. Not observed during
focused plant survey.

Pseudognaphalium
leucocephalum
White rabbit-tobacco
US: –
CA: 2B
NCCP: NC
Sand and gravel at the edges of washes or mouths of
steep canyons at 0 to 2,100 meters (0 to 7,000 feet)
elevation. In California, known from Los Angeles,
Orange, Riverside, Santa Barbara, San Diego, San Luis
Obispo, and Ventura counties. Also occurs in Arizona,
New Mexico, Texas, and Mexico.

Blooms usually August
through November
(perennial herb)
Not Expected. No suitable
washes on site. Not observed
during focused survey.

Sidalcea neomexicana
Salt Spring checkerbloom
US: –
CA: 2B
NCCP: NC
Alkaline springs and brackish marshes below 1,530
meters (5,000 feet) elevation. In California, known only from Kern, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San
Diego, and Ventura counties. Believed extirpated from
Los Angeles County. Also known from Arizona, New
Mexico, Nevada, Utah, and Mexico.

Blooms March through
June (perennial herb)
Not Expected. No alkaline or
brackish habitats on site.

Invertebrates
Bombus crotchii
Crotch bumble bee
US: –
CA: SCE
NCCP: NC
Inhabits open scrub (including chaparral) and
grassland from coastal California to crest of SierraCascade and in desert edge areas, south into Mexico.

Primarily nests underground. Suitable bumble bee
habitat requires the continuous availability of flowers on which to forage throughout the duration of the
colony (spring through fall), colony nest sites, and
overwintering sites for the queens.

Spring and summer Low to Moderate. Habitat
appears suitable.

Branchinecta
sandiegonensis
San Diego fairy shrimp
US: FE
CA: SA
NCCP: CC
Small, shallow (usually less than 30 centimeters deep), relatively clear but unpredictable vernal pools on
coastal terraces. Pools must retain water for a
minimum of 13 days for this species to reproduce (3 to
8 days for hatching, and 10 to 20 days to reach
reproductive maturity). Known from Orange and San
Diego counties, and Baja California.

Seasonally following
rains in late fall, winter,
and spring
Not Expected. Not observed
during focused fairy shrimp
survey.

Danaus plexippus plexippus
pop. 1 (wintering sites)
Monarch butterfly
(California overwintering
populations)
US: FC
CA: SA
NCCP: NC
Winter roosts are located in wind-protected tree
groves (eucalyptus, Monterey pine, cypress) with
nectar and water sources nearby.

September through
March
Not Expected. No windprotected tree groves on site.

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 2 0 2 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24) C-5

SUMMARY OF SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES
Species Status Habitat and Distribution Activity Period Occurrence Probability Euphydryas editha quino
Quino checkerspot
butterfly
US: FE
CA: SA
NCCP: CC
Meadows or openings within coastal sage scrub or
chaparral below about 5,000 feet where food plants
(Plantago erecta and/or Orthocarpus purpurascens)
are present. Historically known from Santa Monica
Mountains to northwest Baja California; currently
known only from southwestern Riverside County,
southern San Diego County, and northern Baja
California.

January through late
April
Not Expected. Site is outside
expected range of species.

Larval food plants not observed
during focused plant survey.

Fish
Catostomus santaanae
Santa Ana sucker
US: FT
CA: SSC
NCCP: NC
The Santa Ana sucker’s historical range includes the
Los Angeles, San Gabriel, and Santa Ana River drainage
systems located in Southern California. An introduced
population also occurs in the Santa Clara River
drainage system in Southern California. Found in
shallow, cool, running water.

Year-round Not Expected. No perennial
streams on site.

Gila orcuttii
Arroyo chub
US: –
CA: SSC
NCCP: NC
Perennial streams or intermittent streams with
permanent pools; slow water sections of streams with
mud or sand substrates; spawning occurs in pools.

Native to Los Angeles, San Gabriel, San Luis Rey, Santa Ana, and Santa Margarita river systems; introduced in
Santa Ynez, Santa Maria, Cuyama, and Mojave river
systems and smaller coastal streams.

Year-round Not Expected. No perennial
water on site.

Amphibians
Anaxyrus (Bufo) californicus
Arroyo toad
US: FE
CA: SSC
NCCP: CC
Washes and arroyos with open water; sand or gravel
beds; for breeding, pools with sparse overstory
vegetation. Coastal and a few desert streams from
Santa Barbara County to Baja California.

March through July Not Expected. No suitable wash
or arroyo areas with lasting
water on site.

Spea hammondii
Western spadefoot
US: PT
CA: SSC
NCCP: C
Grasslands and occasionally hardwood woodlands;
largely terrestrial but requires rain pools or other
ponded water persisting at least 3 weeks for breeding;
burrows in loose soils during the dry season. Occurs in the Central Valley and adjacent foothills, the nondesert areas of Southern California, and Baja California.

October through April
(following onset of
winter rains)
Present. This species was
observed on the stie.

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 2 0 2 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24) C-6

SUMMARY OF SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES
Species Status Habitat and Distribution Activity Period Occurrence Probability Reptiles
Actinemys pallida (Emys
marmarota in part)
Southwestern pond turtle
US: PT
CA: SSC
NCCP: NC
Inhabits permanent or nearly permanent water.

Absent from desert regions, except in the Mojave
Desert along the Mojave River and its tributaries.

Requires basking sites such as partially submerged
logs, rocks, or open mud banks.

Year-round, with
reduced activity
November through
March
Not Expected. No permanent
water on site.

Anniella stebbinsi
Southern California legless
lizard
US: –
CA: SSC
NCCP: NC
Inhabits sandy or loose loamy soils with high moisture
content under sparse vegetation in Southern
California.

Nearly year round, at
least in southern areas
Low to moderate. Habitat
appears suitable.

Aspidoscelis tigris
stejnegeri
Coastal whiptail
US: –
CA: SSC
NCCP: C
Woodlands, riparian areas, and sparsely vegetated
areas in a wide variety of habitats, including coastal
sage scrub and sparse grassland. Occurs in valleys and
foothills from Ventura County to Baja California.

April through August Moderate to High. Suitable
habitat occurs on site.

Coleonyx variegatus abbotti
San Diego banded gecko
US: –
CA: SSC
NCCP: NC
Often associated with rocks. Coastal sage scrub and
chaparral, most often on granite or rocky outcrops in
these habitats. Interior Ventura County south.

Nocturnal April through
October
Low. Habitat appears suitable.

Crotalus ruber
Red diamond rattlesnake
US: –
CA: SSC
NCCP: C
Desert scrub, thornscrub, open chaparral and
woodland; occasional in grassland and cultivated
areas. Prefers rocky areas and dense vegetation.

Morongo Valley in San Bernardino and Riverside
Counties to the west and south into Mexico.

Mid-spring through
mid-fall
Moderate. Suitable habitat
occurs on site.

Phrynosoma blainvillii
(coronatum)
Coast horned lizard
US: –
CA: SSC
NCCP: C
Primarily in sandy soil in open areas, especially washes and floodplains, in many plant communities. Requires
open areas for sunning, bushes for cover, patches of
loose soil for burial, and an abundant supply of ants or other insects. Occurs west of the deserts from
northern Baja California north to Shasta County below
2,400 meters (8,000 feet) elevation.

April through July with
reduced activity August
through October
Not Expected. No sandy areas on
site. Site is highly disturbed,
within an urban environment
with associated predators, and
isolated from better habitat. No
recent CNDDB records closer
than about 6 miles from site.

Salvadora hexalepis
virgultea
Coast patch-nosed snake
US: –
CA: SSC
NCCP: NC
Coastal chaparral, washes, sandy flats, and rocky
areas. Widely distributed throughout lowlands, up to
2,130 meters (7,000 feet) elevation, of Southern
California from coast to the eastern border.

Active diurnally
throughout most of the
year
Low. Habitat appears suitable.

Thamnophis hammondii
Two-striped garter snake
US: –
CA: SSC
NCCP: NC
Highly aquatic. Only in or near permanent sources of
water. Streams with rocky beds supporting willows or
Diurnal year-round Not Expected. No permanent
water on site.

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 2 0 2 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24) C-7

SUMMARY OF SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES
Species Status Habitat and Distribution Activity Period Occurrence Probability other riparian vegetation. From Monterey County to
northwest Baja California.

Birds
Agelaius tricolor
(nesting colony)
Tricolored blackbird
US: –
CA: ST/SSC
(breeding)
NCCP: NC
Open country. Forages in grassland and cropland
habitats. Nests in large groups near fresh water,
preferably in emergent wetland with tall, dense
cattails or tules, but also in thickets of willow,
blackberry, wild rose, or tall herbs. Seeks cover for
roosting in emergent wetland vegetation, especially
cattails and tules, and also in trees and shrubs. Occurs in western Oregon, California, and northwestern Baja
California.

Year-round Not Expected. No suitable wet
areas or other habitat on site.

Aquila chrysaetos
(nesting & wintering)
Golden eagle
US: –
CA: CFP
NCCP: CC
Generally open country of the Temperate Zone
worldwide. Nesting primarily in rugged mountainous
country. Uncommon resident in Southern California.

Diurnal year-round Low. Habitat appears suitable
for foraging; however, nesting
habitat is absent.

Asio otus
(nesting)
Long-eared owl
US: –
CA: SSC (breeding)
NCCP: NC
Scarce and local in forests and woodlands throughout
much of the Northern Hemisphere. Rare resident in
coastal Southern California. Nests and roosts in dense
willow-riparian woodland and oak woodland, but
forages over wider areas. Breeds from valley foothill
hardwood up to ponderosa pine habitat.

Nocturnal year-round Not Expected. Woodland
habitat absent.

Athene cunicularia
(burrow sites)
Burrowing owl
US: –
CA: SSC (breeding)
NCCP: NC
Open, treeless areas with low, sparse vegetation,
usually on flat or gently sloping terrain, including
grasslands, sparse scrub (cover less than 30 percent),
farmland, airfields, airports, road embankments,
cemeteries, urban vacant lots, desert areas, and other
open habitat. Usually occupies ground squirrel
burrows but may also utilize manmade structures such
as culverts or debris piles, usually temporarily.

Year-round Low to Moderate. Habitat on
the stie appears to be suitable,
but this species has not been
observed during any of the site
visits.

Buteo swainsoni
(nesting)
Swainson’s hawk
US: –
CA: ST
NCCP: NC
Open desert, grassland, or cropland containing
scattered, large trees or small groves. Breeds in stands with few trees in juniper-sage flats, riparian areas, and oak savannah in the Central Valley. Forages in adjacent grasslands or suitable grain or alfalfa fields, or
livestock pastures. Breeds and nests in western North
America; winters in South America. Uncommon
Spring and fall (in
migration)
Not Expected. Site is in urban
setting without adjacent open
country. Closest CNDDB record
is in agricultural area about 10
miles northeast of site. Very
limited resident in Antelope
valley. No trees on site.

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 2 0 2 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24) C-8

SUMMARY OF SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES
Species Status Habitat and Distribution Activity Period Occurrence Probability breeding resident and migrant in the Central Valley,
Klamath Basin, Northeastern Plateau, Lassen County,
and Mojave Desert. Very limited breeding reported
from Lanfair Valley, Owens Valley, Fish Lake Valley,
and Antelope Valley. In Southern California, now
mostly limited to spring and fall transient. Formerly
abundant in California with wider breeding range.

Campylorhynchus
brunneicapillus
sandiegensis
Coastal cactus wren
US: –
CA: SSC (year
round)
NCCP: C
Inhabits coastal sage scrub, nesting almost exclusively in thickets of cholla (Opuntia prolifera) and prickly
pear (Opuntia littoralis and Opuntia oricola), typically below 150 meters (500 feet) elevation. Found in
coastal areas of Orange and San Diego counties, and
extreme northwestern Baja California, Mexico.

Year-round
(nonmigratory)
Present. Suitable habitat on
site.

Coccyzus americanus
occidentalis
(nesting)
Western yellow-billed
cuckoo
US: FT
CA: SE
NCCP: NC
Breeds and nests in extensive stands of dense
cottonwood/willow riparian forest along broad, lower
flood bottoms of larger river systems at scattered
locales in western North America; winters in South
America.

June through
September
Not Expected. No extensive
stands of riparian habitat on
site.

Rallus obsoletus
Ridgway’s rail
US: Endangered
CA: Endangered/
Fully protected
NCCP: NC
Found in salt marshes traversed by tidal sloughs,
where cordgrass and pickleweed are the dominant
vegetation. Requires dense growth of either cordgrass
for nesting or escape cover; feeds on mollusks and
crustaceans.

Year-round Not Expected. Suitable salt
marsh habitat absent.

Laterallus jamaicensis
corturniculus
California black rail
US: -
CA: Threatened
NCCP: NC
Inhabits freshwater marshes, wet meadows and
shallow margins of saltwater marshes bordering larger
bays. Needs water depths of about 1 inch that do not
fluctuate during the year and dense vegetation for
nesting habitat.

Year-round Not Expected. Suitable marsh
habitat and year round water
not present.

Elanus leucurus
(nesting)
White-tailed kite
US: –
CA: CFP
NCCP: NC
Typically nests in riparian trees such as oaks, willows, and cottonwoods at low elevations. Forages in open
country. Found in South America and in southern
areas and along the western coast of North America.

Year-round Moderate. May nest in riparian
area
Empidonax traillii extimus
Southwestern willow
flycatcher
US: FE
CA: SE
NCCP: CC
Rare and local breeder in extensive riparian areas of
dense willows or (rarely) tamarisk, usually with
standing water, in the southwestern United States and
possibly extreme northwestern Mexico. Winters in
May through
September
Present. Species observed
foraging within project area;
however, there is no suitable
nesting habitat.

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 2 0 2 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24) C-9

SUMMARY OF SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES
Species Status Habitat and Distribution Activity Period Occurrence Probability Central and South America. Below 6,000 feet
elevation.

Icteria virens
(nesting)
Yellow-breasted chat
US: –
CA: SSC (breeding)
NCCP: NC
Riparian thickets of willow, brushy tangles near
watercourses. Nests in riparian woodland throughout
much of western North America. Winters in Central
America.

April through
September
Not Expected. No suitable
riparian vegetation along water
courses on site.

Laterallus jamaicensis
coturniculus
California black rail
US: –
CA: ST/CFP
NCCP: NC
Requires shallow water in salt marshes, freshwater
marshes, wet meadows, or flooded grassy vegetation.

Prefers areas of moist soil vegetated by fine-stemmed
emergent plants, rushes, grasses, or sedges, with
scattered small pools. Known from coastal California,
northwestern Baja California, the lower Imperial
Valley, and the lower Colorado River of Arizona and
California. Now extirpated from virtually all of coastal Southern California.

Year-round Not Expected. Salt marsh
habitat absent.

Polioptila californica
californica
Coastal California
gnatcatcher
US: FT
CA: SSC
NCCP: C
Inhabits coastal sage scrub in low-lying foothills and
valleys up to about 500 meters (1,640 feet) elevation
in cismontane southwestern California and Baja
California.

Year-round Present. This species has been
observed on site.

Setophagia petechia
(nesting)
Yellow warbler
US: –
CA: SSC (breeding)
NCCP: NC
Riparian woodland while nesting in the western United
States and northwestern Baja California; more
widespread in brushy areas and woodlands during
migration. Occurs from western Mexico to northern
South America in winter. Migrants are widespread and
common. Three subspecies breed in California:
morcomi, brewsteri, and sonorana. (Sonoran yellow
warbler nests along the Colorado River.)
Summer, winter, or
Year-round, depending
on locale
Present. Species observed
foraging in project area;
however, suitable nesting
habitat is absent.

Strix occidentalis
occidentalis
California spotted owl
US: –
CA: SSC (year
round)
NCCP: NC
Occurs from sea level to 1,000 meters (3,300 feet)
elevation in habitats dominated by hardwoods
(primarily oaks) at low and mid elevations and conifers at the highest elevations. Nesting and roosting
habitats have large trees (>90 cm [35 inches] diameter
at breast height) and are generally complex in
structure (many trees in different diameter classes)
with high canopy closure. Foraging habitat appears
more variable and includes both intermediate-aged
Not Expected. No forested
habitats on site.

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 2 0 2 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24) C-10

SUMMARY OF SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES
Species Status Habitat and Distribution Activity Period Occurrence Probability and older forested habitats within a home range.

Occupied forest areas are less fragmented than
random forest areas. This subspecies occurs in the
central and south California coast ranges and the
western slope of the Sierra Nevada, south to northern
Baja California.

Vireo bellii pusillus
Least Bell’s vireo
US: FE
CA: SE
NCCP: CC
Riparian forests and willow thickets. The most critical structural component of least Bell’s vireo habitat in
California is a dense shrub layer 2 to 10 feet (0.6–3.0 meters) above ground. Willows usually dominant.

Nests from central California to northern Baja
California. Winters in southern Baja California.

April through
September
Not Expected. Species not
observed during protocol
surveys.

Mammals
Lasiurus blossevillii
Western red bat
US: FSS
CA: SSC
NCCP: NC
Typically solitary, but may roost in small groups.

Roosts in the foliage of broad-leafed trees or shrubs
within streams or fields, in orchards, and occasionally in urban areas; commonly roosts in mature
cottonwoods and sycamores. Also documented
roosting in mature eucalyptus trees. Strongly
associated with riparian corridors, but has also been
observed foraging around streetlights and floodlights
in urban settings. Examples of prey include
homopterans, coleopterans, hymenopterans,
dipterans, and lepidopterans (Bolster 2005a).

Migratory, but documented year-round in Southern
California.

Year- round; nocturnal Moderate. Has been detected
along the Santa Ana River and
nearby Fremont Canyon.

Antrozous pallidus
Pallid bat
US: –
CA: SSC
NCCP: NC
Most common in open, dry habitats with rocky areas
for roosting. Day roosts in caves, crevices, rocky
outcrops, tree hollows or crevices, mines, and
occasionally buildings, culverts, and bridges. Night
roosts may be more open sites, such as porches and
open buildings. Grasslands, shrublands, woodlands,
and forests in western North America.

Year-round; nocturnal High. Suitable habitat present.

Nyctinomops femorosaccus
Pocketed free-tailed bat
US: -
CA: SSC
NCCP: NC
Distribution appears to be limited to Southern
California. Roosts in crevices in a variety of habitats, but usually associated with high cliffs and rugged rock outcrops. Colonial. Colony sizes usually number fewer
Year-round Present. Although this species
forages over the study area, no
suitable roosting habitat exists
within the study area.

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 2 0 2 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24) C-11

SUMMARY OF SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES
Species Status Habitat and Distribution Activity Period Occurrence Probability than 100 individuals. Diet consists primarily of large
moths (probably Sphingidae), but also crickets,
grasshoppers, flying ants, froghoppers, and
leafhoppers (Pierson and Rainey 1998). Migratory, but
documented year-round in Southern California
Nytinopops macrotis
Big free-tailed bat
US: -
CA: SSC
NCCP: NC
Relatively few roosts of this species have been found,
but it is known to roost in rock crevices in high cliffs as well as in buildings and mines. Highly associated with
arid, rocky habitats. Diet consists primarily of large
moths, but occasionally crickets, grasshoppers, and
flying ants are consumed (Pierson and Rainey 1998).

Migratory, but documented year-round in southern
California.

Year-round Present. Although this species
forages over the study area, no
suitable roosting habitat exists
within the study area.

Eumops perotis californicus
Western mastiff bat
US: –
CA: SSC
NCCP: NC
Occurs in many open, semi-arid to arid habitats,
including conifer and deciduous woodlands, coastal
scrub, grasslands, chaparral, etc.; roosts in crevices in vertical cliff faces, high buildings, and tunnels, and in palm fronds; travels widely when foraging.

Year-round; nocturnal Present. Although this species
forages over the study area, no
suitable roosting habitat exists
within the study area.

Lasiurus xanthinus
Western yellow bat
US: –
CA: SSC
NCCP: NC
Found mostly in desert and desert riparian areas of
the southwest United States, but is also expanding its
range with the increased usage of native and
nonnative ornamental palms in landscaping.

Individuals typically roost amid dead fronds of palms
but have also been documented roosting in
cottonwood trees. Forages over many habitats.

Year-round; nocturnal Low. Has been detected at the
Santa Ana River and at nearby
Fremont Canyon.

Dipodomys stephensi
Stephens’ kangaroo rat
US: FT
CA: ST
NCCP: NC
Found in plant communities transitional between
grassland and coastal sage scrub, with perennial
vegetation cover of less than 50%. Most commonly
associated with Artemisia tridentata, Eriogonum
fasciculatum, and Erodium. Requires well-drained soils
with compaction characteristics suitable for burrow
construction (neither sandy nor too hard). Not found
in soils that are highly rocky or sandy, less than 20
inches deep, or heavily alkaline or clay, or in areas
exceeding 25% slope. Occurs only in western Riverside
County, northern San Diego County, and extreme
southern San Bernardino County below 915 meters
Year-round, nocturnal Not Expected. Study area not
within known range for species.

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 2 0 2 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24) C-12

SUMMARY OF SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES
Species Status Habitat and Distribution Activity Period Occurrence Probability (3,000 feet) elevation. In northwestern Riverside
County, known only from east of I-15. Reaches its
northwest limit in south Norco, southeast Riverside,
and the Reche Canyon area of Riverside and extreme
southern San Bernardino counties.

Sources: CNDDB (CDFW 2021); Biogeographic Information and Observation System (CDFW n.d.); and Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) database (USFWS n.d.) US: Federal Classifications
FT = Listed as threatened
FE = Listed as endangered
FPT = Proposed for listing as Threatened.

CA: State Classifications
SE = Listed as endangered
ST = Listed as threatened
SCE = Candidate Endangered
CFP = California Fully Protected
SSC = Species of Special Concern. Refers to animals with vulnerable or seriously declining populations.

SA = Special Animal. Refers to any other animal monitored by the Natural Diversity Database, regardless of its legal or rarity status. 1B = California Rare Plant Rank 1B: Rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere. 2B = California Rare Plant Rank 2B: Rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more common elsewhere.

NCCP: Natural Community Conservation Plan and Habitat Conservation Plan for Central and Coastal Orange County C = Species Covered by NCCP/HCP
CC= Species Conditionally Covered by NCCP/HCP
NC= Species Not Covered by NCCP/HCP
amsl = above mean sea level
CA = California
CDFW = California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CNDDB = California Natural Diversity Database
I- = Interstate
mi = mile(s)
US = United States
USFWS = United States Fish and Wildlife Service

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 2 0 2 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24)

APPENDIX D

WESTERN SPADEFOOT FOCUSED SURVEYS

CARLSBAD
CLOVIS
IRVINE

LOS ANGELES

PALM SPRINGS

POINT RICHMOND

RIVERSIDE

ROSEVILLE

SAN LUIS OBISPO
20 Executive Park, Suite 200, Irvine, California 92614 949.553.0666 www.lsa.net April 1, 2022
Tim Deutsch, CSDM
General Manager
Orange County Cemetery
25751 Trabuco Road
Lake Forest, CA 92630
Subject: Summary of the Surveys Conducted for Western Spadefoot for the Memorial Park Project in Anaheim, California
Dear Mr. Deutsch:

This letter report documents the results of the focused surveys for western spadefoot (Spea hammondii) conducted by LSA at the proposed Memorial Park Project site (site) in Anaheim California. No western spadefoots were observed within the project area.

The proposed project site is generally located southeast of Gypsum Canyon Road and State Route (SR) 91, on a 283-acre project site that the Anaheim General Plan designates for Low-MediumDensity Residential land use, and is within the Mountain Park Specific Plan (SP90-4) zoning (see Figure 1; all figures attached). The project will include utility infrastructure, bridge crossings and site circulation, administration buildings, a committal chapel, and maintenance areas. There are approximately 6.47 acres of seasonal pools that were surveyed within the project area.

BACKGROUND
Western Spadefoot
The western spadefoot is a medium-sized toad that ranges from 1.5 to 2.5 inches in snout-to-vent length. Adults have a dusky green, gray, or brown dorsal coloration with irregular dark markings and dark orange or reddish-tipped tubercles. Ventral coloration is white to gray with no markings ().

Their eyes are large and protuberant, with a distinctive vertical pupil indicative of nocturnal activity, and usually pale, gold irises. Western spadefoot have a wedge-shaped black spade on each hind foot used for digging into soil.
1 Adult western spadefoot diets consist of invertebrates such as beetles, moths, and worms. Larval diet has not been extensively studied, although other larval spadefoot species are omnivores.

Notable predators of western spadefoot are dytiscid beetle larvae (Dytiscidae spp.), garter snakes (Thamnophis sp.), and great blue herons (Ardea herodias). Like other spadefoot species, S. hammondii have a distinctive glandular secretion that is noxious to predators. 2 1 Stebbins, C. Robert, and M. Samuel McGinnis. 2012. Field Guide to Amphibians and Reptiles of California, revised edition. University of California Press. 2 Dodd, C. Kenneth. 2013. Frogs of the United States and Canada. The Johns Hopkins University Press. 4/1/22 (P:\OCC1901\Biology\Spadefoot\Spadefoot 03282022.docx) 2 Western spadefoot are found from inland north-central California within the Great Central Valley and the Sierra Nevada foothills southward along the coastal regions to Baja California, Mexico. They occur in grasslands, oak woodlands, coastal sage scrub, and chaparral vegetation in washes, floodplains, alluvial fans, playas, and alkali flats at elevations ranging from near sea level up to 4,500 feet.

Western spadefoot are nocturnal and seldom seen, preferring to spend most of their lives underground to avoid temperature extremes and dryness. They can dig into soils as deep as 3 feet or may use previously made mammal burrows. Activity may occur at any time during the year but is most common from October through May.

Temporary pools are the primary habitat used for breeding, but S. hammondii will also readily use artificial water bodies (Thomson 2016). Perennial pools are often not suitable habitat for western spadefoot larvae due to predators such as red-swamp crayfish (Procambarus clarkia), American bullfrog (Lithobates catesbeianus), and western mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis). Emergence is triggered by rainfall and favorable conditions, although western spadefoot will continue to call for 2 or 3 weeks after a rain event. Males call from the edge of a breeding pool in aggregations of several to more than 1,000 individuals. The breeding calls are a low, hoarse trill ranging from 0.32 to

1.25 seconds in duration. Eggs are attached to detritus and vegetation in shallow water in clusters of 10–42 eggs; females may lay up to 500 eggs. Eggs hatch in 1–6 days depending on temperature.

Western spadefoot larval duration ranges from 30 to 80 days, with rates of larval development depending on pond hydroperiod. In ponds with long hydroperiods, tadpoles develop more slowly to reach a larger size prior to metamorphosis.
1 S. hammondii has experienced severe habitat loss throughout California. In Southern California, more than 80 percent of habitat has been altered by development and agriculture to no longer support populations. The loss of vernal pools and habitat fragmentation are the largest threats to western spadefoot. The introduction of nonnative species has also impacted breeding. As such, S. hammondii is listed as a California Species of Special Concern.

Methods
Table A provides the details of Memorial Park surveys for western spadefoots conducted by LSA Biologists Lonnie Rodriguez and Jeremy Rosenthal. There are currently no standardized protocol survey methods for the western spadefoot, a California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) species of special concern.

LSA conducted a review of the CDFW California Natural Diversity Database (CDFW 2021) to determine whether special-status amphibian species have been documented within a 2-mile radius of the project area. CNDDB records show that in 2010, western spadefoots were identified approximately 1 mile away from the project area, west and upstream in Gypsum Canyon. The survey area included the Biological Study Area (BSA) and the project area. The BSA includes the areas shown on Figure 2 in dashed red line; these areas have the potential to be included in the project area.
1 Dodd, C. Kenneth. 2013. Frogs of the United States and Canada. The Johns Hopkins University Press. 4/1/22 (P:\OCC1901\Biology\Spadefoot\Spadefoot 03282022.docx) 3 Table A: Western Spadefoot Field Survey
Survey Date Time
Weather Conditions
Surveyors
Temperature
(°Fahrenheit)
Wind
(miles per hour)
Humidity
(%)
Afternoon 12/27/2021 2:00 p.m.–4:00 p.m. 59 4.35 65 LR
Evening 1/24/2022 3:00 p.m.–6:15 p.m. 70 6.83 17 LR, JR Day 2/4/2022 11:00 a.m.–1:30 p.m. 73 9.32 13 LR
JR = Jeremy Rosenthal
LR- Lonnie Rodriguez
On December 27, 2021, a survey was conducted to map existing pools of standing water within the project and study area after a significant rain event. LSA conducted one afternoon survey, one evening survey, and one daytime survey. Most observations and vocal calls for western spadefoot are made during the winter and spring.
1 All seasonal pools that had water present were mapped as potential habitat for western spadefoot (see Figure 2). Each pool was surveyed for the presence of egg masses on submerged vegetation and the presence of adult western spadefoot. Western spadefoot larvae were not observed within the project area, but they were observed within the Biological Study Area (see Figure 2).

The evening survey was conducted before and after sunset, requiring the use of head lamps. The pools were surveyed on foot with the use of hand nets, head lamps, and binoculars to view amphibians within or on the edges of the pools from a distance. During the course of the survey, the biologists stopped periodically to listen for calls in areas of suitable habitat.

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
In general, the BSA lacks extensive distributions of native vegetation communities because most of the BSA coincides with a former aggregate mining operation that resulted in extensive ground disturbance (e.g., vegetation clearing and surface grading) over multiple decades. Upon closure of past mining operations, the site was recontoured and revegetated for erosion control, primarily with native herbaceous species. However, due to long periods of disturbance and extended drought events, the BSA is a highly degraded landscape. This degradation, along with drought occurrences, has left the BSA with a limited native understory.

Although several large clusters of native plants are starting to re-establish themselves in the interior of the BSA—namely, fascicled tarweed (Deinandra fasciculata), deerweed (Acmispon glaber), brittlebush (Encelia farinosa), and coastal prickly pear (Opuntia littoralis)—nonnative species dominate the vast majority of the BSA. Within areas that have dense clusters of native plants, such as the deerweed and brittlebush populations in the eastern section of the BSA, the understory remains dominated by nonnative annual grasses and weeds, which further inhibit native seed germination.
1 Dodd, C. Kenneth Jr. 2013. Frogs of the United States and Canada, Volume 2. John Hopkins University Press. 786–790. 4/1/22 (P:\OCC1901\Biology\Spadefoot\Spadefoot 03282022.docx) 4 Adjacent Land Uses
The BSA is surrounded by open space (Gypsum Canyon Nature Preserve) to the east and south. The site is also bounded by SR-241 to the west and SR-91 to the north. East of SR-91 is the Santa Ana River, bounded by housing development, and just north of SR-241 is a housing development.

RESULTS
The first survey was conducted on December 27, 2021, after a significant rainfall event, to look for seasonal pools within the BSA and project area and to survey and listen for emergent adult western spadefoot. None were observed.

On January 24, another western spadefoot survey was conducted. Western spadefoot were identified outside the project area in Seasonal Pool 2 within the BSA (Figure 2). No western spadefoot were present in the other seasonal pools within the BSA or project area, and no calls were heard in proximity to the pools with water still present.

On February 4, 2022, a follow-up survey was conducted to survey the seasonal pools. Only the basin on the east side of the project contained water; all other seasonal pools were dry. The basin was surveyed for western spadefoot, but none were observed. The only amphibian species observed within the basin was Baja California tree frog (Pseudacris hypochondriaca) (see Figure 3).

CONCLUSION
The upper site of the project area has potential for spadefoot to be present. It is recommended that monitoring be conducted in areas of potential suitable habitat where seasonal pools have been mapped. This would include monitoring the initial grading activates until the soil has been impacted up to 3 feet in depth. If you have any questions about the results of the surveys or the contents of this letter, please contact Lonnie Rodriguez at (949) 553-0666 or [email protected].

Sincerely,
LSA Associates, Inc.

Lonnie Rodriguez
Associate/Biologist
Attachments: Figure 1: Regional and Project Location
Figure 2: Spadefoot Focused Survey
Figure 3: Representative Site Photos
SOURCE: USGS 7.5' Quad - Black Star Canyon (1988), Prado Dam (1981); CA I:\OCC1901\GIS\MXD\ProjLoc.mxd (11/18/2021)
FIGURE 1
Mountain Park Memorial Park
Regional and Project Location
0 1000 2000
FEET
LEGEND
Survey Area
San Bernardino
County
Los Angeles
County
Riverside
County
Orange
County
Ã142
Ã73
Ã261
Ã133
Ã22
Ã55 Ã241
Ã71
Ã60
Ã57
Ã91
Project
Location
§¨¦210
§¨¦405 §¨¦5
§¨¦15
§¨¦10
Project Vicinity
Service Layer Credits:
!(
ÄÆ241
ÄÆ91
SP1
SP2
SP3
SP4
SP5
SP6
SP7
SP8
SP9
SP10
SP11
SP12
SP13
SP14
SP15
SP16
SP17
SP18
SP19
SOURCE: Nearmap (10/2020); Fuscoe (2019); Jones & Stokes (2002 & 2004) I:\OCC1901\GIS\MXD\Spadefoot.mxd (3/17/2022)
FIGURE 2
Mountain Park Memorial Park
Spadefoot Focused Survey
LEGEND
Project Boundary
Supplemental Survey Area
!( Western Spadefoot Larvae Observed (January 2022)
Seasonal Pools (6.47 acres)
Delineated Jurisdictional Drainages
Vegetation Type
Buckwheat
Buckwheat/Encelia Scrub
Cactus Scrub
Coast Live Oak Woodland
Deerweed Population
Disturbed
Encella
Gypsum Creek
Mule Fat
Oak/Mexican Elderberry
Remnant Coastal Sage Scrub
Riparian
Ruderal
Tarplant Population
Toyon/Sumac Savannah 0 275 550
FEET
I:OCC1901\G\ 3 23 22 Photos_Spadefoot.cdr ( / /20 )
FIGURE 3
Representative ite hotos SP
Mountain Memorial Park
Seasonal Pool 13. View looking north at an erosion feature with standing water (12/27/2021).

Seasonal Pool 9. View looking west at standing water located at the upper area of the project (12/27/2021).

Seasonal Pool 17. View looking northwest at water captured in a basin at the lower part of the project area (12/27/2021).

Image of Baja California treefrog observed in Seasonal Pool 17 (02/14/2022).

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 2 0 2 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24)

APPENDIX E

PROTOCOL COASTAL CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER SURVEYS

CARLSBAD
FRESNO
IRVINE

LOS ANGELES

PALM SPRINGS

POINT RICHMOND

RIVERSIDE

ROSEVILLE

SAN LUIS OBISPO
20 Executive Park, Suite 200, Irvine, California 92614 949.553.0666 www.lsa.net January 25, 2022
Stacey Love
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Carlsbad Field Office
2177 Salk Avenue, Suite 250
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Esther Burkett
Nongame Wildlife Program
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
1812 Ninth Street
Sacramento, CA 95811
Subject: Coastal California Gnatcatcher Protocol Survey Results: Proposed Mountain Park Memorial Park in Anaheim, Orange County, California; LSA Project No. OCC1901 Dear Ms. Love and Ms. Burkett:

This letter report documents the results of coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) protocol surveys conducted by LSA for the Proposed Mountain Park Memorial Park in Anaheim, California. Coastal California gnatcatchers were observed.

The proposed project is generally located southeast of Gypsum Canyon Road and the 91 Freeway (SR-91), on a 283-acre project site that the Anaheim General Plan designates for Low Medium Density Residential land use and is within the Mountain Park Specific Plan (SP90-4) zoning. The project will include utility infrastructure, bridge crossings and site circulation, administration buildings, committal chapel, and maintenance areas. There are approximately 60 acres of scrub that were surveyed within the project area.

SURVEY AREA
The study area is located on the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Black Star Canyon, California 7.5-minute series topographical quadrangle map (Figure 1). Land uses adjacent to the project include transportation and open space. Elevations range from approximately 400 feet (ft) to 850 ft above mean sea level. Primary natural communities/land cover types include Encelia Scrub, California Buckwheat Scrub, Annual Grassland, Ruderal, Disturbed, and Coastal Sage Scrub.

METHODS
During each survey, LSA biologists walked slowly throughout the portions of the survey areas that support potential suitable habitat for coastal California gnatcatchers. A taped recording of a coastal California gnatcatcher was played occasionally. Six gnatcatcher surveys were conducted between April 15 and May 20, 2021 (see the following table for details). LSA biologists conformed to protocol techniques for all surveys.

Date Time Weather Conditions Surveyors
April 15, 2021 0630-1200 Clear, 44.7°F, 1.8 mph EK, LR
April 22, 2021 0620-1200 Overcast, 56.0°F, 2.4 mph EK, LR April 29, 2021 0625-1200 Clear, 56.1°F, 4.6 mph EK, LR
May 6, 2021 0610-1200 Overcast, 58.8°F, 1.8 mph EK, LR
May 13, 2021 0600-1200 Overcast, 59.2°F, 2.7 mph EK
1/25/22 «P:\OCC1901\Biology\CAGN\Mt Memorial Park Gnatcatcher Survey Report.docx» 2 Date Time Weather Conditions Surveyors
May 20, 2021 0600-1200 Overcast, 59.8°F, 3.4 mph EK, LR Surveyors: EK = Eric Krieg; LR = Lonnie Rodriguez
LSA sent a presurvey notification letter dated March 30, 2021, to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Permitted gnatcatcher biologists Eric Krieg and Lonnie Rodriguez conducted a protocol survey every week for six surveys.

The surveys were conducted pursuant to LSA’s Federal Fish and Wildlife 10(a)(1)A) Permit TE777965 and an attachment to the CDFW Scientific Collecting Permit SC-000777 providing Conditions for Research on Listed Birds (February 14, 2018–February 14, 2021).

RESULTS
Observed 3 pairs, 2 males, and 2-3 fledgling coastal California gnatcatchers during the surveys (Figure 2).

Pair 1 – Was observed on a south facing slope at the south side of the survey area. The male was observed on April 15, 2021. Pair 1 was observed on April 22, 29, May 6, and 13, 2021. Most of the scrub in this area is composed of brittle bush (Encelia farinosa).

Pair 2 – Was observed on the south side on a flat area, north of a dirt road. Pair 2 was observed on April 22, May 6, and 20, 2021. On May 6 and 20, 2021 the pair was observed tending to a nest. Most of the scrub in this area is composed of brittle bush, but there was some mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia).

Pair 3 – Was observed northeast side of the survey area in a bowl. The male was detected on April 22, 2021. Pair 3 was observed on April 29, May 6, 13, and 20, 2021. On May 6, 13, and 20, 2021 2-3 fledglings were observed with the Pair 3. The scrub in this area is composed of California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum) and coastal deerweed (Acmispon glaber).

Male 1 – Was observed on April 22 and 29, 2021 adjacent to the additional survey area on the southeast side of the survey area. The male was in the scrub just outside of the survey area. The scrub was a good mix of scrub species.

Male 2 – Was observed on May 6, 2021 calling and trying to attract a female between the territories of Pairs 1 and 2. The male actually had the female from Pair 1 fly in his direction, but the male of Pair 1 defended his territory. Most of the scrub in this area is composed of brittle bush.

Male 1 and 2 could have been the same bird as they were observed in separate weeks at the two locations.

The brown-headed cowbird (Molothrus ater), a brood parasite of gnatcatchers and other passerines, was not observed. A complete list of animals detected during the surveys is provided in Attachment B, and field survey forms for California native species are provided in Attachment C.

Please contact me at (949) 553-0666 if you have any questions about these survey results. 1/25/22 «P:\OCC1901\Biology\CAGN\Mt Memorial Park Gnatcatcher Survey Report.docx» 3 Sincerely,
LSA Associates, Inc.

Eric Krieg
Associate/Biologist
Attachments: A: Figure 1 – Survey Area
Figure 2 – Gnatcatcher Territories
B: Animal Species Detected
C: California Native Species Field Survey Forms (4)

I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION IN THIS SURVEY REPORT AND ATTACHED EXHIBITS FULLY AND ACCURATELY REPRESENTS MY WORK:

SURVEYOR: PERMIT NUMBER: DATE:

TE-777965-11 JUNE 17, 2021

ERIC KRIEG
TE-777965-11 JUNE 17, 2021
Lonnie Rodriguez

C OASTAL C ALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER P ROTOCOL S URVEY RESULTS J ANUARY 2022

MOUNTAIN MEMORIAL P ARK P ROJECT

ANAHEIM , ORANGE COUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC1901\Biology\CAGN\Mt Memorial Park Gnatcatcher Survey Report.docx (01/25/22)

ATTACHMENT A

FIGURES
Figure 1 – Survey Area
Figure 2 – Gnatcatcher Territories
SOURCE: USGS 7.5' Quad - Black Star Canyon (1988), Prado Dam (1981); CA I:\OCC1901\GIS\MXD\ProjLoc.mxd (11/18/2021)
FIGURE 1
Mountain Park Memorial Park
Regional and Project Location
0 1000 2000
FEET
LEGEND
Project Location
San Bernardino
County
Los Angeles
County
Riverside
County
Orange
County
Ã142
Ã73
Ã261
Ã133
Ã22
Ã55 Ã241
Ã71
Ã60
Ã57
Ã91
Project
Location
§¨¦210
§¨¦405 §¨¦5
§¨¦15
§¨¦10
Project Vicinity
Service Layer Credits:

Gypsum
Canyon
Rd
Santa Ana Canyon Rd
Pair 2
Male 2
Pair 1 Male 1
Pair 3
ÄÆ241
ÄÆ91
SOURCE: Nearmap (10/2020); Google (2020); Fuscoe (2019); Jones & Stokes (2002 & 2004) I:\OCC1901\GIS\MXD\CAGN_Territories.mxd (1/24/2022)
FIGURE 2
Mountain Park Memorial Park
California Gnatcatcher (CAGN) Territories
LEGEND
Project Location (308 acres)
CAGN Territories
0 275 550
FEET

C OASTAL C ALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER P ROTOCOL S URVEY RESULTS J ANUARY 2022

MOUNTAIN MEMORIAL P ARK P ROJECT

ANAHEIM , ORANGE COUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC1901\Biology\CAGN\Mt Memorial Park Gnatcatcher Survey Report.docx (01/25/22)

ATTACHMENT B

ANIMAL SPECIES DETECTED

C OASTAL C ALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER P ROTOCOL S URVEY RESULTS J ANUARY 2022

MOUNTAIN MEMORIAL P ARK P ROJECT

ANAHEIM , ORANGE COUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC1901\Biology\CAGN\Mt Memorial Park Gnatcatcher Survey Report.docx «01/25/22» B-1

ANIMAL SPECIES DETECTED
This is a list of the conspicuous aerial insects (i.e., damselflies, dragonflies, and butterflies), bony fishes, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals noted in the study area by LSA biologists. Presence may be noted if a species is seen or heard, or identified by the presence of tracks, scat, or other signs. Please note that most species are listed in phylogenetic order of relation. * Species not native to the study area

LEPIDOPTERA BUTTERFLIES
Pieridae Whites and Sulphurs
* Pieris rapae Cabbage white
Lycaenidae Gossamer-Wing Butterflies
Plebejus acmon Acmon blue

REPTILIA REPTILES
Phrynosomatidae Phrynosomatid Lizards
Sceloporus occidentalis Western fence lizard
Uta stansburiana Common Side-Blotched lizard
Colubridae Colubrid Snakes
Lampropeltis californiae California kingsnake
Viperidae Vipers
Crotalus oreganus Western rattlesnake

AVES BIRDS
Odontophoridae New World Quail
Callipepla californica California quail
Columbidae Pigeons and Doves
Zenaida macroura Mourning dove
Cuculidae Cuckoos, Roadrunners, and Anis
Geococcyx californianus Greater roadrunner
Caprimulgidae Nightjars
Chordeiles acutipennis Lesser nighthawk
Apodidae Swifts
Aeronautes saxatilis White-throated swift
Trochilidae Hummingbirds
Archilochus alexandri Black-chinned hummingbird
Calypte anna Anna’s hummingbird
Calypte costae Costa’s hummingbird

C OASTAL C ALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER P ROTOCOL S URVEY RESULTS J ANUARY 2022

MOUNTAIN MEMORIAL P ARK P ROJECT

ANAHEIM , ORANGE COUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC1901\Biology\CAGN\Mt Memorial Park Gnatcatcher Survey Report.docx «01/25/22» B-2 Selasphorus rufus/sasin Rufous/Allen’s hummingbird
Charadriidae Plovers and Lapwings
Charadrius vociferus Killdeer
Phalacrocoracidae Cormorants
Phalacrocorax auritus Double-crested cormorant
Cathartidae New World Vultures
Cathartes aura Turkey vulture
Accipitridae Hawks, Kites, Eagles, and Allies
Circus hudsonius Northern harrier
Accipiter cooperii Cooper’s hawk
Buteo lineatus Red-shouldered hawk
Buteo jamaicensis Red-tailed hawk
Picidae Woodpeckers and Allies
Melanerpes formicivorus Acorn woodpecker
Dryobates nuttallii Nuttall’s woodpecker
Falconidae Caracaras and Falcons
Falco sparverius American kestrel
Psittacidae African and New World Parrots
* Amazona viridigenalis Red-crowned parrot
Tyrannidae Tyrant Flycatchers
Empidonax traillii Willow flycatcher
Sayornis nigricans Black phoebe
Sayornis saya Say’s phoebe
Myiarchus cinerascens Ash-throated flycatcher
Tyrannus vociferans Cassin’s kingbird
Tyrannus verticalis Western kingbird
Vireonidae Vireos
Vireo gilvus Warbling vireo
Corvidae Crows and Jays
Aphelocoma californica California scrub-jay
Corvus brachyrhynchos American crow
Corvus corax Common raven
Alaudidae Larks
Eremophila alpestris Horned lark
Hirundinidae Swallows
Hirundo rustica Barn swallow
Aegithalidae Long-Tailed Tits and Bushtits
Psaltriparus minimus Bushtit

C OASTAL C ALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER P ROTOCOL S URVEY RESULTS J ANUARY 2022

MOUNTAIN MEMORIAL P ARK P ROJECT

ANAHEIM , ORANGE COUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC1901\Biology\CAGN\Mt Memorial Park Gnatcatcher Survey Report.docx «01/25/22» B-3 Troglodytidae Wrens
Thryomanes bewickii Bewick’s wren
Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus Cactus Wren
Polioptilidae Gnatcatchers and Gnatwrens
Polioptila caerulea Blue-gray gnatcatcher
Polioptila californica californica Coastal California gnatcatcher Sylviidae Sylviid Warblers
Chamaea fasciata Wrentit
Turdidae Thrushes
Sialia mexicana Western bluebird
Catharus guttatus Hermit thrush
Mimidae Mockingbirds and Thrashers
Toxostoma redivivum California thrasher
Mimus polyglottos Northern mockingbird
Ptilogonatidae Silky-flycatchers
Phainopepla nitens Phainopepla
Fringillidae Fringilline and Cardueline Finches and Allies Haemorhous mexicanus House finch
Spinus psaltria Lesser goldfinch
Spinus lawrencei Lawrence’s goldfinch
Passerellidae New World Sparrows
Ammodramus savannarum Grasshopper sparrow
Chondestes grammacus Lark sparrow
Spizella passerina Chipping sparrow
Zonotrichia leucophrys White-crowned sparrow
Pooecetes gramineus Vesper sparrow
Passerculus sandwichensis Savannah sparrow
Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi Belding’s Savannah sparrow Melospiza melodia Song sparrow
Melospiza lincolnii Lincoln’s sparrow
Melozone crissalis California towhee
Pipilo maculatus Spotted towhee
Icteridae Blackbirds
Sturnella neglecta Western meadowlark
Icterus cucullatus Hooded oriole
Icterus bullockii Bullock’s oriole
Agelaius phoeniceus Red-winged blackbird
Parulidae Wood Warblers
Leiothlypis celata Orange-crowned warbler
Geothlypis trichas Common yellowthroat
Setophaga petechia Yellow warbler

C OASTAL C ALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER P ROTOCOL S URVEY RESULTS J ANUARY 2022

MOUNTAIN MEMORIAL P ARK P ROJECT

ANAHEIM , ORANGE COUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC1901\Biology\CAGN\Mt Memorial Park Gnatcatcher Survey Report.docx «01/25/22» B-4 Cardellina pusilla Wilson’s warbler
Cardinalidae Cardinals and Allies
Piranga ludoviciana Western tanager
Pheucticus melanocephalus Black-headed grosbeak
Passerina caerulea Blue grosbeak
Passerina amoena Lazuli bunting

MAMMALIA MAMMALS
Leporidae Hares and Rabbits
Sylvilagus audubonii Audubon’s cottontail
Canidae Foxes, Wolves, and Allies
Canis latrans Coyote
Cervidae Deer, Elk, and Allies
Odocoileus hemionus Mule deer
Cricetidae Hamsters, Voles, Lemmings, and New World Rats and Mice
Peromyscus maniculatus North American deermouse
Taxonomy and nomenclature are based primarily on the following:
• Butterflies: North American Butterfly Association (2001, NABA Checklist and English Names of North American Butterflies, Second Edition, North American Butterfly Association, Morristown, New Jersey, 2003 update in American Butterflies 11: 24-27; see http://www.naba.org/pubs/ checklst.html).
• Amphibians and Reptiles: Crother, B.I. ed. (2017, Scientific and Standard English Names of Amphibians and Reptiles of North America North of Mexico, with Comments Regarding Confidence in our Understanding. Eighth Edition. Herpetological Circular 43.) for species taxonomy and nomenclature;AmphibiaWeb (https://amphibiaweb.org/) and The Reptile Database (www.reptile-database.org/) for higher order taxonomy; see also California Herps (http://www.californiaherps.com/index.html).
• Birds: American Ornithological Society (1998, The A.O.U. Checklist of North American Birds, Seventh Edition, American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, D.C.; and supplements; see http://checklist.aou.org/taxa).
• Mammals: Bradley, R. D. et al. (2014, Revised Checklist of North American Mammals North of Mexico, 2014. Museum of Texas Tech University Occasional Papers No. 327).

C OASTAL C ALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER P ROTOCOL S URVEY RESULTS J ANUARY 2022

MOUNTAIN MEMORIAL P ARK P ROJECT

ANAHEIM , ORANGE COUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC1901\Biology\CAGN\Mt Memorial Park Gnatcatcher Survey Report.docx «01/25/22»

ATTACHMENT C

CALIFORNIA NATIVE SPECIES FIELD SURVEY FORMS
CDFW/BDB/1747 Rev. 7/3/2018
Date of Field Work (mm/dd/yyyy):

California Native Species Field Survey Form
Scientific Name:

Common Name:

Species Found?
Plant Information
Habitat Description (plants & animals) plant communities, dominants, associates, substrates/soils, aspects/slope:

Animal Behavior (Describe observed behavior, such as territoriality, foraging, singing, calling, copulating, perching, roosting, etc., especially for avifauna):

Please fill out separate form for other rare taxa seen at this site.

Site Information
Determination: Photographs: (check one or more, and fill in blanks) (check one or more) Keyed (cite reference): Plant / animal Compared with specimen housed at:

Compared with photo / drawing in: Habitat
Slide Print Digital
Diagnostic feature By another person (name):

Other: May we obtain duplicates at our expense? yes no
Location Description (please attach map AND/OR fill out your choice of coordinates, below) Animal Information
Reporter:

Address:

E-mail Address:

Phone:

For Office Use Only
Source Code:

Elm Code:

EO Index:

Quad Code:

Occ No.:

Map Index:

Mail to:

California Natural Diversity Database
California Dept. of Fish & Wildlife
P.O. Box 944209
Sacramento, CA 94244-2090
[email protected]
Total No. Individuals: Subsequent Visit?
Is this an existing NDDB occurrence?
Collection? If yes:

Phenology:

County:

Quad Name:

TR c S, e 1/4 of 1/4, Meridian: H Source of Coordinates (GPS, topo. map & type):

GPS Make & Model:

Horizontal Accuracy: meters/feet
MS
T
DATUM:

Coordinate System:

Coordinates:

Immediate AND surrounding land use:

Visible disturbances:

Threats:

Comments:

Overall site/occurrence quality/viability (site + population): Excellent Good Fair Poor UTM Zone 10 UTM Zone 11 OR Geographic (Latitude & Longitude) NAD27 NAD83 WGS84
Rc S, e 1/4 of 1/4, Meridian: H
Elevation:

Landowner / Mgr:

Yes No
Yes No
No Unk.

If not found, why?
Yes, Occ. #
Number
% vegetative % flowering % fruiting
# adults
wintering breeding nesting rookery burrow site lek other # juveniles # larvae # egg masses # unknown
Museum / Herbarium
MS
Clear Form Print Form
04/13/2021
Polioptila californica californica
Coastal California gnatcatcher
14 Lonnie Rodriguez
20 Executive Park, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92614
[email protected]
(949) 337-6113
8 6
The area the birds are occupying is dominated by brittlebush, with subspecies that include California buckwheat, coastal deerweed, and mulefat.

Orange County Orange County Cemetery District
Approx. 480 ft
GPS
Esri Collector Application

12.5 (33.858646, -117.700108), (33.859457, -117.706127), (33.866642, -117.700527) Two pairs were observed tending to active nest with fledglings. The third pair was observed in what apperead to breeding breeding behavior, no young or nest was seen during the survey of this pair.

Open space and SR-91
Development
Area has been previously used as a gravel mine
Direct observation and determination based on previous experiences.

CDFW/BDB/1747 Rev. 7/3/2018
Date of Field Work (mm/dd/yyyy):

California Native Species Field Survey Form
Scientific Name:

Common Name:

Species Found?
Plant Information
Habitat Description (plants & animals) plant communities, dominants, associates, substrates/soils, aspects/slope:

Animal Behavior (Describe observed behavior, such as territoriality, foraging, singing, calling, copulating, perching, roosting, etc., especially for avifauna):

Please fill out separate form for other rare taxa seen at this site.

Site Information
Determination: Photographs: (check one or more, and fill in blanks) (check one or more) Keyed (cite reference): Plant / animal Compared with specimen housed at:

Compared with photo / drawing in: Habitat
Slide Print Digital
Diagnostic feature By another person (name):

Other: May we obtain duplicates at our expense? yes no
Location Description (please attach map AND/OR fill out your choice of coordinates, below) Animal Information
Reporter:

Address:

E-mail Address:

Phone:

For Office Use Only
Source Code:

Elm Code:

EO Index:

Quad Code:

Occ No.:

Map Index:

Mail to:

California Natural Diversity Database
California Dept. of Fish & Wildlife
P.O. Box 944209
Sacramento, CA 94244-2090
[email protected]
Total No. Individuals: Subsequent Visit?
Is this an existing NDDB occurrence?
Collection? If yes:

Phenology:

County:

Quad Name:

TR c S, e 1/4 of 1/4, Meridian: H Source of Coordinates (GPS, topo. map & type):

GPS Make & Model:

Horizontal Accuracy: meters/feet
MS
T
DATUM:

Coordinate System:

Coordinates:

Immediate AND surrounding land use:

Visible disturbances:

Threats:

Comments:

Overall site/occurrence quality/viability (site + population): Excellent Good Fair Poor UTM Zone 10 UTM Zone 11 OR Geographic (Latitude & Longitude) NAD27 NAD83 WGS84
Rc S, e 1/4 of 1/4, Meridian: H
Elevation:

Landowner / Mgr:

Yes No
Yes No
No Unk.

If not found, why?
Yes, Occ. #
Number
% vegetative % flowering % fruiting
# adults
wintering breeding nesting rookery burrow site lek other # juveniles # larvae # egg masses # unknown
Museum / Herbarium
MS
Clear Form Print Form
04/22/2021
Calypte costae
Costa's hummingbird
1 Lonnie Rodriguez
20 Executive Park, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92614
[email protected]
(949) 337-6113
1 Costa's hummingbird was seen perched on a tree tabacco adjacent to an access road.

Orange County Orange County Cemetery District
Approx. 480 ft
GPS
Esri Collector Application

12.5 33.859231, -117.706052
Was seen perched and feeding from the flowers on a tree tabacco.

Open space and SR-91
Development
Area has been previously used as a gravel mine
Direct observation and determination based on previous experiences.

CDFW/BDB/1747 Rev. 7/3/2018
Date of Field Work (mm/dd/yyyy):

California Native Species Field Survey Form
Scientific Name:

Common Name:

Species Found?
Plant Information
Habitat Description (plants & animals) plant communities, dominants, associates, substrates/soils, aspects/slope:

Animal Behavior (Describe observed behavior, such as territoriality, foraging, singing, calling, copulating, perching, roosting, etc., especially for avifauna):

Please fill out separate form for other rare taxa seen at this site.

Site Information
Determination: Photographs: (check one or more, and fill in blanks) (check one or more) Keyed (cite reference): Plant / animal Compared with specimen housed at:

Compared with photo / drawing in: Habitat
Slide Print Digital
Diagnostic feature By another person (name):

Other: May we obtain duplicates at our expense? yes no
Location Description (please attach map AND/OR fill out your choice of coordinates, below) Animal Information
Reporter:

Address:

E-mail Address:

Phone:

For Office Use Only
Source Code:

Elm Code:

EO Index:

Quad Code:

Occ No.:

Map Index:

Mail to:

California Natural Diversity Database
California Dept. of Fish & Wildlife
P.O. Box 944209
Sacramento, CA 94244-2090
[email protected]
Total No. Individuals: Subsequent Visit?
Is this an existing NDDB occurrence?
Collection? If yes:

Phenology:

County:

Quad Name:

TR c S, e 1/4 of 1/4, Meridian: H Source of Coordinates (GPS, topo. map & type):

GPS Make & Model:

Horizontal Accuracy: meters/feet
MS
T
DATUM:

Coordinate System:

Coordinates:

Immediate AND surrounding land use:

Visible disturbances:

Threats:

Comments:

Overall site/occurrence quality/viability (site + population): Excellent Good Fair Poor UTM Zone 10 UTM Zone 11 OR Geographic (Latitude & Longitude) NAD27 NAD83 WGS84
Rc S, e 1/4 of 1/4, Meridian: H
Elevation:

Landowner / Mgr:

Yes No
Yes No
No Unk.

If not found, why?
Yes, Occ. #
Number
% vegetative % flowering % fruiting
# adults
wintering breeding nesting rookery burrow site lek other # juveniles # larvae # egg masses # unknown
Museum / Herbarium
MS
Clear Form Print Form
04/13/2021
Ammodramus savannarum
grasshopper sparrow
12 Lonnie Rodriguez
20 Executive Park, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92614
[email protected]
(949) 337-6113
16 1
Seen and heard throught the project area. One juvinile was observed.

Orange County Orange County Cemetery District
Approx. 850 ft
GPS
Esri Collector Application

12.5 33.866129, -117.700711
The area is dominated by brittlebush, with subspecies that include California buckwheat, coastal deerweed, mule fat, and nonnative annual grassland. Species is breeding in the project area.

Open space and SR-91
Development
Area has been previously used as a gravel mine
Direct observation and determination based on previous experiences.

CDFW/BDB/1747 Rev. 7/3/2018
Date of Field Work (mm/dd/yyyy):

California Native Species Field Survey Form
Scientific Name:

Common Name:

Species Found?
Plant Information
Habitat Description (plants & animals) plant communities, dominants, associates, substrates/soils, aspects/slope:

Animal Behavior (Describe observed behavior, such as territoriality, foraging, singing, calling, copulating, perching, roosting, etc., especially for avifauna):

Please fill out separate form for other rare taxa seen at this site.

Site Information
Determination: Photographs: (check one or more, and fill in blanks) (check one or more) Keyed (cite reference): Plant / animal Compared with specimen housed at:

Compared with photo / drawing in: Habitat
Slide Print Digital
Diagnostic feature By another person (name):

Other: May we obtain duplicates at our expense? yes no
Location Description (please attach map AND/OR fill out your choice of coordinates, below) Animal Information
Reporter:

Address:

E-mail Address:

Phone:

For Office Use Only
Source Code:

Elm Code:

EO Index:

Quad Code:

Occ No.:

Map Index:

Mail to:

California Natural Diversity Database
California Dept. of Fish & Wildlife
P.O. Box 944209
Sacramento, CA 94244-2090
[email protected]
Total No. Individuals: Subsequent Visit?
Is this an existing NDDB occurrence?
Collection? If yes:

Phenology:

County:

Quad Name:

TR c S, e 1/4 of 1/4, Meridian: H Source of Coordinates (GPS, topo. map & type):

GPS Make & Model:

Horizontal Accuracy: meters/feet
MS
T
DATUM:

Coordinate System:

Coordinates:

Immediate AND surrounding land use:

Visible disturbances:

Threats:

Comments:

Overall site/occurrence quality/viability (site + population): Excellent Good Fair Poor UTM Zone 10 UTM Zone 11 OR Geographic (Latitude & Longitude) NAD27 NAD83 WGS84
Rc S, e 1/4 of 1/4, Meridian: H
Elevation:

Landowner / Mgr:

Yes No
Yes No
No Unk.

If not found, why?
Yes, Occ. #
Number
% vegetative % flowering % fruiting
# adults
wintering breeding nesting rookery burrow site lek other # juveniles # larvae # egg masses # unknown
Museum / Herbarium
MS
Clear Form Print Form
05/06/2021
Setophaga petechia
Yellow warbler
2 Lonnie Rodriguez
20 Executive Park, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92614
[email protected]
(949) 337-6113
2 The area is dominated by coast live oak, California buckwheat, coastal deerweed, and mule fat.

Orange County Orange County Cemetery District
Approx. 480 ft
GPS
Esri Collector Application

12.5 33.859109, -117.705808
Two individuals were seen flying through an unnamed drainage feature located on the west side of the project area that is tributary to Gypsum creek.

Open space and SR-91
Development
Area has been previously used as a gravel mine
Direct observation and determination based on previous experiences.

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 2 0 2 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24)

APPENDIX F

FOCUSED BAT SURVEYS

BERKELEY
CLOVIS
IRVINE

LOS ANGELES

PALM SPRINGS

POINT RICHMOND

RIVERSIDE

ROSEVILLE

SAN LUIS OBISPO
20 Executive Park, Suite 200, Irvine, California 92614 949.553.0666 www.lsa.net February 14, 2022
Tim Deutsch
General Manager
Orange County Cemetery District
25751 Trabuco Road
Lake Forest, CA 92630
Subject: Results of Focused Bat Surveys: Proposed Mountain Park Memorial Park in Anaheim, Orange County, California; LSA Project No. OCC1901
Dear Mr. Deutsch:

This letter documents the results of focused bat surveys conducted within the proposed Mountain Park Memorial Park (project) in Anaheim, Orange County, California. The proposed project is located southeast of Gypsum Canyon Road and the State Route 91 (SR-91) on an approximately 300-acre site, and will involve the construction of utility infrastructure, bridge crossings and site circulation, administration buildings, a committal chapel, and maintenance areas. LSA conducted focused bat surveys in July 2021 in order to identify potential roosting locations, gather data on bat species composition, and locate foraging and commuting areas used by bats. These surveys were conducted during the summer to enable the detection of roosts used by bat maternity colonies. In addition to describing the results of the focused bat surveys, this document also identifies any potential projectrelated impacts to bats, including special-status bat species and bat maternity colonies, and provides recommendations for mitigation and minimization strategies to reduce any potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level.

BAT NATURAL HISTORY AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
Bats are the primary predators of nocturnal flying insects and are largely adapted to a variety of habitats. Bat populations are diverse but generally declining throughout California due to various factors, including loss of natural roosting and foraging habitats, exposure to pesticides and pathogens, and extermination (Johnston et al. 2004; Miner and Stokes 2005). In the south coast ecoregion, the increasing scarcity of natural roost sites and loss of foraging areas due to urban development and changes in land use, combined with disturbance or extermination of bat colonies, are considered the primary threats to bat populations (Miner and Stokes 2005). As natural roost sites (e.g., trees, rock crevices, and caves) become scarcer due to urban development and changes in land use, the importance and ecological value of anthropogenic structures (e.g., buildings, culverts, and bridges) as roosts has increased to the point that many of these “artificial” roost sites are becoming essential to the survival of local bat populations (Johnston et al. 2004; Smith and Stevenson 2013). However, these humanmade roosting sites are also highly vulnerable because bats may be driven out or killed once they are discovered occupying these structures. Therefore, as urban and suburban development occurs across the landscape, many of these areas may act as habitat “sinks”1 where bats may at first appear to be relatively common and may even be attracted to human-made structures, but then decrease in abundance over time as urbanization of that area continues (Miner and Stokes 2005; 1 A habitat sink refers to an area where the productivity of a given species is insufficient to offset mortality.

DRAFT
3/29/23 «P:\OCC1901\Biology\Bats\BatSurveys_GypsumMemorial.docx» 2 Remington 2000). Because bats have low reproductive turnover (most species have only one young per year and only a few species have twins or multiple births) and high juvenile mortality, it can take many years for a colony of bats to recover from any impacts that result in mortality or even in a decrease in reproductive ability. Consequently, the protection of bat roosting habitat, particularly maternity or nursery sites, is important to prevent adverse effects to, and further loss of, remaining bat populations.

Day roosts protect bats from predators and the elements during the day while they are resting and/or rearing their young. Examples of day roosting sites include, but are not limited to, human-made structures (e.g., bridges, culverts, and buildings), trees, and cliff or rock crevices. In human-made structures, day roosts are typically in crevices or cavities. Some types of day roosts where bats are particularly vulnerable to disturbance include maternity colonies, where female bats congregate in the spring and summer months to give birth and raise young, and hibernacula, where bats enter a period of hibernation during the winter months. Most of the bat species in Southern California are present year-round; however, some bats that are observed in a day roost in the summer may not be present at that same roost in the winter months, and day roosts where no bats are observed during the summer may be occupied during the winter months. Night roosts, on the other hand, are structures or structural features (natural or human-made) in which bats roost during the evening between foraging bouts. These areas include crevices, cavities, corners, and recessed open spaces (e.g., concrete girders that can trap warm air, or the ceilings and walls of concrete box culverts) that are sheltered from the wind. Day roosts may also double as night roosts, particularly if they are situated in or near a foraging area. Night roosts are typically situated in or near a foraging area and play an important role in the energetics and social interaction of bats. When a night roost is eliminated, the energetics for bats to successfully use the surrounding foraging area may be negatively affected, which can lead to lower survival of individuals as well as lower reproductive success in the case of a maternity colony.

In Southern California, bat species that use crevices and cavities in rock outcrops or humanmade structures for day and/or night roosting include the Mexican free-tailed bat (Tadarida brasiliensis ssp. mexicana), big brown bat (Eptesicus fuscus), pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus), Yuma myotis (Myotis yumanensis), western small-footed myotis (Myotis ciliolabrum), California myotis (Myotis californicus), western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis californicus), pocketed free-tailed bat (Nyctinomops femorosaccus), big free-tailed bat (Nyctinomops macrotis), and canyon bat (Parastrellus hesperus).

Bats may also roost in trees and tree snags, and although bat roosts in structures can be relatively easy to identify, tree roosts are more cryptic and require close examination. Some species of bats that use trees for roosting, such as western yellow bat (Lasiurus xanthinus) 1 , western red bat (Lasiurus
blossevillii)
2 , eastern red bat (Lasiurus borealis), and hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus) 3 , day roost alone or
in small family groups on twigs, branches, or the petioles in the foliage of trees or shrubs. These species typically roost in areas that provide cover above and around the sides of the bat as well as a 1 Also referred to as Dasypterus xanthinus (Baird et al. 2015), though this proposed taxonomic change has not yet been fully accepted (Simmons and Cirranello 2022; www.batnames.org) 2 Also referred to as Lasiurus frantzii (Baird et al. 2015), though this proposed taxonomic change has not yet been fully accepted (Simmons and Cirranello 2022; www.batnames.org) 3 Also referred to as Aeorestes cinereus (Baird et al. 2015), though this proposed taxonomic change has not yet been fully accepted (Simmons and Cirranello 2022; www.batnames.org) 3/29/23 «P:\OCC1901\Biology\Bats\BatSurveys_GypsumMemorial.docx» 3 lack of obstruction below (Barbour and Davis 1969). Other bat species (e.g., big brown bat, pallid bat, and several Myotis species including long-legged myotis [Myotis volans], western long-eared myotis [Myotis evotis], and fringed myotis [Myotis thysanodes]) that day roost in trees occupy crevices or cavities found in mature trees and snags and can form maternity colonies in these roost features.

Because bats have separate roosting and foraging habitat requirements, it is expected that some bats may use one area for foraging and another for roosting. While more extensive and direct impacts to bats occur through removal, destruction, or disturbance of roosts, indirect impacts (e.g., decline of the prey base due to loss or modification of foraging habitat) can also be substantial. Therefore, when assessing an area with regard to proposed alterations to habitat, a landscape-level approach is required to adequately determine potential impacts to bats.

Various regulations afford protections to bats, which are classified as indigenous nongame mammal species, regardless of their status under the California or Federal Endangered Species Acts. These regulations include Title 14, Section 251.1 of the California Code of Regulations, which prohibits harassment (defined in that section as an intentional act that disrupts an animal’s normal behavior patterns, including breeding, feeding, or sheltering) of nongame mammals (e.g., bats), and California Fish and Game Code Section 4150, which prohibits “take”1 or possession of all nongame mammals or parts thereof. Any activities resulting in bat mortality (e.g., the destruction of an occupied bat roost that results in the death of bats), disturbance that causes the loss of a maternity colony of bats (resulting in the death of young), or various modes of nonlethal pursuit or capture may be considered “take” as defined in Section 86 of the California Fish and Game Code. In addition, impacts to bat maternity colonies, which are considered native wildlife nursery sites, could be considered potentially significant under the California Environmental Quality Act.

METHODS
Bat behavior varies among species and is typically unpredictable; consequently, usage and activity patterns are extremely difficult to assess accurately with a single survey. In fact, based on available research (Moreno and Halffter 2000), 5 to 18 survey nights are necessary to determine at least 90 percent of bat species diversity at a given site. Skalak et al. (2012) found that with regard to acoustic sampling methods, at least 22 detector-nights in the summer and 16 detector-nights in the fall are needed to obtain 80 percent of species richness for a given acoustic sampling location, and recommended sampling at least six locations for approximately 30 nights to detect less common or rare bat species. In addition, multiple studies regarding bat survey methodologies (Pierson 1993; O’Farrell and Gannon 1999; Tyburec et al. 2016) indicate that a combination of different survey techniques (e.g., acoustic sampling, mist netting, and roost monitoring) over multiple seasons should be used where feasible to adequately assess bat species richness and diversity and thus perform due diligence at a given site. As a result, the overall strategy employed for these surveys comprised a combination of three types of methods: (1) a daytime habitat assessment, (2) emergence surveys with active acoustic monitoring at potential roost sites, and (3) passive acoustic monitoring stations.

Although LSA’s bat specialist possesses a California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) permit to capture bats, it was not possible to mist-net for bats during the summer 2021 surveys due to handling 1 Take is defined in Section 86 of the Fish and Game Code as “hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill.”
3/29/23 «P:\OCC1901\Biology\Bats\BatSurveys_GypsumMemorial.docx» 4 restrictions enacted by the CDFW to prevent potential human-to-bat transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Each of the methods employed during the July 2021 focused bat surveys are described in greater detail below.

Daytime Habitat Assessment
LSA bat specialist Jill Carpenter conducted a daytime bat roosting habitat assessment on July 2, 2021.

During the assessment, the entire biological study area (BSA) was accessed by vehicle or on foot to locate any suitable bat roosting habitat in trees or other features (e.g., rock outcrops) situated within the BSA. Trees and rock outcrops were examined with binoculars and a high-powered spotlight for suitable roosting habitat such as crevices or cavities (especially those that may support maternity colonies). Trees and large shrubs were also assessed for their potential to serve as roosting habitat for foliage-roosting bat species such as hoary bats, red bats, and western yellow bats; however, this type of roosting is difficult to confirm because foliage-roosting species tend to roost singly, beneath leaves, and may roost in a different location each night. Areas with the potential to attract bat activity (e.g., water sources, suspected foraging areas) and/or to funnel bat activity (e.g., drainages or canyons) were also identified during this assessment for use as passive acoustic monitoring station locations.

Nighttime Emergence Surveys with Active Acoustic Monitoring Nighttime emergence surveys were conducted to determine whether roosting bats occupy any of the potential roost sites identified within the proposed project boundary during the habitat assessment.

These maternity-season surveys were performed at two locations: the Gypsum Canyon Creek culvert beneath SR-91 and the mature oak trees in the parking lot at the western end of the BSA (Figure 1, attached) on the evenings of July 7 and 15, 2021, respectively. The bat specialist was assisted during these surveys by LSA biologists Jessica Lieuw, Heather Monteleone, and Samuel Bressler, all of whom had past experience assisting with nighttime bat surveys. Each nighttime survey was initiated 0.5 hour before sunset and continued until 1.5 hours after sunset. During the emergence period, each observer used night vision goggles (military grade PVS-7, Generation 3) and was positioned at a vantage point that optimized visibility of any bats that could exit or enter his or her side of the roost feature being surveyed. The number of bats exiting or entering during the emergence period was recorded using handheld tally counters and species were identified using a combination of visual and acoustic techniques.

Active acoustic monitoring was conducted with Anabat Walkabout (Titley Scientific) ultrasound detectors, and secure digital (SD) memory cards were used to record the call files. During active acoustic monitoring, a surveyor holds the acoustic detector and orients the microphone toward any bats to obtain higher quality echolocation call sequences. The Anabat Walkabout detectors have screens that allow the echolocation call sequences to be viewed in real time, which can aid in species identification of bats emerging from the roost feature(s) being surveyed or occurring in the vicinity by enabling visual techniques to be used in combination with actively collecting the acoustic data. 1 1 In cases of overlap in echolocation call characteristics between species, observations such as flight behavior and body shape in conjunction with the recorded echolocation can allow for definitive species identification that would otherwise not be possible with the echolocation call alone.
3/29/23 «P:\OCC1901\Biology\Bats\BatSurveys_GypsumMemorial.docx» 5 Because some echolocation calls that are audible to humans and can be identified to a species level are not always readily recorded on ultrasound detectors, biologists also listened for audible bat echolocation calls and social vocalizations. This technique is useful for detecting echolocation calls of western mastiff bats, big free-tailed bats, and pocketed free-tailed bats as well as social calls of pallid bats and hoary bats. These audible bat passes were not quantified; rather, if an audible bat species was heard, it was simply documented as present at that location.

Passive Acoustic Monitoring Stations
Four zero-crossing Anabat Express (Titley Scientific) and three full-spectrum Anabat Swift acoustic detectors were used to establish passive acoustic monitoring stations at multiple sites to allow a larger and more defensible quantity of acoustic data to be collected within the BSA without additional field labor. The acoustic detectors were programmed to automatically begin recording 0.5 hour before sunset and to stop recording 0.5 hour after sunrise, and were deployed at locations where they could record bats emerging from potential roosts, while commuting from roost sites to foraging sites, and/or foraging. Consequently, this survey effort primarily targeted potential roost sites, canyons or corridors that were expected to attract and/or funnel bat activity, and patches of native habitat that could serve as foraging areas in order to increase the detection probability of specialstatus species occurring within the BSA. Detectors were initially deployed during the habitat assessment on July 2, 2021, and three of the detectors were retrieved 5 days later on July 7, 2021 (prior to performing the first of the two nighttime emergence surveys) and moved to new monitoring locations for the next 8 nights to gather data at those areas. All detectors were retrieved on July 15, 2021 after the second nighttime emergence survey was completed. Consequently, a total of 98 detector-nights (seven detectors deployed for 14 nights each) of acoustic data were collected across nine passive monitoring stations.

Acoustic Data Analysis
The acoustic data collected during the active monitoring (i.e., emergence) surveys and from the passive acoustic monitoring stations were subsequently analyzed manually using AnalookW and SonoBat DataViewer 4.4.5 for zero-crossing and full-spectrum recordings, respectively. Species identifications of acoustic data, where possible, were made by comparing call recordings with a library of “voucher” calls from known hand-released bats. Some limitations are inherent in acoustic monitoring and in the analysis of acoustic data; these include (but are not limited to) human bias and past experience in data interpretation, as well as the fact that some species are not equally detectable or may not be recorded at all. Some bats (e.g., Mexican free-tailed bats) emit loud low-frequency echolocation calls that can be recorded from great distances and will be overrepresented in the data, while “whispering” bats (e.g., Townsend’s big-eared bats [Corynorhinus townsendii]) emit faint calls that may not be recorded at all. Some bat species such as pallid bat frequently do not echolocate and instead listen for prey-produced sounds; consequently, this species is often not detected even when present in an area. In addition, not all call sequences are identifiable, since different bat species may use similar types of echolocation calls, or the same species may use different types of echolocation calls based on the perceptual task and the immediate environment or habitat.1 For example, the 1 Because the flight behavior and foraging patterns can differ between bat species with similar echolocation calls, visual observation during surveys often aids in making more definitive species identifications. 3/29/23 «P:\OCC1901\Biology\Bats\BatSurveys_GypsumMemorial.docx» 6 echolocation calls of both Yuma myotis and California myotis terminate at around 45–50 kilohertz (kHz) and are very similar in structure. Although some calls of Yuma myotis or California myotis are diagnostic for that species and may be identifiable, in cases where they cannot be definitively classified as either species, the calls are simply labeled as 50 kHz Myotis. Another group of calls that can be difficult to identify to species includes echolocation calls terminating near 25 kHz that are not diagnostic for any particular species and could therefore be attributable to several mid-frequency larger species. While some of these echolocation calls contain diagnostic characteristics that allow them to be identifiable to species level, nondiagnostic sequences may have come from any one of several species. Based on the habitat present within the study area, calls in this group lacking diagnostic features for a particular species could belong to pallid bat, Mexican free-tailed bat, or big brown bat. During analysis, any call sequences in this frequency range lacking diagnostic characteristics that would allow for conclusive species identification were simply labeled as Q25.

Finally, it is important to note that the species composition and activity levels recorded during a single nighttime visit to a site may not necessarily reflect long-term patterns of use (e.g., seasonal and nightly use of an area).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Daytime Habitat Assessment
The BSA is bordered by SR-91 to the north and surrounded by undeveloped open space on all other sides. On the west side of the BSA, Gypsum Canyon Creek extends from south to north through a small portion of the proposed project boundary. A deep ravine comprises the BSA’s northeastern boundary, while the southeastern portion of the BSA consists of a large graded area. While much of the BSA is characterized by nonnative grassland, patches of native habitat are present throughout the site, and native upland scrub and riparian vegetation extends along the perimeter of the site. Some patches of riparian vegetation are situated within several constructed basins created to control drainage flow from the now-defunct mining operation. All of these habitats likely contain diverse insect fauna that provide prey for a variety of bat species. Representative photographs are provided on Figures 2 and 3.

Suitable roosting habitat is present in the Gypsum Canyon Creek culvert beneath SR-91, which is a known bat roost site located at the northwestern corner of the BSA. The southern (upstream) entrance of this concrete triple-box culvert is situated within the proposed project boundary. Use of this structure by big brown bats, Mexican free-tailed bats, and Yuma myotis was first documented in 2006 (LSA 2006). Although maternity roosting has been observed at this culvert (LSA 2006; LSA 2009), no evidence of maternity roosting was observed during a survey performed in 2013. During the daytime habitat assessment in July 2021, scattered Yuma myotis individuals were observed day roosting in expansion joints throughout the culvert. Although no aggregations suggestive of maternity roosting were observed during the assessment, the curvature of the expansion joints in this culvert precludes inspection of the entire crevice interior and a nighttime emergence survey was required to determine whether the culvert is currently used as a maternity roost.

Potential roost sites were also identified in mature trees and snags that occur primarily along the perimeter of the BSA. These trees and snags include the mature oaks (Quercus agrifolia) and sycamores (Platanus racemosa) within the Gypsum Canyon Creek drainage, at the upper reaches of 3/29/23 «P:\OCC1901\Biology\Bats\BatSurveys_GypsumMemorial.docx» 7 the deep ravine bordering the eastern side of the BSA, and in the parking area at the western end of the site. These trees contain large dead limbs, exfoliating bark, and hollows that could provide habitat for crevice- or cavity-roosting bats. Foliage-roosting bats may also use these trees, and may also use the willows (Salix sp.) and cottonwoods (Populus fremontii) within the constructed basins. Although no crevices or cavities suitable for bats were observed at the rock outcrops at the large graded area in the southeast portion of the BSA and in the deep ravine along the eastern boundary, rock outcrops scattered throughout the hillsides in the open space south of the BSA likely provide day-roosting habitat for a variety of bat species.

Nighttime Emergence Surveys
Gypsum Canyon Creek Culvert
A net total of 8 bats were counted emerging from the culvert during the nighttime emergence survey at the Gypsum Canyon Creek Culvert beneath SR-91 on July 7, 2021. During the emergence period, approximately one dozen bats, most of which were identified as big brown bats, entered the culvert at the upstream end and exited at the downstream end near the Santa Ana River. Extensive foraging behavior was also observed around the downstream culvert entrance. Species acoustically detected in the vicinity of the culvert during the survey included big brown bat, Mexican free-tailed bat, Yuma myotis, California myotis, and canyon bat. In addition, western mastiff bat was detected with the unaided ear during the survey. Based upon the results of this survey, the culvert is not being used as a maternity roost but is being used by some day-roosting Yuma myotis. The culvert also appears to be used as a part of a commuting corridor from upstream roosting habitat toward the Santa Ana River.

Mature Oak Trees in Parking Area
During the nighttime emergence survey that occurred at the parking lot on July 15, 2021, no bats were observed emerging from any of the mature oak trees. However, extensive foraging activity by several big brown bats around the oak canopies was observed throughout the emergence period, and most of the echolocation calls detected were attributed to this species. Other species detected in the vicinity included canyon bat and Mexican free-tailed bat.

Passive and Active Acoustic Monitoring
A total of nine bat species were conclusively detected within the BSA, including western small-footed myotis, California myotis, Yuma myotis, canyon bat, big brown bat, Mexican free-tailed bat, mastiff bat, pocketed free-tailed bat, and big free-tailed bat. The presence of a tenth species, pallid bat, could not be conclusively confirmed due to the lack of any truly diagnostic echolocation sequences; however, the occurrence of pallid bat in the BSA is strongly suspected because suitable habitat is present and this species is difficult to detect acoustically. Hoary bat may also occur within the BSA.

This species primarily occurs at this elevation in Southern California only during the fall, winter, and spring months, so lack of detection in July is not surprising. It is also possible that long-legged myotis and western long-eared myotis could occur within the BSA. Species accounts and the regulatory status of the bat species detected throughout the BSA or known in the proposed project vicinity are provided in Table A, below.
3/29/23 «P:\OCC1901\Biology\Bats\BatSurveys_GypsumMemorial.docx» 8 Table A: Species Accounts and Regulatory Status of Bat Species Detected or Likely to Occur within the BSA
Species Name
(Scientific/Common) Status 1 Description of Roosting Habitat and Foraging Habitat/Prey Base Potential to Occur
within BSA
Potential to Roost
within BSA
FAMILY: VESPERTILIONIDAE
Lasiurus blossevillii
Western red bat
US: FSS
CA: SSC
WBWG: H
Typically solitary, but may roost in small groups.

Roosts in the foliage of broad-leafed trees or shrubs
within streams or fields, in orchards, and occasionally urban areas; commonly roosts in mature
cottonwoods and sycamores. Also documented
roosting in mature eucalyptus trees. Strongly
associated with riparian corridors, but has also been
observed foraging around streetlights and floodlights
in urban settings. Examples of prey include
homopterans, coleopterans, hymenopterans,
dipterans, and lepidopterans (Bolster 2005a).

Migratory, but documented year-round in southern
California.

Moderate. Not
conclusively detected
during the 2021
summer surveys, but
has been detected
along the Santa Ana
River and at nearby
Fremont Canyon and
could occur in the
BSA.

Low. Sycamore and
willow trees within
the BSA are suitable
for roosting by this
species, but more
likely to roost in
trees along the
nearby Santa Ana
River floodplain.

Lasiurus cinereus
Hoary bat
US: –
CA: SA
WBWG: M
Solitary. Roosts in the foliage of coniferous,
deciduous, and evergreen trees and shrubs, often at
the edge of a clearing. Typically roosts near the ends
of branches approximately 3-12 meters above the
ground. Generally considered to prefer moths, but
also consumes beetles, flies, grasshoppers, termites,
dragonflies, and wasps. Migratory wintering sites
have not been well documented, and specific
migration routes are not known (Bolster 2005b).

Migratory; documented primarily September–May in
southern California
High. Not conclusively
detected during the
2021 summer
surveys, but likely
occurs here in the fall
and winter months.

Moderate. Suitable
roosting habitat is
present in mature
trees and shrubs
around the
perimeter of the
site and at the
constructed basins.

Lasiurus xanthinus
Western yellow bat
US: –
CA: SSC
WBWG: H
Roosts hanging from the underside of leaves in trees.

Commonly roosts in the dead fronds of native and
nonnative palm trees, though has also been
documented roosting in cottonwood and sycamore
trees. Foraging areas include natural and artificial
water features, canyons, riparian areas, orchards, and
residential areas. Diet includes Coleoptera, Diptera,
Hemiptera, Homoptera, Lepidoptera, and Orthoptera
(Williams 2005). Migratory status not well known, but
documented year-round in southern California
Low. Not conclusively
detected during the
2021 summer
surveys, but has been
detected at the Santa
Ana River and at
nearby Fremont
Canyon and could
occur in the BSA.

Low. No palm trees
suitable for this
species within the
BSA, but it is
possible this species
could roost in
sycamore trees
within the BSA.

Myotis californicus
California myotis
US: –
CA: –
WBWG: L
Roosts in crevices within caves, mines, rocky hillsides, as well as under tree bark and in buildings. Forages in a variety of habitats. Typically consumes moths and
flies, but is known to eat other insects (Bogan et al.
2005a). Non-migratory; present year-round in
southern California
Present. Acoustically
detected throughout
the BSA.

Moderate. Suitable
roosting habitat is
present in mature
trees and snags
along the perimeter
of the BSA.

Myotis ciliolabrum
Small-footed myotis
US: –
CA: SA
WBWG: M
Roosts in cliff and rock crevices, caves, mines, and
buildings. Forages on small insects over desert, scrub, chaparral, and riparian habitats (Bogan et al. 2005b).

Non-migratory; present year-round in southern
California
Present. Acoustically
detected throughout
the BSA.

Moderate. Suitable
roosting habitat is
present in mature
trees and snags
along the perimeter
of the BSA.

Myotis evotis
Western long-eared
myotis
US: –
CA: SA
WBWG: M
Roosts under exfoliating tree bark, and in hollow
trees, culverts, caves, mines, cliff crevices, and rocky outcrops; may also roost in buildings and bridges.

Found in semiarid shrublands, sage, chaparral, and
agricultural areas, but is usually associated with
coniferous forests (Bogan et al. 2005c). Nonmigratory; present year-round in southern California but rarely detected during the winter
Moderate. Not
detected during the
2021 summer
surveys, but suitable
habitat is present.

Likely rare in the
area.

Low. Likely rare in
the area, but this
species could roost
in mature trees and
snags along the
perimeter of the
BSA.
3/29/23 «P:\OCC1901\Biology\Bats\BatSurveys_GypsumMemorial.docx» 9 Table A: Species Accounts and Regulatory Status of Bat Species Detected or Likely to Occur within the BSA
Species Name
(Scientific/Common) Status 1 Description of Roosting Habitat and Foraging Habitat/Prey Base Potential to Occur
within BSA
Potential to Roost
within BSA
Myotis volans
Long-legged myotis
US: –
CA: SSC
WBWG: H
Roosts in abandoned buildings, cliff crevices,
exfoliating tree bark, and hollows within snags;
usually overwinters in caves and mine tunnels.

Primarily found in coniferous forests, but also occurs
seasonally in riparian and desert habitats (Bogan et
al. 2005d). Non-migratory; present year-round in
southern California but rarely detected during the
winter
Moderate. Not
detected during the
2021 summer
surveys, but suitable
habitat is present and
this species has been
detected on nearby
Irvine Ranch open
space land
(Remington 2012).

Likely rare in the
area.

Low. Likely rare in
the area, but this
species could roost
in mature trees and
snags along the
perimeter of the
BSA.

Myotis yumanensis
Yuma myotis
US: –
CA: SA
WBWG: LM
Roosts in crevices within bridges, buildings, culverts, cliff crevices, caves, mines, and trees, typically near a perennial water source. Also documented roosting in
swallows nests. Forages primarily on aquatic
emergent insects; example prey items include caddis
flies, flies, midges, small moths, and small beetles
(Bogan et al. 2005e). Non-migratory; present and
detected year-round in southern California
Present. Acoustically
detected throughout
the BSA. Multiple
known roost sites in
the vicinity of the
BSA.

Present. Observed
day roosting in the
Gypsum Canyon
Creek Culvert.

Suitable roosting
habitat is also
present in mature
trees and snags
along the perimeter
of the BSA.

Parastrellus hesperus
Western canyon bat
US: –
CA: –
WBWG: L
Roosts in small crevices in rocky canyons, caves,
mines, bridges, and outcrops; may roost under rocks
or in small burrows. Roosts in riprap. Feeds on small
swarming insects such as flying ants, mosquitoes,
fruit flies, leafhoppers, and ants (Brown 2005). Nonmigratory; present and detected year-round in southern California
Present. Acoustically
detected throughout
the BSA.

Moderate. Suitable
roosting habitat is
present in the
Gypsum Canyon
Creek Culvert and in
small rock piles and
burrows in the BSA.

Eptesicus fuscus
Big brown bat
US: –
CA: –
WBWG: L
Roosts in trees, caves, and crevices in cliff faces and in anthropogenic structures such as bridges, buildings,
and mines. Typically forages for heavy-bodied insects
along tree canopies, over meadows, or along
watercourses within a few kilometers of roost sites.

Primarily beetle (coleopteran) specialists, but diet
also includes hemipterans, dipterans, lepidopterans,
trichopterans and hymenopterans (Perkins 2005).

Non-migratory; present year-round in southern
California but rarely detected during the winter.

Present. Acoustically
detected throughout
the BSA. Multiple
known roost sites in
the vicinity of the
BSA, including a
maternity roost
within 300 feet of the
western edge of the
BSA.

Moderate. Suitable
roosting habitat is
present in the
Gypsum Canyon
Creek Culvert and in
mature trees and
snags along the
perimeter of the
BSA.

Antrozous pallidus
Pallid bat
US: FSS
CA: SSC
WBWG: H
Roosts in crevices in rocky outcrops and cliffs, caves, mines, hollows or cavities of large trees, and
anthropogenic structures such as bridges and
buildings; may also roost near the ground in rock
piles. Foraging habitat includes grassland, open scrub, open forest, and gravel roads. Diet composition varies
among populations, but considered opportunistic
generalists. Glean a variety of arthropod prey from
surfaces, but also capture insects on the wing.

Examples of prey include antlions, beetles,
centipedes, cicadas, crickets, grasshoppers, Jerusalem
crickets, katydids, moths, and scorpions (Rambaldini
2005). Non-migratory; present year-round in
southern California but rarely detected during the
winter.

High. Not conclusively
detected during the
2021 summer
surveys; however,
suitable habitat is
present and this
species can be
difficult to detect
acoustically.

Moderate. Suitable
roosting habitat is
present in mature
trees and snags
along the perimeter
of the BSA.
3/29/23 «P:\OCC1901\Biology\Bats\BatSurveys_GypsumMemorial.docx» 10 Table A: Species Accounts and Regulatory Status of Bat Species Detected or Likely to Occur within the BSA
Species Name
(Scientific/Common) Status 1 Description of Roosting Habitat and Foraging Habitat/Prey Base Potential to Occur
within BSA
Potential to Roost
within BSA
FAMILY: MOLOSSIDAE
Tadarida brasiliensis
mexicana
Mexican free-tailed
bat
US: –
CA: –
WBWG: L
Roosts in caves, rock crevices on cliff faces, and
anthropogenic structures such as mines, culverts,
tunnels, and bridges. Also documented roosting in
swallows nests. Highly colonial. Forages over a variety of habitats; consuming mostly moths, but also flying
ants, weevils, stink-bugs and ground beetles (BCI
2005). Migratory, but documented year-round in
southern California
Present. Acoustically
detected throughout
study area, where
suitable roosting
habitat is present in
mature trees and rock
outcrops. Multiple
known roost sites in
the vicinity of the
BSA.

High. Has been
observed day
roosting in the
Gypsum Canyon
Creek Culvert (LSA
2006; LSA 2009).

Nyctinomops
femorosaccus
Pocketed free-tailed
bat
US: –
CA: SSC
WBWG: M
Distribution appears to be limited to Southern
California. Roosts in crevices in a variety of habitats, but usually associated with high cliffs and rugged rock outcrops. Colonial. Colony sizes usually number fewer
than 100 individuals. Diet consists primarily of large
moths (probably Sphingidae), but also crickets,
grasshoppers, flying ants, froghoppers, and
leafhoppers (Pierson and Rainey 1998). Migratory,
but documented year-round in southern California.

Present. Although
this species forages
over the study area,
no suitable roosting
habitat within the
study area. Detected
and likely roosts
within nearby Irvine
Ranch open space
land (Remington
2012).

None. No large rock
outcrops or cliffs
suitable for this
species within the
BSA.

Nyctinomops
macrotis
Big free-tailed bat
US: –
CA: SSC
WBWG: M
Relatively few roosts of this species have been found,
but it is known to roost in rock crevices in high cliffs as well as in buildings and mines. Highly associated
with arid, rocky habitats. Diet consists primarily of
large moths, but occasionally crickets, grasshoppers,
and flying ants are consumed (Pierson and Rainey
1998). Migratory, but documented year-round in
southern California.

Present. Although
this species forages
over the study area,
no suitable roosting
habitat within the
study area. Detected
and likely roosts
within nearby Irvine
Ranch open space
land (Remington
2012).

None. No large rock
outcrops or cliffs
suitable for this
species within the
BSA.

Eumops perotis
californicus
Western mastiff bat
US: –
CA: SSC
WBWG: H
In California, most records are from rocky areas at
low elevations and from buildings. Occurs in many
open, semi-arid to arid habitats, including conifer and deciduous woodlands, coastal scrub, grasslands, and
chaparral; roosts in crevices in vertical cliff faces, high buildings, trees, and tunnels throughout
southwestern California. May roost in tall bridges.

This species regularly forages approximately 100–200
feet above the ground, and has been estimated to
forage at altitudes as high as 2,000 feet above the
substrate. Likely forages considerable distances from
roosting sites. The diet consists primarily of moths
(Lepidoptera), but also includes beetles, crickets and
katydids (Pierson and Rainey 1998). Nonmigratory;
present year-round in Southern California.

Present. Although
this species forages
over the study area,
no suitable roosting
habitat within the
study area. Detected
and likely roosts
within nearby Irvine
Ranch open space
land (Remington
2012).

None. No large rock
outcrops or cliffs
suitable for this
species within the
BSA.
1 All bat species are protected under the California Fish and Game Code. Status categories include Forest Service Sensitive (FSS) species identified by the U.S. Forest Service in Region 5 (Pacific Southwest Region) that receive special management consideration within the National Forest; California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Species of Special Concern (SSC) and Special Animal (SA); and Western Bat Working Group (WBWG) conservation priority designations of High (H), Medium (M), and Low (L)
3/29/23 «P:\OCC1901\Biology\Bats\BatSurveys_GypsumMemorial.docx» 11 Detectors were deployed in areas that were expected to attract and/or funnel bat activity to increase the detection probability of bat species occurring within the BSA. These acoustic monitoring locations are shown on Figure 1. These areas included drainages with potential to be used as commuting corridors or foraging areas for bats as well as in in patches of native habitat. Detectors were also placed at the constructed basins. Although no water was present within the constructed basins at the time of the July 2021 surveys, the riparian vegetation at these ephemeral ponds had the potential to attract a variety of insects and therefore a variety of bat species for foraging. Although there was no water in the constructed basins during the July 2021 survey, these ponds are expected to capture water during the rainy season and may provide a foraging or drinking resource for bats in the spring or winter months.

Echolocation call sequences belonging to big brown bat and the Q25 group (which comprises big brown bat, Mexican free-tailed bat, and pallid bat) comprised the largest number of recordings during the July 2021 surveys. However, it should be noted that because detection rates differ among species, and some species are more easily detectable and/or identifiable than others, it is difficult to make reliable comparisons of species abundance in a given area using acoustic data (Walsh et al. 2002).

Regardless, patterns in detections can still provide information about species use of a given area. For example, while most of the bat species were detected at least once across all sites, western smallfooted myotis was detected only at detectors placed along the perimeter of the BSA at Gypsum Canyon Creek, the east ravine, and the eastern edge of the large graded area. It is also noteworthy that the western mastiff bat, big free-tailed bat, and pocketed free-tailed bat were detected relatively frequently at the detector placed near the top of the east ravine because the relatively low-frequency echolocation calls of these species are not easily detected by the detector microphones, which are better tuned to higher frequencies. These detections, particularly those recorded within an hour of sunset indicating nearby roosting, suggest that this ravine serves as a commuting corridor for individuals traveling toward the Santa Ana River and Prado Basin from known roost sites south of the BSA in Fremont Canyon.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A total of 9 bat species were conclusively detected within the BSA, including western mastiff bat, big free-tailed bat, pocketed free-tailed bat, Mexican free-tailed bat, big brown bat, western small-footed myotis, California myotis, Yuma myotis, and canyon bat. The presence of a tenth species, pallid bat, could not be conclusively confirmed due to the lack of any truly diagnostic echolocation sequences; however, the occurrence of pallid bat in the BSA is strongly suspected because suitable habitat is present and this species is difficult to detect acoustically. Hoary bat, western red bat, western yellow bat, long-legged myotis, and western long-eared myotis may also occur within the BSA.

Although bats were acoustically detected throughout the BSA, suitable roosting habitat was observed only near the perimeter of the BSA. Roosting was confirmed at the Gypsum Canyon Creek Culvert beneath SR-91, and suitable bat roosting habitat was identified in oak trees within the western parking area as well as in mature trees and snags along the southern perimeter of the BSA. Although bats were not observed emerging from the parking area oak trees during the emergence surveys performed in July 2021, it is possible that bats may occupy these trees prior to construction for the 3/29/23 «P:\OCC1901\Biology\Bats\BatSurveys_GypsumMemorial.docx» 12 proposed project. To minimize potential impacts to bats (including maternity colonies) roosting in the proposed project area, LSA recommends the following measures:
• The removal of mature trees and snags should be minimized to the greatest extent feasible. If mature trees or snags are removed for the project, a CDFW-approved bat biologist will survey the trees to determine whether they are suitable for use by bats prior to their removal. • Trees and snags that have been identified as confirmed or potential roost sites require a twostep removal process and the involvement of a bat biologist to ensure that no roosting bats are killed during this activity. This two-step removal shall occur over two consecutive days as follows: on Day 1, branches and limbs not containing cavities, as identified by a qualified bat biologist, will be removed. On Day 2, the remainder of the tree may be removed without supervision by a bat biologist. The disturbance caused by limb or frond removal, followed by an interval of one evening, will allow bats to safely abandon the roost. • The removal of any mature trees and snags suitable for use by bats shall be performed outside the bat maternity season (April 1 through August 31) to avoid direct impacts to nonvolant (flightless) young. This period also coincides with the bird nesting season. If trimming or removal of trees during the bat maternity season cannot be avoided, a CDFWapproved bat biologist will survey the trees to determine whether they serve as maternity roosts. If a maternity roost is found, a buffer will be established and the tree will not be removed until the conclusion of the maternity season.

Based on the relatively high levels of activity recorded on the acoustic detectors deployed at Gypsum Canyon Creek and the east ravine, these areas serve as important commuting corridors for a variety of bat species. It is possible that bats commuting along the edges or roosting in the vicinity of the proposed project site could be subject to potential adverse effects from an increase in lighting from the proposed project. Multiple studies indicate that ongoing night lighting, in particular, can be very disruptive to foraging and roosting behaviors. Stone et al. (2009) found that light pollution can negatively impact bats’ selection of flight routes by limiting the options for flyways, and can even eliminate bats’ abilities to use certain roosts and/or foraging areas. Rydell et al. (2017) and Voigt et al. (2018) note that maintaining darkness at maternity roosts is particularly important because at these types of roosts, aggregations of bats are present consistently over a long period of time, individual bats emerge from predictable locations, and juvenile bats are learning how to fly. Illumination of a maternity roost renders the colony more vulnerable to opportunistic predators such as raptors and owls, and predator-avoidance behaviors such as delayed emergence times reduce their foraging opportunities, thereby lowering juvenile survivorship. The following measures are recommended to reduce potential adverse effects to bats from construction activities and from the installation of new light fixtures associated with the proposed project:
• Design for the number and placement of light fixtures installed for the proposed project will balance safety needs with the potential adverse effect of artificial night lighting on wildlife in surrounding open space areas. All lighting fixtures will have light shields or similar devices (e.g., dark sky compliant lighting) installed to minimize illuminance above the site and to avoid light trespass into Gypsum Canyon Creek and other adjacent open space areas. The color 3/29/23 «P:\OCC1901\Biology\Bats\BatSurveys_GypsumMemorial.docx» 13 temperature of the light emitted by the luminaires should be less than 2700 Kelvin to minimize adverse effects to wildlife including bats.

Pesticides are commonly used at landscaped areas such as those associated with cemeteries and golf courses. Exposure to pesticides (e.g., by ingesting pesticide residue on insect prey), even at a sublethal level, can pose reproductive risks to some bat species (Williams-Guillén et al. 2016). To minimize potential adverse effects to bat populations, the following measure is recommended:
• Use of pesticides will be minimized to the greatest extent feasible and best management practices will be implemented to prevent pesticide runoff and/or drift into adjacent open space areas.

The above actions will reduce the potential for project-related impacts to bats to the greatest extent feasible.

If you have questions regarding this report or would like to discuss the project further, please contact me at (949) 337-6103.

Sincerely,
LSA Associates, Inc.

Jill Carpenter
Senior Biologist/Bat Specialist
Attachments: References
Figure 1 – Locations of Acoustic Detectors and Potential Roost Sites Figures 2 and 3 – Representative Site Photographs

F OCUSED B AT SURVEYS
F EBRUARY 2022

MOUNTAIN P ARK MEMORIAL

C OUNTY OF ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC1901\Biology\Bats\BatSurveys_GypsumMemorial.docx «03/29/23»

REFERENCES
Bat Conservation International (BCI). 2005. Proceedings of the Western Bat Working Group workshop on ecology, conservation and management of western bat species – updated species account, Mexican free-tailed bat (Tadarida brasiliensis). March 31–April 2, 2005.

Portland, Oregon.

Baird, A.B., J. K. Braun, M.A. Mares, J.C. Morales, J.C. Patton, C.Q. Tran, and J.W. Bickham. 2015.

Molecular systematic revision of tree bats (Lasiurini): doubling the native mammals of the Hawaiian Islands. Journal of Mammalogy 96(6), 1255–1274.

Barbour, R. W., and W.H. Davis. 1969. Bats of America. University of Kentucky Press. 286 pp Barclay, R.M.R., and A. Kurta. 2007. Ecology and behavior of bats roosting in tree cavities and under bark, pp. 17-59, in Bats in Forests: Conservation and Management. (M.J. Lacki, J.P. Hayes, and A. Kurta eds.)
Bogan, M.A., E.W. Valdez, and K.W. Navo. 2005a. Proceedings of the Western Bat Working Group workshop on ecology, conservation and management of western bat species – updated species account, California myotis (Myotis californicus). March 31–April 2, 2005. Portland, Oregon.
_____. 2005b. Proceedings of the Western Bat Working Group workshop on ecology, conservation and management of western bat species – updated species account, western small-footed myotis (Myotis ciliolabrum). March 31–April 2, 2005. Portland, Oregon. _____. 2005c. Proceedings of the Western Bat Working Group workshop on ecology, conservation and management of western bat species – updated species account, long-eared myotis (Myotis evotis). March 31–April 2, 2005. Portland, Oregon. _____. 2005d. Proceedings of the Western Bat Working Group workshop on ecology, conservation and management of western bat species – updated species account, long-legged myotis (Myotis volans). March 31–April 2, 2005. Portland, Oregon _____. 2005e. Proceedings of the Western Bat Working Group workshop on ecology, conservation and management of western bat species – updated species account, Yuma myotis (Myotis yumanensis). March 31–April 2, 2005. Portland, Oregon.

Bolster, B.C. 2005a. Proceedings of the Western Bat Working Group workshop on ecology, conservation and management of western bat species – updated species account, western red bat (Lasiurus blossevillii). March 31–April 2, 2005. Portland, Oregon. _____. 2005b. Proceedings of the Western Bat Working Group workshop on ecology, conservation and management of western bat species – updated species account, hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus). March 31–April 2, 2005. Portland, Oregon.

F OCUSED B AT SURVEYS
F EBRUARY 2022

MOUNTAIN P ARK MEMORIAL

C OUNTY OF ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC1901\Biology\Bats\BatSurveys_GypsumMemorial.docx «03/29/23» Brown, P.E. 2005. Proceedings of the Western Bat Working Group workshop on ecology, conservation and management of western bat species – updated species account, western pipistrelle (Pipistrellus hesperus). March 31–April 2, 2005. Portland, Oregon.

Brown, P.E., and W.E. Rainey. 2021. Eastern red bats breeding in California: do they need a new common name? Paper presented at the Western Bat Working Group Virtual Meeting, April 2021. http://wbwg.org/2021-wbwg-virtual-meeting/
Erickson, Gregg A., et al. 2003. Bat and Bridges Technical Bulletin (Hitchhiker Guide to Bat Roosts), California Department of Transportation, Sacramento CA.

Evelyn, M.J., D.A. Stiles, and R.A. Young. 2004. Conservation of bats in suburban landscapes: roost selection by Myotis yumanensis in a residential area in California. Biological Conservation 115:463-473
Johnston, D.S., G. Tatarian, and E.D. Pierson. 2004. California Bat Mitigation: Techniques, Solutions, and Effectiveness. Prepared for California Department of Transportation, Sacramento, California, and California State University Sacramento Foundation Keeley, B.W., and M.D. Tuttle. 1999. Bats in American Bridges. Bat Conservation International, Inc.

Resource Publication No. 4. Website: https://www.batcon.org/pdfs/bridges/ BatsBridges2.pdf, accessed December 21, 2017.

Kunz, T.H., and L.F. Lumsden. 2003. Ecology of Cavity and Foliage Roosting Bats, pp. 3–89, in Bat Ecology (T.H. Kunz and M.B. Fenton eds.). University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London.

LSA Associates, Inc. 2006. Results of Bat Habitat Suitability Assessment at Eastbound SR-91 (Between SR-241 and SR-71), LSA Associates Memorandum prepared by Jill Carpenter for inclusion in Natural Environmental Study (NES) for California Department of Transportation.

Dated September 29, 2006.
_____. 2009. Results of Bat Habitat Suitability Assessment for SR-91 CIP (Between SR-55 and I-15), LSA Associates Memorandum prepared by Jill Carpenter for inclusion in Natural Environmental Study (NES) for California Department of Transportation. Dated January 6, 2009.

Miner, K.L., and D.C. Stokes. 2005. Bats in the South Coast Ecoregion: Status, Conservation Issues, and Research Needs. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Gen. Tech.

Rep. PSW-GTR-195.

Moreno, C. E., and G. Halffter. 2000. Assessing the completeness of bat biodiversity inventories using species accumulation curves. Journal of Applied Ecology 37:149-158.

O’Farrell, M.J., and W.L. Gannon. 1999. A comparison of acoustic versus capture techniques for the inventory of bats. Journal of Mammalogy, 80:24-30.

F OCUSED B AT SURVEYS
F EBRUARY 2022

MOUNTAIN P ARK MEMORIAL

C OUNTY OF ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC1901\Biology\Bats\BatSurveys_GypsumMemorial.docx «03/29/23» Perkins, M. 2005. Proceedings of the Western Bat Working Group workshop on ecology, conservation and management of western bat species – updated species account, big brown bat (Eptesicus fuscus). March 31–April 2, 2005. Portland, Oregon.

Pierson, E.D. 1993. Survey protocols for California bats. Wildlife Society, Monterey, California. 26 February 1993.

Pierson, E.D., and W.E. Rainey. 1998. Distribution, habitat associations, status, and survey methodologies for three Molossid bat species (Eumops perotis, Nyctinomops femorosaccus, Nyctinomops macrotis) and the Vespertilionid (Euderma maculatum). Final Report, Contract #FG2328WM. California Department of Fish and Game 61pp.

Pierson, E.D., W.E. Rainey, and C. Corben. 2006. Distribution and status of Western red bats (Lasiurus blossevillii) in California. Calif. Dept. Fish and Game, Habitat Conservation Planning Branch, Species Conservation and Recovery Program Report 2006-04, Sacramento, CA. 45 pp.

Rambaldini, D.A. 2005. Proceedings of the Western Bat Working Group workshop on ecology, conservation and management of western bat species – updated species accounts, pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus). March 31–April 2, 2005. Portland, Oregon. Original account by R.

Sherwin, 1998.

Remington, S. 2000. The distribution and diversity of bats in Orange County, California. Pomona, CA:

California State Polytechnic University; 114 p. M.S. thesis.

Remington, S. 2012. Bat Surveys of the North Irvine Ranch Conservation Easements, Orange County, California. Report prepared for The Nature Conservancy. 49 pp.

Rydell, J., J. Eklöf, and S. Sánchez-Navarro. 2017. Age of Enlightenment: Long-Term Effects of Outdoor Aesthetic Lights on Bats in Churches. Royal Society Open Science 4(8):161077.

Skalak, S.L., R.E. Sherwin, and R.M. Brigham. 2012. Sampling period, size and duration influence measures of bat species richness from acoustic surveys. Methods in ecology and evolution 3(3): 490-502.

Stone, E.L., G. Jones, and S. Harris. 2009. Street Lighting Disturbs Commuting Bats. Current Biology 19: 1123-1127.

Tyburec, J.D., J.D. Chenger, and J.M. Szewczak. 2016. Improving Bat Survey Efficiency and Occupancy Results by Using Simultaneous Capture and Acoustic Methods. North American Symposium for Bat Research, San Antonio, TX, October 12–15, 2016.

Voigt, C.C., et al. 2018. Guidelines for Consideration of Bats in Lighting Projects. EUROBATS Publication Series No. 8. Bonn, Germany: UNEP/EUROBATS Secretariat. 62 pp.

F OCUSED B AT SURVEYS
F EBRUARY 2022

MOUNTAIN P ARK MEMORIAL

C OUNTY OF ORANGE , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC1901\Biology\Bats\BatSurveys_GypsumMemorial.docx «03/29/23» Walsh, A.L., R.M.R. Barclay, and G.F. McCracken. 2002. Designing bat-activity surveys for inventory and monitoring studies at local and regional scales, pp. 157–165, in Bat Echolocation Research: Tools, Techniques & Analysis (R.M. Brigham, E.K.V. Kalko, G. Jones, S. Parsons, and H.J.G.A. Limpens, ed.). Bat Conservation International, Austin, Texas.

Williams, J.A. 2005. Proceedings of the Western Bat Working Group workshop on ecology, conservation and management of western bat species – updated species account, western yellow bat (Lasiurus xanthinus). March 31–April 2, 2005. Portland, Oregon. Original account by B.C. Bolster, 1998.

Williams-Guillén K., E. Olimpi, B. Maas, P.J. Taylor, and R. Arlettaz. 2016. Bats in the Anthropogenic Matrix: Challenges and Opportunities for the Conservation of Chiroptera and Their Ecosystem Services in Agricultural Landscapes, pp. 151-186 in Bats in the Anthropocene: Conservation of Bats in a Changing World (C. Voigt and T. Kingston ed.) SOURCE: USGS 7.5' Quad - Black Star Canyon (1988), Prado Dam (1981); CA I:\OCC1901\GIS\MXD\ProjLoc.mxd (11/18/2021)
FIGURE 1
Mountain Park Memorial Park
Regional and Project Location
0 1000 2000
FEET
LEGEND
Project Study Area
San Bernardino
County
Los Angeles
County
Riverside
County
Orange
County
Ã142
Ã73
Ã261
Ã133
Ã22
Ã55 Ã241
Ã71
Ã60
Ã57
Ã91
Project
Location
§¨¦210
§¨¦405 §¨¦5
§¨¦15
§¨¦10
Project Vicinity
Service Layer Credits:
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Site A
Site J
Site D
Site B
Site C
Site H
Site G
Site I
Site F
Gypsum Canyon
Creek Culvert
Oaks at
Parking Area
Site E
Gypsum
Canyon
Rd
Santa Ana Canyon Rd
ÄÆ241
ÄÆ91
SOURCE: Nearmap (10/2020); Google (2020)
I:\OCC1901\GIS\MXD\AcousticalDetectors_RoostSites.mxd (2/14/2022) FIGURE 2
Mountain Park Memorial Park
Focused Bat Survey Report
Locations of Acoustic Detectors and Potential Roost Sites LEGEND
Project Study Area
!( Acoustic Detector Station Location
!( Potential Roost/Nighttime Emergence Survey Location
0 275 550
FEET
I:\OCC1901\G 3 22 22 \Photos_BatHSA.cdr ( / /20 )
Representative Site Photographs
Mountain Park Memorial Park
Focused Bat Survey Report
FIGURE 2
View looking south toward the parking lot and the three large oak trees that have crevices and cavities suitable for use by roosting bats despite heavy pruning.

View looking west toward Gypsum Creek and the Gypsum
Creek Culvert beneath SR-91. This structure is used by bats for day roosting and as a commuting corridor from roosting habitat south of the freeway to foraging habitat along the Santa Ana River.

View of one of the Yuma myotis (Myotis
yumanensis) day roosting in an expansion
joint crevice inside the Gypsum Creek Culvert
beneath SR-91.

View looking east along the drainage that extends along the southwestern edge of the BSA toward the mature oak and
sycamore trees that provide suitable roosting habitat for a variety of bat species.

I:\OCC1901\G 3 22 22 \Photos_BatHSA.cdr ( / /20 )
Representative Site Photographs
Mountain Park Memorial Park
Focused Bat Survey Report
FIGURE 3
View looking north along the deep ravine at the eastern edge of the BSA. The acoustic detector placed at this location recorded a high level of species diversity, and the oak tree in the foreground contains crevices and cavities suitable for use by roosting bats.

View of the small ravines and rock outcrops adjacent to the large graded area in the southeast portion of the BSA.

View of one of the constructed wetland basins in the western portion of the BSA. This area likely provides foraging habitat for bats.

View of one of the constructed basins in the eastern portion of the BSA, which likely provides foraging habitat and may provide some limited roosting habitat for foliage-roosting bat species.

BI O L O G I C A L RE S O U R C E S AS S E S S M E N T
MAY 2 0 2 4

GY P S U M C A N Y O N CE M E T E R Y

A N A H E I M , C A L I F O R N I A
\\aznasunifiler1\projects\OCC1901\Addendum\City Comments 3-27-24\Final Submittal\BRA\Gypsum_Canyon_BRA_051424.docx (05/16/24)

APPENDIX G
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION LETTER
DATED JULY 22, 2022

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

LOS ANGELES DISTRICT
915 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, SUITE 1109
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017
July 22, 2022
SUBJECT: Approved Jurisdictional Determination
Tim Deutsch
Orange County Cemetery District
25751 Trabuco Road
Lake Forest, California 92630
Dear Mr. Deutsch:

I am responding to your request dated December 3, 2021, for an approved Department of the Army jurisdictional determination (JD) for the Gypsum Canyon Cemetery AJD project site (File No. SPL-2021-00640). The proposed project is located in Anaheim and unincorporated Orange County, California (Latitude 33.865289°, Longitude -117.705554°).

The Corps' evaluation process for determining whether or not a Department of the Army permit is needed involves two tests. If both tests are met, a permit would likely be required. The first test determines whether or not the proposed project is located within the Corps' geographic jurisdiction (i.e., it is within a water of the United States). The second test determines whether or not the proposed project is a regulated activity under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act or Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. This evaluation pertains only to geographic jurisdiction.

Based on available information, I have determined there are waters of the United States on the project site in the locations depicted on the enclosed drawing. The basis for our determination can be found in the enclosed Approved Jurisdictional Determination (JD) form(s).

This letter includes an approved jurisdictional determination for the Gypsum Canyon Cemetery AJD project site. If you wish to submit new information regarding this jurisdictional determination, please do so within 60 days. We will consider any new information so submitted and respond within 60 days by either revising the prior determination, if appropriate, or reissuing the prior determination. If you object to this or any revised or reissued jurisdictional determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed you will find a Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) and Request for Appeal (RFA) form. If you wish to appeal this decision, you must submit a completed RFA form within 60 days of the date on the NAP to the Corps South Pacific Division Office at the following address:
-2-
Tom Cavanaugh
Administrative Appeal Review Officer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
South Pacific Division, CESPD-PDO
450 Golden Gate Ave.

San Francisco, CA 94102
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal under 33 CFR Part 331.5 (see below), and that it has been received by the Division Office by September 30th, 2022.

This determination has been conducted to identify the extent of the Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction on the particular project site identified in your request, and is valid for five years from the date of this letter, unless new information warrants revision of the determination before the expiration date. This determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service prior to starting work.

Thank you for participating in the regulatory program. If you have any questions, please contact me at (213) 280-6653 or via email at [email protected].

Please help me to evaluate and improve the regulatory experience for others by completing the customer survey form at https://regulatory.ops.usace.army.mil/customerservice-survey/.

Sincerely,
James E. Mace
Lead, Orange and Riverside Counties Team
South Coast Branch
Regulatory Division
Enclosure(s)

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND

REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Orange County Cemetery
District
File Number: SPL-2021-00640 Date: JULY 22, 2022
Attached is: See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) A PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) B

PERMIT DENIAL C

X APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D

PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision. Additional information may be found at http://www.usace.army.mil/cecw/pages/reg_materials.aspx or Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.

A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit. • ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit. • OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below.

B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit • ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit. • APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.

C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.

D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the date of this notice means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.

E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD.

SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or objections are addressed in the administrative record.) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record. However, you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative record.

POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:

If you have questions regarding this decision
and/or the appeal process you may contact:

Nicole Cammisa
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Los Angeles District
915 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, SUITE 1109
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017
Phone: (213) 452-3375
Email: [email protected]
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may also contact: Thomas J. Cavanaugh
Administrative Appeal Review Officer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
South Pacific Division
450 Golden Gate Ave.

San Francisco, CA 94102
Phone: (415) 503-6574 Fax: (415) 503-6646
Email: [email protected]
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process.

You will be provided a 15 day notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations.
_______________________________
Signature of appellant or agent.

Date: Telephone number:
§
331.5 Criteria.
(a) Criteria for appeal —(1) Submission of RFA. The appellant must submit a completed RFA (as defined at §331.2) to the appropriate division office in order to appeal an approved JD, a permit denial, or a declined permit. An individual permit that has been signed by the applicant, and subsequently unilaterally modified by the district engineer pursuant to 33 CFR 325.7, may be appealed under this process, provided that the applicant has not started work in waters of the United States authorized by the permit. The RFA must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of the NAP.
(2) Reasons for appeal. The reason(s) for requesting an appeal of an approved JD, a permit denial, or a declined permit must be specifically stated in the RFA and must be more than a simple request for appeal because the affected party did not like the approved JD, permit decision, or the permit conditions. Examples of reasons for appeals include, but are not limited to, the following: A procedural error; an incorrect application of law, regulation or officially promulgated policy; omission of material fact; incorrect application of the current regulatory criteria and associated guidance for identifying and delineating wetlands; incorrect application of the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines (see 40 CFR Part 230); or use of incorrect data. The reasons for appealing a permit denial or a declined permit may include jurisdiction issues, whether or not a previous approved JD was appealed.
(b) Actions not appealable. An action or decision is not subject to an administrative appeal under this part if it falls into one or more of the following categories:
(1) An individual permit decision (including a letter of permission or a standard permit with special conditions), where the permit has been accepted and signed by the permittee. By signing the permit, the applicant waives all rights to appeal the terms and conditions of the permit, unless the authorized work has not started in waters of the United States and that issued permit is subsequently modified by the district engineer pursuant to 33 CFR 325.7; (2) Any site-specific matter that has been the subject of a final decision of the Federal courts; (3) A final Corps decision that has resulted from additional analysis and evaluation, as directed by a final appeal decision;
(4) A permit denial without prejudice or a declined permit, where the controlling factor cannot be changed by the Corps decision maker (e.g., the requirements of a binding statute, regulation, state Section 401 water quality certification, state coastal zone management disapproval, etc. (See 33 CFR 320.4(j));
(5) A permit denial case where the applicant has subsequently modified the proposed project, because this would constitute an amended application that would require a new public interest review, rather than an appeal of the existing record and decision; (6) Any request for the appeal of an approved JD, a denied permit, or a declined permit where the RFA has not been received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of the NAP; (7) A previously approved JD that has been superceded by another approved JD based on new information or data submitted by the applicant. The new approved JD is an appealable action; (8) An approved JD associated with an individual permit where the permit has been accepted and signed by the permittee;
(9) A preliminary JD; or
(10) A JD associated with unauthorized activities except as provided in §331.11.

May 2024

TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS

GYPSUM CANYON CEMETERIES

ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA
May 2024

TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS

GYPSUM CANYON CEMETERIES

ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA
Submitted to:

Orange County Cemetery District
25751 Trabuco Road
Lake Forest, California 92630
Prepared by:

LSA
3210 El Camino Real, Suite 100
Irvine, California 92602
(949) 553‐0666
Project No. OCC2001
i

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx (05/16/24)

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................................... i LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ............................................................................................ iii INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION................................................................................................ 3 METHODOLOGY.......................................................................................................... 5 IntersecƟon Level of Service Methodology................................................................................... 5 Roadway Segment Level of Service Methodology ........................................................................ 7 Significance Criteria....................................................................................................................... 8 Project Fair Share .......................................................................................................................... 8 EXISTING CONDITIONS................................................................................................ 9 ExisƟng CirculaƟon System............................................................................................................ 9 ExisƟng IntersecƟon Level of Service Analysis ............................................................................ 10 ExisƟng Roadway Segment Level of Service Analysis.................................................................. 12 Opening Year (2026) Baseline CondiƟons................................................................................... 13 Opening Year (2026) Baseline IntersecƟon Level of Service Analysis ......................................... 13 Opening Year (2026) Baseline Roadway Segment Level of Service Analysis............................... 15 General Plan Buildout (2045) No Project CondiƟons.................................................................. 15 General Plan Buildout (2045) No Project IntersecƟon Level of Service Analysis........................ 17 General Plan Buildout (2045) No Project Roadway Segment Level of Service Analysis.............. 17 PROJECT IMPACTS..................................................................................................... 20 Trip GeneraƟon............................................................................................................................ 20 Trip DistribuƟon and Assignment................................................................................................ 20 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITION......................................................................... 23 ExisƟng Plus Project IntersecƟon Level of Service Analysis......................................................... 23 ExisƟng Plus Project Roadway Segment Level of Service Analysis.............................................. 25 OPENING YEAR (2026) PLUS PROJECT CONDITION..................................................... 26 Opening Year (2026) Plus Project IntersecƟon Level of Service Summary Analysis.................... 26 Opening Year (2026) Plus Project Roadway Segment Level of Service Analysis ......................... 28 GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (2045) PLUS PROJECT CONDITION.................................... 30 General Plan Buildout (2045) Plus Project IntersecƟon Level of Service Summary Analysis........................................................................................................................................ 32 General Plan Buildout (2045) Plus Project Roadway Segment Level of Service Analysis............ 32 ACCESS ANALYSIS...................................................................................................... 34 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION................................................................................... 35 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................. 37 ii

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx (05/16/24)

FIGURES
Figure 1: Project LocaƟon and Study Area IntersecƟons........................................................................ 2 Figure 2: Site Plan ................................................................................................................................... 4 Figure 3: ExisƟng Geometrics................................................................................................................. 6 Figure 4: ExisƟng Volumes.................................................................................................................... 11 Figure 5: Opening Year (2026) Baseline Volumes................................................................................. 14 Figure 6: General Plan Buildout (2045) Geometrics............................................................................. 16 Figure 7: General Plan Buildout (2045) No Project Volumes................................................................ 18 Figure 8: Project Trip Assignment......................................................................................................... 22 Figure 9: ExisƟng Plus Project Volumes................................................................................................ 24 Figure 10: Opening Year (2026) Plus Project Volumes ......................................................................... 27 Figure 11: General Plan Buildout (2045) Plus Project Volumes............................................................ 31 TABLES
Table A: ExisƟng IntersecƟon Level of Service Summary ..................................................................... 10 Table B: ExisƟng Roadway LOS Comparison ......................................................................................... 12 Table C: Opening Year (2026) IntersecƟon Level of Service Summary ................................................. 13 Table D: Opening Year (2026) Roadway LOS Summary ........................................................................ 15 Table E: General Plan Buildout (2045) No Project IntersecƟon Level of Service Summary.................. 17 Table F: General Plan Buildout (2045) Roadway LOS Summary ........................................................... 19 Table G: Gypsum Canyon Cemeteries Trip GeneraƟon......................................................................... 20 Table H: ExisƟng Plus Project IntersecƟon Level of Service Summary ................................................. 23 Table I: ExisƟng Plus Project Roadway LOS Comparison ...................................................................... 25 Table J: Opening Year (2026) Plus Project IntersecƟon Level of Service Summary .............................. 26 Table K: Opening Year (2026) Plus Project Roadway LOS Comparison................................................. 29 Table L: General Plan Buildout (2045) Plus Project IntersecƟon Level of Service Summary................ 32 Table M: General Plan Buildout (2045) Plus Project Roadway LOS Comparison.................................. 33 Table N: Internal IntersecƟon LOS and Queuing Summary .................................................................. 34

APPENDICES
A: TRAFFIC VOLUME DATA
B: ICU LEVEL OF SERVICE WORKSHEETS
C: HCM LEVEL OF SERVICE WORKSHEETS
D: TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT WORKSHEETS
E: INTERNAL INTERSECTION QUEUEING AND LEVEL OF SERVICE WORKSHEETS iii

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx (05/16/24)

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
Caltrans California Department of TransportaƟon
CalVet California Department of Veterans Affairs
City City of Anaheim
District Orange County Cemetery District
HCM Highway Capacity Manual
I‐110 Interstate 110
ICU intersecƟon capacity uƟlizaƟon
LOS level of service
OCTAM Orange County TransportaƟon Analysis Model
sf square foot/feet
SR State Route
v/c volume‐to‐capacity raƟo

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 1

INTRODUCTION
In 2005 the City of Anaheim (City) amended the 1991 Mountain Park Specific Plan, which is located on approximately 3,000 acres generally in Gypsum Canyon. A traffic study was prepared in support of the Specific Plan Amendment. The Mountain Park Specific Plan Traffic Analysis (AusƟn‐Foust Associates, Inc. 2005) analyzed the traffic impacts associated with reducing the previously approved uses (including extracƟon operaƟons, commercial development, insƟtuƟonal uses, and 7,966 residenƟal units) to 2,500 residenƟal units. To accommodate planned development, roadway improvements were included in the Mountain Park Specific Plan Traffic Analysis and Specific Plan Amendment. Among these roadway improvements was the relocaƟon of Santa Ana Canyon Road south of its current alignment to create Development Area 6.

The currently proposed project affects Development Area 5 and Development Area 6. Development Area 5 had been proposed for 770 single‐family detached dwelling units and 825 single‐family aƩached dwelling units. Development Area 6 had been proposed for a fire staƟon and 3,000 square feet (sf) of commercial use. The proposed project would eliminate these uses and construct two adjacent cemetery sites. The proposed project would also eliminate the realignment of Santa Ana Canyon Road, which would remain in its exisƟng alignment with the proposed project.

LSA has prepared this analysis consistent with the City of Anaheim Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for California Environmental Quality Act Analysis (June 2020) and the City’s Criteria for PreparaƟon of Traffic Impact Studies. Figure 1 shows the project locaƟon and study area.

Although the proposed project will be developed in approximately 10‐ to 20‐acre increments on an as‐needed basis for the Orange County Cemetery District (District) public cemetery or California Department of Veterans Affairs (CalVet) cemetery, specific dates for those as‐needed expansions are unknown. This analysis idenƟfies the effects of the full traffic generaƟon of both cemeteries.

Therefore, the traffic analysis examines the phasing of planned circulaƟon improvements in six scenarios:

1. ExisƟng condiƟons

2. ExisƟng Plus Project condiƟons

3. Opening Year (2026) condiƟons

4. Opening Year (2026) Plus Project condiƟons

5. General Plan Buildout (2045) condiƟons

6. General Plan Buildout (2045) Plus Project condiƟons
I:\OCC2001\G\Location_Ints.ai (12/11/2023)
SOURCE: Google Earth (2023), RJM Design Group
FEET
0 375 750
La Palma Ave
Gypsum Canyon Rd
E Santa Canyon Rd
91 241
241
Featherly P kFeatherly P k
LEGEND
Project Area
# Study Area Intersection
4 3
2 1
FIGURE 1
Project Location and
Study Area Intersections
Gypsum Canyon Cemeteries

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 3

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The District is proposing to construct a public cemetery on 283 acres of property within Development Area 5 of the Mountain Park Specific Plan. A veterans cemetery is also being considered within the 283‐acre project site in a collaboraƟve effort among the California Department of Veterans Affairs (CalVet), the County of Orange (County) and the District. Development of the proposed project would be accomplished through subdivision of the property into two parcels, a lower pad (126.13 acres) for the public cemetery and an upper pad (157.15 acres) for the veterans cemetery, separated by a keyway buƩressed slope. Figure 2 shows the site plan, including both public and veterans pads.

An approximately 80‐acre developable pad would be developed for the District cemetery within the 126.13 acre lower pad that would provide up to approximately 50 acres of interment areas, an approximately 7,700‐square‐foot (sf) administraƟon building, a 30,150 sf maintenance yard and building, approximately 9,800 sf of commiƩal shelters, approximately 15 acres of roads, walkways, parking, hardscape, and plaza niche areas, and approximately 15 acres of landscape area. Build‐out of the District cemetery would take place in phases as demand warrants and could include up to 150,000 interment spaces.

An approximately 100‐acre development area has been provided for within the 157.15 acre upper pad of the project site. The ulƟmate design of the State veterans cemetery will be determined by CalVet; however, the exterior loop roadway and uƟlity infrastructure have been designed to accommodate future development of the State veterans cemetery. Accessed via the main entry roadway, the State veterans cemetery would include an administraƟve building (approximately 2,000 sf), an assembly area, restrooms, a maintenance/operaƟons building (approximately 3,000 sf), and a commiƩal structure (approximately 600 sf) in addiƟon to interment spaces. Build‐out of the State veterans cemetery would take place as demand warrants and is anƟcipated to span over 100 years and could include up to 200,000 interment spaces.

The project site will be developed in approximately 10‐ to 20‐acre increments on an as‐needed basis for the District’s public cemetery or CalVet.

FIGURE 2
Site Plan
Gypsum Canyon Cemeteries
SOURCE: RJM Design Group
I:\OCC2001\G\Site_Plan.ai (4/15/2024)

NO SCALE
Santa Ana Canyon Road
91 Gypsum Canyon Road

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 5

METHODOLOGY
This traffic study is prepared consistent with the objecƟves and requirements of the City’s Criteria for PreparaƟon of Traffic Impact Studies and applicable provisions of CEQA.

The City’s Criteria for PreparaƟon of Traffic Impact Studies requires a capacity analysis at intersecƟons and roadway segments where the project contributes at least 51 trips. As requested by the City’s Traffic Engineering staff, the study area analyzed in this report includes the following intersecƟons and roadway segments. Figure 1 illustrates the locaƟons of the intersecƟons and roadway segments included in the study area. Figure 3 provides the exisƟng geometrics and traffic control devices at each study intersecƟon.
 Study IntersecƟons:

1. Gypsum Canyon Road/La Palma Avenue

2. Gypsum Canyon Road/State Route (SR‐) 91 Westbound Ramps

3. Gypsum Canyon Road/SR‐91 Eastbound Ramps

4. Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana Canyon Road
 Roadway Segments:

1. Gypsum Canyon Road (La Palma Avenue to SR‐91 Westbound Ramps)

2. Gypsum Canyon Road (SR‐91 Westbound Ramps to SR‐91 Eastbound Ramps)

3. Gypsum Canyon Road (SR‐91 Eastbound Ramps to Santa Ana Canyon Road)

4. Santa Ana Canyon Road (West of Gypsum Canyon Road)

INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE METHODOLOGY
For idenƟficaƟon of project impacts, intersecƟon capacity uƟlizaƟon (ICU) methodology was applied to all study intersecƟons using spreadsheets applying the ICU methodology, consistent with other General Plan‐level traffic analyses. The ICU methodology was used to determine the level of service (LOS) for the signalized study intersecƟons consistent with City of Anaheim and City of Yorba Linda requirements. This methodology compares the volume‐to‐capacity (v/c) raƟos of conflicƟng turn movements at an intersecƟon, sums up these criƟcal conflicƟng v/c raƟos for each intersecƟon approach, and determines the overall ICU. Unsignalized intersecƟons and intersecƟons in California Department of TransportaƟon (Caltrans) jurisdicƟon were also analyzed applying Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology. HCM methodology calculates the delay experienced by vehicles passing through the intersecƟon.

The resulƟng ICU or delay is expressed in terms of LOS, where LOS A represents free‐flow acƟvity and LOS F represents overcapacity operaƟon. LOS is a qualitaƟve assessment of the quanƟtaƟve effects of such factors as traffic volume, roadway geometrics, speed, delay, and maneuverability on roadway and intersecƟon operaƟons. LOS criteria for signalized intersecƟons using the ICU methodology are presented in the table following Figure 3. 1 Gypsum Canyon Rd/La Palma Ave
2 Gypsum Canyon Rd/SR‐91 WB Ramps
3 Gypsum Canyon Rd/SR‐91 EB Ramps
4 Gypsum Canyon Rd/Santa Ana Cyn Rd
FIGURE 3
LEGEND
Signal
Stop Sign
Free Right Turn Gypsum Canyon Cemeteries
Existing Geometrics 

 




 

 
F
F
F
F
La Palma Ave
SR‐91 WB Off‐Ramp
Featherly Park
Santa Ana Canyon Road
SR‐91 EB Off‐Ramp
La Palma Ave
Gypsum Canyon Rd Gypsum Canyon Rd Gypsum Canyon Rd
Gypsum Canyon Rd
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Report Figures\Existing Geometrics.xlsx 5/16/2024

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 7
LOS DescripƟon
A No approach phase is fully uƟlized by traffic, and no vehicle waits longer than one red indicaƟon. Typically, the approach appears quite open, turns are made easily, and nearly all drivers find freedom of operaƟon.

B This service level represents stable operaƟon, where an occasional approach phase is fully uƟlized and a substanƟal number are nearing full use. Many drivers begin to feel restricted within platoons of vehicles.

C
This level sƟll represents stable operaƟng condiƟons. Occasionally, drivers may have to wait through more than one red signal indicaƟon, and backups may develop behind turning vehicles. Most drivers feel somewhat restricted, but not objecƟonably so.

D
This level encompasses a zone of increasing restricƟon approaching instability at the intersecƟon. Delays to approaching vehicles may be substanƟal during short peaks within the peak period; however, enough cycles with lower demand occur to permit periodic clearance of developing queues, thus prevenƟng excessive backups.

E
Capacity occurs at the upper end of this service level. It represents the most vehicles that any parƟcular intersecƟon approach can accommodate. Full uƟlizaƟon of every signal cycle is aƩained no maƩer how great the demand.

F
This level describes forced‐flow operaƟons at low speeds, where volumes exceed capacity. These condiƟons usually result from queues of vehicles backing up from a restricƟon downstream. Speeds are reduced substanƟally, and stoppages may occur for short or long periods of Ɵme due to the congesƟon. In the extreme case, speed can drop to zero.

LOS = level of service
The relaƟonship between LOS and the ICU value (i.e., the v/c raƟo) is as follows:

Level of Service IntersecƟon Capacity UƟlizaƟon
A < 0.600
B 0.601–0.700
C 0.701–0.800
D 0.801–0.900
E 0.901–1.000
F > 1.000
Source: City of Anaheim Criteria for PreparaƟon of Traffic Impact Studies.

The relaƟonship between LOS and the HCM delay (at unsignalized and signalized intersecƟons) is as follows:

Level of Service Unsignalized IntersecƟon
Delay per Vehicle (seconds)
Signalized IntersecƟon
Delay per Vehicle (seconds)
A < 10.0 < 10.0
B 10.0–15.0 > 10.0 and < 20.0
C 15.0–25.0 > 20.0 and < 35.0
D 25.0–35.0 > 35.0 and < 55.0
E 35.0–50.0 > 55.0 and < 80.0
F > 50.0 > 80.0

ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE METHODOLOGY
Daily roadway link v/c raƟos were determined using the theoreƟcal daily capaciƟes idenƟfied in the traffic study for the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan. The following table shows the roadway classificaƟons and capaciƟes.

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 8
Type of Arterial Daily Capacity
Eight Lanes Divided 75,000
Six Lanes Divided 56,300
Four Lanes Divided 37,500
Four Lanes (Undivided) 25,000
Two Lanes (Undivided) 12,500
Source: Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan (City of Anaheim 2016).

SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
The City considers intersecƟons with a v/c raƟo of 0.90 (LOS D) as the upper limit of saƟsfactory operaƟons. A transportaƟon impact on an intersecƟon is considered significant in accordance with the following table. The “Final V/C RaƟo” includes the future v/c raƟo at an intersecƟon, considering traffic from exisƟng condiƟons, ambient growth, approved/related projects, and the proposed project, but without any proposed miƟgaƟon.

Level of Service Final V/C RaƟo Project‐Related Increase in V/C C > 0.700–0.800  ≥ 0.050
D > 0.800–0.900  ≥ 0.030
E or F > 0.901 ≥ 0.010
V/C = volume‐to‐capacity raƟo
For roadway segments, the City’s General Plan establishes a target of LOS C. If a segment is found to operate at LOS D, E, or F under daily condiƟons, its operaƟon is also analyzed under peak‐hour condiƟons. If the roadway segment also operates at LOS D, E, or F under peak‐hour condiƟons and project traffic increases the daily v/c raƟo by 0.01 or greater, then the project is determined to have a significant impact.

PROJECT FAIR SHARE
Based on the City’s Criteria for PreparaƟon of Traffic Impact Studies, for cumulaƟve long‐range analysis (i.e., General Plan Buildout), the project parƟcipates in future improvements on a fair‐share basis. A project’s equitable share is to be calculated using the following equaƟon:

TT EB
T P  
Where:

P =   the equitable share for the proposed project’s traffic impact T =   the vehicle trips generated by the project during the peak hour of the adjacent street, vehicles per hour at the impacted locaƟon
TB =   the General Plan Buildout forecast traffic volume (i.e., the 20‐year model or the furthest future model date feasible), vehicles per hour at the impacted locaƟon TE =   the exisƟng traffic volumes plus approved projects that have not been constructed or occupied, vehicles per hour at the impacted locaƟon

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 9

EXISTING CONDITIONS

EXISTING CIRCULATION SYSTEM
Key roadways in the vicinity of the proposed project are as follows:
 State Route 91: SR‐91 is located north of the project site and is expected to facilitate the majority of the regional travel to and from the site. SR‐91 begins in the Inland Empire to the east, traverses all of northern Orange County, and terminates at Interstate 110 (I‐110) in Los Angeles County. It is a primary east‐west commuter route and accommodates more than 290,000 vehicles per day in the vicinity of the project.  State Route 241: SR‐241 is west of the project site, although no connecƟon exists between SR‐241 and the project site. SR‐241 is a tolled facility operated by the TransportaƟon Corridor Agencies and provides a regional connecƟon through eastern Orange County between SR‐91 and South County.
 La Palma Avenue: La Palma Avenue is an east‐west roadway located north of the project site.

The route is designated as a Secondary Arterial. In the vicinity of the project site, the roadway has four lanes and a center median. There are no sidewalks or bike lanes, and on‐street parking is prohibited. A porƟon of the traffic volume on La Palma Avenue during peak commute hours is bypassing congesƟon on SR‐91. The City of Yorba Linda has placed a 1,600‐foot raised median between the eastbound through and right‐turn lanes at Gypsum Canyon Road to accommodate this traffic while prevenƟng eastbound La Palma Avenue from being blocked by vehicles aƩempƟng late mergers for the eastbound right‐turn lane.  Gypsum Canyon Road: Gypsum Canyon Road is a north‐south roadway accessing the project site and is classified as a Hillside Primary Arterial by the City’s General Plan CirculaƟon Element.

Hillside Primary Arterials can be constrained by terrain and may provide four lanes divided with leŌ‐turn pockets. Gypsum Canyon Road is currently four divided lanes between La Palma Avenue and the SR‐91 Westbound Ramps. Between the SR‐91 Westbound Ramps and Santa Ana Canyon Road, Gypsum Canyon Road is two undivided lanes. The Santa Ana River Trail provides a separated bike path between La Palma Avenue and the SR‐91 Westbound Ramps. There are no bike lanes and on‐street parking is prohibited south of the SR‐91 Westbound Ramps. The Anaheim Canyon General Plan proposes bicycle lanes and a horse trail along Gypsum Canyon Road.
 Santa Ana Canyon Road: Santa Ana Canyon Road is an east‐west Hillside Secondary Arterial. The purpose of these roadways is to provide for circulaƟon within Anaheim. In the current condiƟon, however, a large quanƟty of regional traffic uses Santa Ana Canyon Road in the peak commute hours to bypass SR‐91. The City’s General Plan CirculaƟon Element states that four undivided lanes are typical. In the exisƟng condiƟon, Santa Ana Canyon Road is two undivided lanes beginning 0.6 mile east of Weir Canyon Road. No sidewalks or bike lanes are provided. However, the shoulder is currently used by bicyclists and a Class II bicycle lane is proposed in the Anaheim General Plan.

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 10

EXISTING INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS
Vehicle turning volumes were collected for the study intersecƟons during the peak morning (7:00 a.m.–9:00 a.m.) and evening (4:00 p.m.–6:00 p.m.) commute periods. Peak‐hour intersecƟon turn volumes were surveyed on a typical weekday (Thursday, October 20, 2022) at the study intersecƟons. These volumes were taken in 15‐minute increments and then totaled as hourly volumes, which is the standard procedure for volume data collecƟon. Although these data were collected at toward the end of COVID‐19 restricƟons, the traffic volumes were higher than pre‐COVID traffic volumes the City collected in 2018. Figure 4 presents the exisƟng a.m. and p.m. peak‐hour turn movement volumes for the study intersecƟons. The traffic volume data sheets are provided in Appendix A.

A porƟon of the traffic volume through the study area consists of vehicles aƩempƟng to bypass congesƟon on SR‐91. Figure 4 shows some vehicles exiƟng SR‐91 westbound in the a.m. peak hour and traveling to La Palma Avenue and Santa Ana Canyon Road, and even more vehicles using surface streets to travel eastbound in the p.m. peak hour. LOS analysis was performed for the study intersecƟons, and the results are summarized in Table A. All ICU analysis worksheets are provided in Appendix B. All HCM analysis worksheets are provided in Appendix C. Table A shows that even with these cut‐through vehicles, most of the study intersecƟons funcƟon at saƟsfactory LOS.

Table A: ExisƟng IntersecƟon Level of Service Summary
Study
Area No. IntersecƟons AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
V/C RaƟo or Delay LOS V/C RaƟo or Delay LOS
1 Gypsum Canyon Road/La Palma Avenue 0.39 A 0.57 A
2 Gypsum Canyon Road/SR‐91 WB Ramps 0.31 A 0.41 A
HCM 12.2 sec B 15.5 sec B
3 Gypsum Canyon Road/SR‐91 EB Ramps
(unsignalized) 0.21 A 0.13 A
HCM 10.2 sec B 9.3 sec A
4 Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana Canyon
Road (unsignalized) 0.16 A 0.68 B
HCM 7.2 sec A 119.5 sec F
Source: Compiled by LSA (2024).
= UnsaƟsfactory LOS
EB = eastbound
HCM = Highway Capacity Manual
LOS = level of service
sec = seconds
SR‐91= State Route 91
V/C = volume‐to‐capacity
WB = westbound
The excepƟon is the unsignalized intersecƟon of Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana Canyon Road, which funcƟons at LOS F in the p.m. peak hour. The ICU analysis shows that if the intersecƟon were signalized, it would funcƟon at saƟsfactory LOS. In the exisƟng condiƟon, this intersecƟon is stop‐controlled in all direcƟons. According to the California Vehicle Code, each eastbound vehicle should come to a complete stop at the intersecƟon. If all eastbound vehicles were coming to a complete stop, the delay in the p.m. peak hour would exceed 2 minutes per vehicle, which exceeds the standard for saƟsfactory LOS (i.e., 35 seconds per vehicle). ObservaƟons of this intersecƟon reveal that few eastbound vehicles stop, and many do not even pause at the intersecƟon.  6 / 3
 261 / 244
   340 / 65
10 / 27   
94 / 361 
218 / 805 
1 Gypsum Canyon Rd/La Palma Ave
 135 / 143
 2 / 8
 57 / 43
1 / 6   
17 / 6 
2 Gypsum Canyon Rd/SR‐91 WB Ramps

147 / 5 
11 / 5 
3 Gypsum Canyon Rd/SR‐91 EB Ramps

59 / 927 
0 / 8 
4 Gypsum Canyon Rd/Santa Ana Cyn Rd
FIGURE 4
LEGEND
XXX / YYY AM / PM Volume
Gypsum Canyon Cemeteries
Existing Volumes
19 / 15
202 / 717124 / 125
5 / 15569 / 863
134 / 114
11 / 2
166 / 96122 / 66
5 / 2
16 / 8
4 / 45 / 1
157 / 15
18 / 16
42 / 921
1 / 16
1 / 10
Santa Ana Canyon Road
Gypsum Canyon Rd
SR‐91 EB Off
Gypsum Canyon Rd
SR‐91 WB Off
Gypsum Cyn Rd Gypsum Cyn
La Palma Ave
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Report Figures\Existing Volumes.xlsx (5/16/2024)

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 12
This aberrant behavior is possible because conflicƟng vehicle movements at the intersecƟon are limited to northbound and southbound through traffic, and these conflicƟng vehicle movements occur approximately once every 2 minutes. It should be noted that the south leg of the intersecƟon is currently unpaved and gated. Many of the eastbound right‐turn vehicles, southbound through vehicles, and subsequent northbound through vehicles represent further aberrant behavior where drivers are cuƫng the line and then making a U‐turn in the unpaved south leg of the intersecƟon.

Despite the aƩempts of drivers to make this intersecƟon funcƟon, the HCM analysis shows that it operates at LOS F in the p.m. peak hour.

The vehicles passing through the intersecƟon of Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana Canyon Road in the p.m. peak hour are desƟned for the SR‐91 eastbound on‐ramp. Table A shows that the intersecƟon of Gypsum Canyon Road/SR‐91 Eastbound Ramps funcƟons at LOS A during both peak hours because the SR‐91 Eastbound on‐ramps are free right‐turn lanes in both the northbound and southbound direcƟons. The northbound free right‐turn lane originates just north of the Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana Canyon Road intersecƟon. CongesƟon and delay on SR‐91 eastbound in the p.m. peak hour results in congesƟon and delay on this SR‐91 eastbound on‐ramp. The on‐ramp backs up from the merge point onto the freeway all the way to Gypsum Canyon Road. The queue of eastbound vehicles at the intersecƟon of Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana Canyon Road is an extension of the SR‐91 eastbound on‐ramp queue through the intersecƟon.

EXISTING ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS
At the same Ɵme intersecƟon turn volumes were collected, 24‐hour roadway traffic volumes along the segments of Gypsum Canyon Road and on Santa Ana Canyon Road were collected. Table B compares the exisƟng daily traffic volume to the daily capacity of these roadways. As Table B shows, despite the volumes of cut‐through traffic, the roadway segments in the study area operate within their theoreƟcal daily capacity.

Table B: ExisƟng Roadway LOS Comparison
Roadway Segment Mid‐Block Lanes Capacity ExisƟng V/C LOS Gypsum Canyon Road (La Palma Avenue to SR‐91 WB
Ramps) 4D 37,500 12,944 0.35 A
Gypsum Canyon Road (SR‐91 WB Ramps to SR‐91 EB
Ramps) 2U 12,500 8,434 0.67 B
Gypsum Canyon Road (SR‐91 EB Ramps to Santa Ana
Canyon Road) 2U 12,500 7,748 0.62 B
Santa Ana Canyon Road (West of Gypsum Canyon Road) 2U 12,500 7,353 0.59 A Source: Compiled by LSA (2024).
= UnsaƟsfactory LOS; peak‐hour analysis required
EB = eastbound
LOS = level of service
SR‐91= State Route 91
V/C = volume‐to‐capacity raƟo
WB = westbound

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 13
OPENING YEAR (2026) BASELINE CONDITIONS
The proposed project is anƟcipated to be completed by 2026. Traffic volume growth is anƟcipated to occur based on populaƟon growth and changing land use paƩerns. It was not anƟcipated that potenƟal development near the project site (such as other development areas within the Mountain Park Specific Plan) could be completed by the project opening year. Other cumulaƟve projects that could be completed by the project opening year are not sufficiently close to the project site to directly account for their contribuƟon to future traffic condiƟons. This analysis accounts for the development of cumulaƟve projects and their future traffic using modeled traffic growth forecasts.

LSA used the Orange County TransportaƟon Analysis Model (OCTAM) to calculate an annual growth rate within the study area, which was applied to the exisƟng traffic volume data to generate intersecƟon turn volume and daily roadway traffic volume esƟmates for Opening Year (2026) condiƟons. The traffic model data showed an annual traffic growth rate of slightly more than 1 percent per year on Santa Ana Canyon Road and on Gypsum Canyon Road between SR‐91 and Santa Ana Canyon Road. The traffic model data showed an annual growth rate of less than 1 percent per year on Gypsum Canyon Road north of SR‐91.

OPENING YEAR (2026) BASELINE INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS IntersecƟon geometrics at the study intersecƟons are not anƟcipated to change by the project opening year. The future a.m. and p.m. peak‐hour traffic volumes are shown on Figure 5. Table C summarizes the results of the Opening Year (2026) Baseline a.m. and p.m. peak‐hour LOS analysis for the study intersecƟons. As indicated in Table C, all study intersecƟons operate at a saƟsfactory LOS in the a.m. and p.m. peak hours in the Opening Year (2026) Baseline condiƟon except for the intersecƟon of Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana Canyon Road. As detailed previously, cut‐through traffic causes this unsignalized intersecƟon to operate at LOS F in the p.m. peak hour. Increasing traffic volume through the Opening Year would exacerbate the already unsaƟsfactory delay.

Table C: Opening Year (2026) IntersecƟon Level of Service Summary Study
Area No. IntersecƟons AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
V/C RaƟo or Delay LOS V/C RaƟo or Delay LOS
1 Gypsum Canyon Road/La Palma Avenue 0.41 A 0.59 A
2 Gypsum Canyon Road/SR‐91 WB Ramps 0.31 A 0.41 A
HCM 12.2 sec B 15.7 sec B
3 Gypsum Canyon Road/SR‐91 EB Ramps
(unsignalized) 0.22 A 0.13 A
HCM 10.3 sec B 9.2 sec A
4 Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana Canyon
Road (unsignalized) 0.17 A 0.70 B
HCM 7.8 sec A 158.9 sec F
Source: Compiled by LSA (2024).
= UnsaƟsfactory LOS
EB = eastbound
HCM = Highway Capacity Manual
LOS = level of service
sec = seconds
SR‐91= State Route 91
V/C = volume‐to‐capacity
WB = westbound
 6 / 3
 271 / 254
   354 / 68
10 / 28   
98 / 375 
227 / 837 
1 Gypsum Canyon Rd/La Palma Ave
 140 / 149
 2 / 8
 59 / 45
1 / 6   
18 / 6 
2 Gypsum Canyon Rd/SR‐91 WB Ramps

154 / 5 
11 / 5 
3 Gypsum Canyon Rd/SR‐91 EB Ramps

61 / 964 
0 / 8 
4 Gypsum Canyon Rd/Santa Ana Cyn Rd
FIGURE 5
LEGEND
XXX / YYY AM / PM Volume
Gypsum Canyon Cemeteries
Opening Year (2026) Baseline Volumes 20 / 16 210 / 746 129 / 130 5 / 16 592 / 898 139 / 119 11 / 2 127 / 69 173 / 100 5 / 2 17 / 8 4 / 4 5 / 2 163 / 16 19 / 17 44 / 958 1 / 17 1 / 10 La Palma Ave
Gypsum Cyn
SR‐91 WB Off
Gypsum Cyn Rd
Gypsum Canyon Rd
SR‐91 EB Off
Santa Ana Canyon Road
Gypsum Canyon Rd
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Report Figures\Opening Volumes.xlsx (5/16/2024)

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 15
OPENING YEAR (2026) BASELINE ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS Annual traffic growth was also applied to daily roadway traffic volumes. Table D summarizes the daily traffic volumes and v/c raƟos for the four study area roadway segments in the Opening Year (2026) Baseline condiƟon. As Table D illustrates, all study area roadway segments operate at a saƟsfactory LOS (i.e., LOS C or beƩer).

Table D: Opening Year (2026) Roadway LOS Summary
Roadway Segment Mid‐Block Lanes Capacity Future V/C LOS Gypsum Canyon Road (La Palma Avenue to SR‐91
WB Ramps) 4D 37,500 12,957 0.35 A
Gypsum Canyon Road (SR‐91 WB Ramps to SR‐91 EB
Ramps) 2U 12,500 8,620 0.69 B
Gypsum Canyon Road (SR‐91 EB Ramps to Santa Ana
Canyon Road) 2U 12,500 8,044 0.64 B
Santa Ana Canyon Road (West of Gypsum Canyon
Road) 2U 12,500 7,567 0.61 B
Source: Compiled by LSA (2024).
=  = UnsaƟsfactory LOS; peak‐hour analysis required
EB = eastbound
LOS = level of service
SR‐91 = State Route 91
V/C = volume‐to‐capacity raƟo
WB = westbound
GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (2045) NO PROJECT CONDITIONS
As menƟoned at the beginning of this report, the Mountain Park Specific Plan anƟcipated 2,500 new residenƟal units and associated infrastructure improvements, including 1,595 residenƟal units in the development areas where the proposed project would be located. Development of the proposed project would amend the General Plan to eliminate those 1,595 residenƟal units. In the General Plan Buildout (2045) No Project condiƟon, however, those previously planned residenƟal units would add traffic volume to the study area. LSA used OCTAM to generate future traffic volume forecasts. These data were postprocessed with exisƟng traffic volume data. During the development of traffic volume forecasts, LSA also coordinated with the City of Yorba Linda and reviewed the Yorba Linda Housing Element and General Plan Update Traffic Analysis (Urban Crossroads 2022) to include potenƟal land use changes in Yorba Linda and improve consistency between future traffic volume forecasts.

The General Plan Buildout (2045) No Project condiƟon includes roadway improvements anƟcipated in the Anaheim General Plan including full buildout of Gypsum Canyon Road and Santa Ana Canyon Road to four lanes. Planned roadway improvements also include signalizaƟon of the intersecƟons of Gypsum Canyon Road/SR‐91 Eastbound Ramps and Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana Canyon Road.

Figure 6 illustrates the geometrics and traffic control devices at each study intersecƟon. 1 Gypsum Canyon Rd/La Palma Ave
2 Gypsum Canyon Rd/SR‐91 WB Ramps
3 Gypsum Canyon Rd/SR‐91 EB Ramps
4 Gypsum Canyon Rd/Santa Ana Cyn Rd
FIGURE 6
LEGEND
Signal
Stop Sign
Free Right Turn Gypsum Canyon Cemeteries
General Plan Buildout (2045) Geometrics



 


 




F
F
F
F
Gypsum Canyon Rd
Gypsum Canyon Rd Gypsum Canyon Rd Gypsum Canyon Rd
Santa Ana Canyon Road
SR‐91 EB Off‐Ramp
SR‐91 WB Off‐Ramp
Featherly Park
La Palma Ave
La Palma Ave
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Report Figures\Buildout Geometrics.xlsx 5/16/2024

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 17
GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (2045) NO PROJECT INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE

ANALYSIS
The General Plan Buildout (2045) No Project a.m. and p.m. peak‐hour traffic volumes are shown on Figure 7. Figure 7 shows higher traffic volume into and out of the residenƟal neighborhood accessed from Gypsum Canyon Road north of La Palma Avenue. The traffic model accounts for the full trip‐generaƟng potenƟal of these homes even if that potenƟal is greater than the actual traffic volume today and no new homes are anƟcipated. Using these higher modeled volumes results in a more conservaƟve, worst‐case analysis. AnƟcipated roadway improvements were carried through to intersecƟon geometrics for the General Plan (2045) LOS analysis including signalizaƟon of Gypsum Canyon Road/SR‐91 Eastbound Ramps and Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana Canyon Road.

Table E summarizes the results of the General Plan Buildout (2045) No Project a.m. and p.m. peak‐ hour LOS analysis for the study intersecƟons. As indicated in Table E, three of the four intersecƟons would be anƟcipated to operate at saƟsfactory LOS in both peak hours if the Mountain Park Specific Plan were constructed with planned improvements to the study intersecƟons. The intersecƟon of Gypsum Canyon Road/La Palma Avenue is anƟcipated to operate at LOS E in the p.m. peak hour as a result of future traffic volume growth.

Table E: General Plan Buildout (2045) No Project IntersecƟon Level of Service Summary
Study
Area No. IntersecƟons AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
V/C RaƟo or Delay LOS V/C RaƟo or Delay LOS
1 Gypsum Canyon Road/La Palma Avenue 0.70 B 0.97 E
2 Gypsum Canyon Road/SR‐91 WB Ramps 0.57 A 0.62 B
HCM 17.4 sec B 16.5 sec B
3 Gypsum Canyon Road/SR‐91 EB Ramps   0.36 A 0.52 A
HCM 6.4 sec A 8.9 sec A
4 Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana Canyon Road   0.63 B 0.61 B Source: Compiled by LSA (2024).
=   = UnsaƟsfactory LOS
EB = eastbound
HCM = Highway Capacity Manual
LOS = level of service
sec = seconds
SR‐91 = State Route 91
V/C = volume‐to‐capacity
WB = westbound
GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (2045) NO PROJECT ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE

ANALYSIS
Table F displays the future roadway daily traffic volume in the No Project condiƟon, which was forecast by OCTAM as described above. It should be noted that the Anaheim General Plan anƟcipates future widening of Gypsum Canyon Road and Santa Ana Canyon Road, which is included in the Table F calculaƟon of v/c raƟos for the four study area roadway segments. As Table F shows, if the Mountain Park Specific Plan were constructed with proposed improvement to the roadways, the four roadway segments would be anƟcipated to operate at saƟsfactory LOS A.  6 / 3
 261 / 244
   739 / 426
10 / 27   
94 / 467 
263 / 1011 
1 Gypsum Canyon Rd/La Palma Ave
 334 / 150
 2 / 8
 247 / 229
2 / 6   
17 / 6 
2 Gypsum Canyon Rd/SR‐91 WB Ramps

253 / 495 
24 / 91 
3 Gypsum Canyon Rd/SR‐91 EB Ramps

62 / 1176  
121 / 26 
4 Gypsum Canyon Rd/Santa Ana Cyn Rd
FIGURE 7
LEGEND
XXX / YYY AM / PM Volume
Gypsum Canyon Cemeteries
General Plan Buildout (2045) No Project Volumes 19 / 15 378 / 1002 544 / 594 11 / 24 1030 / 1431 484 / 120 11 / 2 352 / 199 293 / 586 27 / 34 39 / 18 110 / 36 4 / 4 336 / 663 197 / 208 230 / 1183 84 / 565 495 / 88 365 / 215 La Palma Ave
Gypsum Cyn
SR‐91 WB Off
Gypsum Cyn Rd
Gypsum Canyon Rd
SR‐91 EB Off
Santa Ana Canyon Road
Gypsum Canyon Rd
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Report Figures\Buildout Volumes.xlsx (5/16/2024)

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 19
Table F: General Plan Buildout (2045) Roadway LOS Summary Roadway Segment Mid‐Block Lanes Capacity Future V/C LOS Gypsum Canyon Road (La Palma Avenue to SR‐91 WB
Ramps) 4D 37,500 13,122 0.35 A
Gypsum Canyon Road (SR‐91 WB Ramps to SR‐91 EB
Ramps) 4D 37,500 14,206 0.38 A
Gypsum Canyon Road (SR‐91 EB Ramps to Santa Ana
Canyon Road) 4D 37,500 19,473 0.52 A
Santa Ana Canyon Road (West of Gypsum Canyon
Road) 4U 25,000 10,107 0.40 A
Source: Compiled by LSA (2024).
=  = UnsaƟsfactory LOS; peak‐hour analysis required
LOS = level of service
SR = State Route
V/C = volume‐to‐capacity raƟo

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 20

PROJECT IMPACTS

TRIP GENERATION
As presented previously in the Project DescripƟon secƟon, the proposed project consists of two cemeteries: one public cemetery operated by the District and one veterans’ cemetery operated by CalVet. The daily and peak‐hour trips for the proposed project were generated using trip rates contained in the InsƟtute of TransportaƟon Engineers’ (ITE) Trip GeneraƟon, 11th EdiƟon (2021). The project trip generaƟon is presented in Table G. As Table G indicates, the proposed project is anƟcipated to generate a total of 1,084 new daily trips, 30 of which would occur in the a.m. peak hour (25 inbound and 5 outbound) and 83 of which would occur in the p.m. peak hour (25 inbound and 58 outbound). Table G also provides the trip generaƟon for Development Areas 5 and 6 that would have occurred under the Mountain Park Specific Plan. The proposed project would generate less than 10 percent of the traffic previously anƟcipated.

Table G: Gypsum Canyon Cemeteries Trip GeneraƟon
Land Use Size Unit ADT AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
In Out Total In Out Total
Trip Rates (Land Use Code)
Cemetery (566)1   Acre 6.02 0.14 0.03 0.17 0.14 0.32 0.46 Single Family ResidenƟal2   DU 10.00 0.24 0.60 0.80 0.70 0.30 1.00 Condominiums2   DU 8.00 0.13 0.51 0.64 0.56 0.24 0.80
Convenience Commercial2   TSF 120.00 2.90 1.90 4.80 6.00 6.00 12.00 Mountain Park Specific Plan
Single Family ResidenƟal 7702 DU 7,700 185 462 617 539 231 770 AƩached Condominium 8252 DU 6,600 107 421 528 462 198 660 DA 6 Commercial 3.000 TSF 360 9 6 15 18 18 36
Total DAs 5 and 6 1,595

3.000
DU
TSF 14,660 301 889 1,160 1,019 447 1,466
Project Trip GeneraƟon
Public Cemetery 80 Acre 482 11 2 13 11 26 37
Veterans’ Cemetery 100 Acre 602 14 3 17 14 32 46
Total   180 Acre 1,084 25 5 30 25 58 83
Source: Compiled by LSA (2024). 1 Trip rates referenced from the ITE Trip GeneraƟon Manual, 11th EdiƟon (2021). 2 Trip rates and DA 5 and 6 land use referenced from Mountain Park Specific Plan Traffic Analysis (AusƟn‐Foust, February 2005).

ADT = average daily trips
DA = development area
DU = dwelling unit
ITE = InsƟtute of TransportaƟon Engineers
TSF = thousand square feet

TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT
Trip distribuƟon defines the regional percentage origins/desƟnaƟons for a project. To determine trip distribuƟon for the proposed project, LSA considered the results of the OCTAM traffic modeling, the project descripƟon, and the availability of regional transportaƟon infrastructure. Consistent with Public Cemetery District Law, both cemeteries would serve Orange County residents. Under only

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 21
limited circumstances could non‐residents be interred. According to the District, fewer than 1 percent of interments are of non‐residents. Due to the locaƟon of the project site, the majority of visits would be anƟcipated to arrive from the west via SR‐91. However, residents of some areas may find La Palma Avenue or Santa Ana Canyon Road to be a pracƟcal alternaƟve to SR‐91. LSA queried the populaƟon in ZIP codes for which La Palma Avenue would be a pracƟcal means of accessing the project site and found it to be approximately 5 percent of the Orange County populaƟon. Similarly, populaƟon in ZIP codes for which Santa Ana Canyon Road would be a pracƟcal alternaƟve to SR‐91 is approximately 5 percent of the Orange County populaƟon. LSA also considered that some employees or visitors may arrive from the Inland Empire. Traffic from the project site was distributed 85 percent west on SR‐91, 5 percent east on SR‐91, 5 percent west on La Palma Avenue, and 5 percent west on Santa Ana Canyon Road. Figure 8 shows the regional trip distribuƟon and assignment for the proposed project.
1 / 1 
1 Gypsum Canyon Rd/La Palma Ave
 1 / 1

2 Gypsum Canyon Rd/SR‐91 WB Ramps

22 / 22 
3 Gypsum Canyon Rd/SR‐91 EB Ramps

1 / 1  
4 Gypsum Canyon Rd/Santa Ana Cyn Rd
FIGURE 8
LEGEND
XXX / YYY AM / PM Volume
Gypsum Canyon Cemeteries
Project Trip Assignment 2 / 2 1 / 1 0 / 3 0 / 3 4 / 49 4 / 52 0 / 3 24 / 24 1 / 3 4 / 55 Santa Ana Canyon Road
Gypsum Canyon Rd
SR‐91 EB Off
Gypsum Canyon Rd
SR‐91 WB Off
Gypsum Cyn Rd Gypsum Cyn
La Palma Ave
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Report Figures\Project Volumes.xlsx (5/16/2024)

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 23

EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITION
The ExisƟng Plus Project condiƟon is a theoreƟcal exercise that examines the effect of adding trip generaƟon of a fully built and operaƟng project to exisƟng traffic volume. The total project trips were added to the exisƟng traffic volumes at the study intersecƟons and roadway segments for this scenario. Figure 9 shows the resulƟng ExisƟng Plus Project a.m. and p.m. peak‐hour traffic volumes.

EXISTING PLUS PROJECT INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS Table H summarizes the results of the ExisƟng Plus Project a.m. and p.m. peak‐hour LOS analysis for all study intersecƟons. As Table H indicates, all study intersecƟons are anƟcipated to operate at a saƟsfactory LOS (i.e., LOS D or beƩer) in the a.m. and p.m. peak hours with full implementaƟon of the proposed project except for the unsignalized intersecƟon of Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana Canyon Road.

Table H: ExisƟng Plus Project IntersecƟon Level of Service Summary Study
Area
No.

IntersecƟons
Baseline Plus Project
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
V/C RaƟo LOS V/C RaƟo LOS V/C RaƟo LOS V/C RaƟo LOS
1 Gypsum Canyon Road/La Palma
Avenue 0.39 A 0.57 A 0.39 A 0.57 A
2 Gypsum Canyon Road/SR‐91 WB
Ramps 0.31 A 0.41 A 0.31 A 0.41 A
HCM 12.2 sec B 15.5 sec B 12.2 sec B 15.5 sec B
3 Gypsum Canyon Road/SR‐91 EB
Ramps (unsignalized) 0.21 A 0.13 A 0.21 A 0.14 A
HCM 10.2 sec B 9.3 sec A 10.3 sec B 9.6 sec A
4 Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana
Canyon Road (unsignalized) 0.16 A 0.68 B 0.18 A 0.69 B
HCM 7.2 sec A 119.5 sec F 7.4 sec A 137.2 sec F
Source: Compiled by LSA (2024).
=  = UnsaƟsfactory LOS
EB = eastbound
HCM = HCM Highway Capacity Manual
LOS = level of service
sec = seconds
SR‐91 = State Route 91
V/C = volume‐to‐capacity
WB = westbound
The HCM analysis, which is appropriate to analyze the operaƟon of an unsignalized intersecƟon, shows that Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana Canyon Road operates at unsaƟsfactory LOS in the p.m. peak hour in the ExisƟng condiƟon and would conƟnue to operate at unsaƟsfactory LOS with the addiƟon of project traffic. SignalizaƟon of the intersecƟon would result in saƟsfactory LOS B without or with the project.  The City’s Criteria for PreparaƟon of Traffic Impact Studies requires consideraƟon of traffic signal warrants as part of any recommendaƟon for signalizaƟon.  6 / 3
 261 / 244
   340 / 65
10 / 27   
94 / 361 
219 / 806 
1 Gypsum Canyon Rd/La Palma Ave
 135 / 143
 2 / 8
 58 / 44
1 / 6   
17 / 6 
2 Gypsum Canyon Rd/SR‐91 WB Ramps

147 / 5 
33 / 27 
3 Gypsum Canyon Rd/SR‐91 EB Ramps

59 / 927  
1 / 9 
4 Gypsum Canyon Rd/Santa Ana Cyn Rd
FIGURE 9
LEGEND
XXX / YYY AM / PM Volume
Gypsum Canyon Cemeteries
Existing Plus Project Volumes 19 / 15 202 / 717 126 / 127 5 / 15 570 / 864 134 / 114 11 / 2 166 / 99 122 / 66 5 / 2 16 / 8 9 / 50 4 / 4 157 / 18 22 / 68 42 / 924 25 / 40 1 / 3 5 / 65 Santa Ana Canyon Road
Gypsum Canyon Rd Gypsum Canyon Rd
SR‐91 EB Off
Gypsum Cyn Rd
SR‐91 WB Off
Gypsum Cyn
La Palma Ave
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Report Figures\Existing Plus Project Volumes.xlsx (5/16/2024)

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 25
The California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) idenƟfies nine potenƟal warrants for a traffic signal. These are:
 Warrant 1: Eight Hour Vehicular Volume
 Warrant 2: Four Hour Vehicular Volume
 Warrant 3: Peak Hour Vehicular Volume
 Warrant 4: Pedestrian Volume
 Warrant 5: School Crossing
 Warrant 6: Coordinated Signal System
 Warrant 7: Crash Experience
 Warrant 8: Roadway Network
 Warrant 9: IntersecƟon Near a Grade Crossing
Pedestrian volumes at the intersecƟon are low; the intersecƟon is not near a school crossing; neither Gypsum Canyon Road nor Santa Ana Canyon Road are part of a coordinated signal system that would be interrupted by the intersecƟon remaining unsignalized; crashes that could be prevented by signalizaƟon have been fewer than five per year; signalizaƟon would not change concentraƟon or organizaƟon of traffic flow on either road; and the intersecƟon is not near a rail grade crossing.

Therefore, Warrants 4 through 9 do not apply. LSA prepared worksheets for Warrants 1 through 3 using data collected for and generated by this analysis. The worksheets are provided in Appendix D.

The traffic volume thresholds established by the MUTCD are not met in the ExisƟng or ExisƟng Plus Project scenarios. Because none of the nine traffic signal warrant condiƟons are met for the intersecƟon of Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana Canyon Road, it must be concluded that a traffic signal is not warranted. Therefore, a traffic signal is not recommended.

EXISTING PLUS PROJECT ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS Table I summarizes the daily traffic volumes and v/c raƟos for the four study area roadway segments with the addiƟon of project traffic. As Table I illustrates, all study area roadway segments would conƟnue to operate at a saƟsfactory LOS (i.e., LOS C or beƩer) with the addiƟon of project traffic to the exisƟng daily traffic volume.

Table I: ExisƟng Plus Project Roadway LOS Comparison
Roadway Segment Mid‐Block Lanes Capacity Baseline V/C LOS Plus Project V/C LOS Gypsum Canyon Road (La Palma
Avenue to SR‐91 WB Ramps) 4D 37,500 12,944 0.35 A 12,998 0.35 A Gypsum Canyon Road (SR‐91 WB
Ramps to SR‐91 EB Ramps) 2U 12,500 8,434 0.67 B 9,410 0.75 C Gypsum Canyon Road (SR‐91 EB
Ramps to Santa Ana Canyon Road) 2U 12,500 7,748 0.62 B 8,778 0.70 B Santa Ana Canyon Road (West of
Gypsum Canyon Road) 2U 12,500 7,353 0.59 A 7,407 0.59 A Source: Compiled by LSA (2024).
=  = UnsaƟsfactory LOS; peak‐hour analysis required
EB = eastbound
LOS = level of service
SR‐91 = State Route 91
V/C = volume‐to‐capacity raƟo
WB = westbound

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 26
OPENING YEAR (2026) PLUS PROJECT CONDITION
At project opening, the cemetery sites would be graded, administraƟve and maintenance buildings would be completed, and a porƟon of the grounds would be prepared to accept interments. The full trip generaƟon for either cemetery site would not occur at project opening as not all of the grounds would be developed. However, the Opening Year (2026) Plus Project scenario adds traffic generated by the project to the baseline traffic volumes developed for the project Opening Year (2026) at each study intersecƟon and roadway segment. Figure 10 illustrates the resulƟng Opening Year (2026) Plus Project a.m. and p.m. peak‐hour traffic volumes.

OPENING YEAR (2026) PLUS PROJECT INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY

ANALYSIS
Table J summarizes the results of the Opening Year (2026) Plus Project a.m. and p.m. peak‐hour LOS analysis for all study intersecƟons. As Table J indicates, all study intersecƟons are anƟcipated to operate at a saƟsfactory LOS (i.e., LOS D or beƩer) in the a.m. and p.m. peak hours with implementaƟon of the proposed project except for the unsignalized intersecƟon of Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana Canyon Road. Similar to the analysis of the ExisƟng Plus Project scenario, the intersecƟon of Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana Canyon Road would not warrant signalizaƟon according to criteria in the MUTCD.

Table J: Opening Year (2026) Plus Project IntersecƟon Level of Service Summary Study
Area No. IntersecƟons
Baseline Plus Project
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
V/C RaƟo LOS V/C RaƟo LOS V/C RaƟo LOS V/C RaƟo LOS
1 Gypsum Canyon Road/La Palma Avenue 0.41 A 0.59 A 0.41 A 0.59 A 2 Gypsum Canyon Road/SR‐91 WB Ramps 0.31 A 0.41 A 0.32 A 0.42 A HCM 12.2 sec B 15.7 sec B 12.2 sec B 15.7 sec B
3 Gypsum Canyon Road/SR‐91 EB Ramps
(unsignalized) 0.22 A 0.13 A 0.22 A 0.14 A
HCM 10.3 sec B 9.2 sec A 10.2 sec B 9.2 sec A
4 Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana
Canyon Road (unsignalized) 0.17 A 0.70 B 0.18 A 0.72 C
HCM 7.3 sec A 158.9 sec F 7.5 sec A 157.7 sec F
Source: Compiled by LSA (2024).
=  = UnsaƟsfactory LOS
EB = eastbound
HCM = HCM Highway Capacity Manual
LOS = level of service
sec = seconds
SR‐91 = State Route 91
V/C = volume‐to‐capacity
WB = westbound
 6 / 3
 271 / 254
   354 / 68
10 / 28   
98 / 375 
228 / 838 
1 Gypsum Canyon Rd/La Palma Ave
 140 / 149
 2 / 8
 60 / 46
1 / 6   
18 / 6 
2 Gypsum Canyon Rd/SR‐91 WB Ramps

154 / 5 
33 / 27 
3 Gypsum Canyon Rd/SR‐91 EB Ramps

61 / 964  
1 / 9 
4 Gypsum Canyon Rd/Santa Ana Cyn Rd
FIGURE 10
LEGEND
XXX / YYY AM / PM Volume
Gypsum Canyon Cemeteries
Opening Year (2026) Plus Project Volumes 1 / 3 5 / 65 23 / 69 44 / 961 25 / 41 9 / 51 4 / 4 163 / 19 11 / 2 127 / 69 173 / 103 5 / 2 17 / 8 210 / 746 131 / 132 5 / 16 593 / 899 139 / 119 20 / 16 La Palma Ave
Gypsum Cyn
SR‐91 WB Off
Gypsum Cyn Rd
SR‐91 EB Off
Gypsum Canyon Rd Gypsum Canyon Rd
Santa Ana Canyon Road
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Report Figures\Opening Plus Project Volumes.xlsx (5/16/2024)

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 28
Although signalizaƟon is not warranted and the intersecƟon of Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana Canyon Road would remain unsignalized, modificaƟons are possible that could increase the visibility of cross traffic and improve intersecƟon performance. As noted previously, congesƟon on SR‐91 eastbound results in congesƟon on the SR‐91 eastbound on‐ramp in the p.m. peak hour. This congesƟon results in queueing back to and through the intersecƟon of Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana Canyon Road. Vehicle queueing in the intersecƟon could inhibit northbound and southbound through traffic into and out of the project site and impair intersecƟon operaƟon. Eastbound driver failure to comply with stop signs and watch for oncoming vehicles could also impair intersecƟon operaƟon. The following measures are recommended to enhance the intersecƟon of Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana Canyon Road at the Ɵme the northbound leg is modified to permit through traffic:
 Southbound Gypsum Canyon Road
○ Retain retroreflect strip (consistent with SecƟon 2A.21 of the MUTCD) already mounted to sign support
○ Install R3‐18 sign below exisƟng Stop sign indicaƟng no leŌ or U‐turns  Eastbound Santa Ana Canyon Road
○ Retain retroreflect strip (consistent with SecƟon 2A.21 of the MUTCD) already mounted to sign support
○ Replace exisƟng 30 x 30 stop sign 36 x 36 Stop sign (R1‐1) and (for a temporary period of six months consistent with SecƟon 2A.15 of the MUTCD) add two red flags above the Stop sign for enhanced conspicuity
○ Add R10‐7 Do Not Block IntersecƟon sign below Stop sign ○ Place an addiƟonal R10‐7 Do Not Block IntersecƟon sign on east side of Gypsum Canyon Road directly opposite eastbound leg
○ Add 30x30 warning sign W23‐2 New Traffic PaƩern Ahead 250 feet in advance of intersecƟon on a temporary basis for six months (consistent with SecƟon 2C.52 of the MUTCD) to alert drivers to the addiƟon of north‐south traffic OPENING YEAR (2026) PLUS PROJECT ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS Table K summarizes the daily traffic volumes and v/c raƟos for the four study area roadway segments with the addiƟon of project traffic. As Table K illustrates, all study area roadway segments would conƟnue to operate at a saƟsfactory LOS (i.e., LOS C or beƩer) with the addiƟon of project traffic to Opening Year (2026) daily traffic volumes.

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 29
Table K: Opening Year (2026) Plus Project Roadway LOS Comparison Roadway Segment Mid‐Block
Lanes Capacity Baseline V/C LOS PlusProject V/C LOS
Gypsum Canyon Road (La Palma Avenue to SR‐91
WB Ramps) 4D 37,500 12,957 0.35 A 13,011 0.35 A
Gypsum Canyon Road (SR‐91 WB Ramps to SR‐91
EB Ramps) 2U 12,500 8,620 0.69 B 9,596 0.77 C
Gypsum Canyon Road (SR‐91 EB Ramps to Santa
Ana Canyon Road) 2U 12,500 8,044 0.64 B 9,074 0.73 C
Santa Ana Canyon Road (West of Gypsum Canyon
Road) 2U 12,500 7,567 0.61 B 7,621 0.61 B
Source: Compiled by LSA (2024).
=   UnsaƟsfactory LOS; peak‐hour analysis required.

EB = eastbound
LOS = level of service
SR‐91 = State Route 91
V/C = volume‐to‐capacity raƟo
WB = westbound

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 30
GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (2045) PLUS PROJECT CONDITION
As discussed previously, the Mountain Park Specific Plan anƟcipated 1,595 new residenƟal units in the development areas where the proposed project would be located. In the General Plan Buildout (2045) No Project condiƟon, two intersecƟons and three of four roadway segments would operate at unsaƟsfactory LOS without physical improvement with implementaƟon of the Mountain Park Specific Plan. The General Plan Buildout (2045) Plus Project scenario eliminates the 1,595 residenƟal units that contributed to those deficiencies and replaces them with the proposed project’s lower trip generaƟon. The proposed project does not replace the other Mountain Park Specific Plan Development Areas and the 905 residenƟal units in the other development areas remain in the General Plan Buildout (2045) Plus Project scenario.

Two of the associated infrastructure improvements of the Mountain Park Specific Plan are the construcƟon of Mountain Park Drive and the extension of Weir Canyon Road, which were idenƟfied in the Mountain Park Specific Plan as Project Design Features 7‐3 and 7‐4 associated with the development of areas east of SR‐241. The proposed project eliminates the extension of Mountain Park Drive into Development Area 5 and the intersecƟon of Gypsum Canyon Road/Mountain Park Drive at the previously anƟcipated locaƟon. The proposed project would not construct the extension of Weir Canyon Road or Mountain Park Drive. These infrastructure improvements would instead be deferred to construcƟon of Development Areas 3, 4, or 7, as necessary, to provide access to those Development Areas. Development Areas 1 and 2 would conƟnue to take access from a connecƟon to the southern extension of Gypsum Canyon Road.

Traffic volumes for the General Plan Buildout (2045) Plus Project scenario were developed using the OCTAM traffic model by subsƟtuƟng previous residenƟal uses with the project land use in Development Areas 5 and 6. The OCTAM examines a future horizon year of 2045. The proposed project will have some areas developed and operaƟng and more areas reserved for future use. The District currently operates three public cemeteries in Orange County, all of which began operaƟon in the 19th century. The proposed 80‐acre public cemetery and 100‐acre veterans’ cemetery are similarly expected to operate over a long horizon. As such, full project trip generaƟon is not anƟcipated by 2045. However, predicƟon of ambient traffic paƩerns past the 2045 horizon year could not be completed with a validated traffic model and would be speculaƟve. Therefore, this report analyzes full project trip generaƟon at the limit of the future horizon for traffic volume development. Figure 11 illustrates the resulƟng General Plan Buildout (2045) Plus Project a.m. and p.m. peak‐hour traffic volumes.
 6 / 3
 261 / 244
   749 / 396
10 / 27   
94 / 467 
264 / 872 
1 Gypsum Canyon Rd/La Palma Ave
 298 / 155
 2 / 8
 269 / 46
2 / 6   
17 / 6 
2 Gypsum Canyon Rd/SR‐91 WB Ramps

251 / 660 
33 / 27 
3 Gypsum Canyon Rd/SR‐91 EB Ramps

60 / 1225  
13 / 9 
4 Gypsum Canyon Rd/Santa Ana Cyn Rd
FIGURE 11
LEGEND
XXX / YYY AM / PM Volume
Gypsum Canyon Cemeteries
General Plan Buildout (2045) Plus Project Volumes 19 / 15 333 / 1041 622 / 205 11 / 22 1041 / 1264 605 / 142 11 / 2 272 / 282 273 / 576 27 / 34 39 / 18 15 / 63 4 / 4 272 / 731 40 / 138 44 / 1169 50 / 90 4 / 21 24 / 82 La Palma Ave
SR‐91 WB Off
SR‐91 EB Off
Santa Ana Canyon Road
Gypsum Canyon Rd Gypsum Canyon Rd
Gypsum Cyn Rd Gypsum Cyn
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Report Figures\Buildout Plus Project Volumes.xlsx (5/16/2024)

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 32
GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (2045) PLUS PROJECT INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE

SUMMARY ANALYSIS
Table L summarizes the results of the General Plan Buildout (2045) Plus Project a.m. and p.m. peak‐ hour LOS analysis for all study intersecƟons. As Table L indicates, the intersecƟon of Gypsum Canyon Road/La Palma Avenue is anƟcipated to operate at a saƟsfactory LOS (i.e., LOS D or beƩer) in the a.m. and p.m. peak hours with implementaƟon of the proposed project. While nonproject volumes would increase by the 2045 horizon year, the proposed project reduces the traffic volume generated by the project site compared to the land uses in the Mountain Park Specific Plan. Amending the General Plan results in lower traffic volume forecasts and preserves saƟsfactory operaƟon of the Gypsum Canyon Road/La Palma Avenue intersecƟon. This conclusion mirrors the conclusion presented in the Yorba Linda Housing Element and General Plan Update Traffic Analysis (Urban Crossroads 2022).

Table L: General Plan Buildout (2045) Plus Project IntersecƟon Level of Service Summary
Study
Area No. IntersecƟons
Baseline Plus Project
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
V/C RaƟo LOS V/C RaƟo LOS V/C RaƟo LOS V/C RaƟo LOS
1 Gypsum Canyon Road/La Palma
Avenue 0.70 B 0.97 E 0.69 B 0.82 D
2 Gypsum Canyon Road/SR‐91 WB
Ramps 0.57 A 0.62 B 0.55 A 0.53 A
HCM 17.4 sec B 15.7 sec B 16.7 sec B 11.9 sec B
3 Gypsum Canyon Road/SR‐91 EB Ramps   0.36 A 0.52 A 0.38 A 0.50 A HCM 6.4 sec A 8.9 sec A 6.8 sec A 8.3 sec A
4 Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana
Canyon Road   0.63 B 0.61 B 0.41 A 0.48 B
Source: Compiled by LSA (2024). 1 IntersecƟon modificaƟon includes northbound leŌ‐turn lane and southbound right‐turn lane. =  =UnsaƟsfactory LOS
EB = eastbound
HCM = HCM Highway Capacity Manual
LOS = level of service
sec = seconds
SR = State Route
V/C = volume‐to‐capacity
WB = westbound
The remaining three study intersecƟons were anƟcipated to operate at saƟsfactory LOS under General Plan Buildout (2045) No Project condiƟons and conƟnue to operate at saƟsfactory LOS under General Plan Buildout (2045) Plus Project condiƟons, including deferral of construcƟng Mountain Park Drive.

GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT (2045) PLUS PROJECT ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVEL OF

SERVICE ANALYSIS
Table M summarizes the daily traffic volumes and v/c raƟos for the four study area roadway segments with the addiƟon of project traffic. As Table M illustrates, all study area roadway segments would conƟnue to operate at a saƟsfactory LOS (i.e., LOS C or beƩer) with the addiƟon of project traffic to General Plan Buildout (2045) Plus Project daily traffic volumes. Again, this is an improvement over General Plan Buildout (2045) No Project condiƟons, because the proposed project would reduce the

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 33
Table M: General Plan Buildout (2045) Plus Project Roadway LOS Comparison Roadway Segment Mid‐Block
Lanes Capacity Baseline V/C LOS Plus
Project V/C LOS
Gypsum Canyon Road (La Palma Avenue to SR‐91 WB
Ramps) 4D 37,500 13,122 0.35 A 13,042 0.35 A
Gypsum Canyon Road (SR‐91 WB Ramps to SR‐91 EB
Ramps) 4D 37,500 14,206 0.38 A 9,862 0.26 A
Gypsum Canyon Road (SR‐91 EB Ramps to Santa Ana
Canyon Road) 4D 37,500 19,473 0.52 A 10,019 0.27 A
Santa Ana Canyon Road (West of Gypsum Canyon Road) 4U 25,000 10,107 0.40 A 8,995 0.36 A Source: Compiled by LSA (2024).
= UnsaƟsfactory LOS; peak‐hour analysis required
EB = eastbound
LOS = level of service
SR = State Route
V/C = volume‐to‐capacity raƟo
WB = westbound
trips generated by the project site compared to the land uses in the Mountain Park Specific Plan, even with deferral of construcƟng Mountain Park Drive. Sufficient capacity remains in the General Plan Buildout circulaƟon network for all project uses and Mountain Park Specific Plan Development Areas 1 and 2 with the extension of Gypsum Canyon Road. The extension of Weir Canyon Road and construcƟon of Mountain Park Drive are not necessary for access to the proposed project or for circulaƟon network capacity with the proposed project. Therefore, it is possible to defer the extension of Weir Canyon Road and construcƟon of Mountain Park Drive to future Mountain Park Specific Plan Development Areas. Development Areas 3, 4, or 7 may require these associated infrastructure improvements for access.

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 34

ACCESS ANALYSIS
The analysis above used Synchro computer soŌware to calculate intersecƟon LOS at the Caltrans intersecƟons and unsignalized intersecƟons within the study area. The site plan includes an unsignalized intersecƟon along the main access roadway from which the public cemetery will take access. Vehicle traveling to the veterans’ cemetery would conƟnue south along the main access roadway. This intersecƟon was included in the Synchro analysis to determine LOS and queueing.

For this analysis, weekend traffic into and out of the cemeteries was considered. ITE’s Trip GeneraƟon reports a weekend peak‐hour trip generaƟon rate of 2.0 trips per acre, of which 53 percent are inbound and 47 percent are outbound. During the busiest weekend hour, the public cemetery would generate 85 inbound trips and 75 outbound trips, while the veterans’ cemetery would generate 106 inbound trips and 94 outbound trips.

LOS and queuing worksheets are provided in Appendix E. Table N presents LOS and queueing calculaƟons at the internal access intersecƟon. As Table N shows, queues forming for southbound leŌ‐turns into the public cemetery are not anƟcipated to exceed a single vehicle. Queues for the westbound approach out of the public cemetery are not anƟcipated to exceed a single vehicle.

Therefore, the funcƟon of the internal roadways is not anƟcipated to affect operaƟon of City streets.

Table N: Internal IntersecƟon LOS and Queuing Summary
Approach
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Weekend Peak Hour
Delay
(sec) LOS Queue(vehicle)
Delay
(sec) LOS Queue(vehicle)
Delay
(sec) LOS Queue(vehicle)
Northbound Through 0.0 A 0 0.0 A 0 0.0 A 0
Northbound Right 0.0 A 0 0.0 A 0 0.0 A 0
Southbound LeŌ  7.2 A 0 7.3 A 0 7.6 A 0.2
Southbound Through 0.0 A 0 0.0 A 0 0.0 A 0
Westbound LeŌ‐Right 8.3 A 0 8.6 A 0.1 9.1 A 0.3
Source: Compiled by LSA (2023).

LOS = level of service
sec = seconds

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 35

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
The approximately 283‐acre project site is currently subject to the Mountain Park Specific Plan.

Mountain Park Specific Plan Development Areas 5 and 6, which comprise 1,595 residenƟal dwelling units, a fire staƟon, and 3,000 sf of commercial use, would be displaced by the proposed project. The extension of Weir Canyon Road, construcƟon of Mountain Park Drive, and planned infrastructure improvements included in the Mountain Park Specific Plan would not be constructed by the proposed project but would not be precluded by the project either. The project would construct an 80‐acre public cemetery operated by the District and a 100‐acre veterans’ cemetery operated by CalVet. Each of these parcels will be developed in approximately 10‐ to 20‐acre increments on as‐ needed basis.

Full trip generaƟon for both parcels would total 1,084 daily trips, 30 of which would occur in the a.m. peak hour and 83 of which would occur in the p.m. peak hour. This trip generaƟon is much lower than the Mountain Park Specific Plan land uses. At Opening Year (2026), only a porƟon of the interment areas will be developed and operaƟng. Full development of the project site will not occur unƟl many years aŌer the 2045 traffic model horizon year.

Freeway bypass traffic cuts through the study area, which causes the intersecƟon of Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana Canyon Road to operate at unsaƟsfactory LOS in the exisƟng p.m. peak hour.

CongesƟon and delay on SR‐91 eastbound causes congesƟon and delay on the SR‐91 eastbound on‐ ramp and the queuing reaches the Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana Canyon Road intersecƟon in the p.m. peak hour. This currently unsignalized intersecƟon would operate at unsaƟsfactory LOS in the ExisƟng and Opening Year (2026) Baseline scenarios. Improvements included in the Anaheim General Plan, including widening Gypsum Canyon Road and Santa Ana Canyon Road to four lanes and signalizaƟon of the intersecƟon, result in calculaƟons of saƟsfactory LOS in the General Plan Buildout (2045) No Project scenario. However, queueing from the SR‐91 eastbound on‐ramp could sƟll impair intersecƟon operaƟon if not managed.

The following modificaƟons to the intersecƟon of Gypsum Canyon Road/Santa Ana Canyon Road are recommended at the Ɵme the northbound leg is modified to permit through traffic:
 Southbound Gypsum Canyon Road
○ Retain retroreflect strip (consistent with SecƟon 2A.21 of the MUTCD) already mounted to sign support
○ Install R3‐18 sign below exisƟng Stop sign indicaƟng no leŌ or U‐turns  Eastbound Santa Ana Canyon Road
○ Retain retroreflect strip (consistent with SecƟon 2A.21 of the MUTCD) already mounted to sign support

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 36
○ Replace exisƟng 30 x 30 stop sign 36 x 36 Stop sign (R1‐1) and (for a temporary period of six months consistent with SecƟon 2A.15 of the MUTCD) add two red flags above the Stop sign for enhanced conspicuity
○ Add R10‐7 Do Not Block IntersecƟon sign below Stop sign ○ Place an addiƟonal R10‐7 Do Not Block IntersecƟon sign on east side of Gypsum Canyon Road directly opposite eastbound leg
○ Add 30 x 30 warning sign W23‐2 New Traffic PaƩern Ahead 250 feet in advance of intersecƟon on a temporary basis for six months (consistent with SecƟon 2C.52 of the MUTCD) to alert drivers to the addiƟon of north‐south traffic Removal of the Mountain Park Specific Plan land uses from the project site in the General Plan in favor of the lower trip generaƟon of the proposed project would help maintain saƟsfactory LOS at Gypsum Canyon Road/La Palma Avenue, even with deferral of the extension of Weir Canyon Road and construcƟon of Mountain Park Drive to future Mountain Park Specific Plan development areas requiring those infrastructure improvements for access.

This report also examined the funcƟon of the public cemetery access road intersecƟon with the internal access roadway leading to the veterans’ cemetery. The internal intersecƟon was found to operate at saƟsfactory LOS during the a.m. and p.m. weekday peak hours as well as with peak traffic volume on weekends. Queues for any approach are not anƟcipated to exceed a single vehicle during weekdays or weekends. Therefore, the funcƟon of the internal roadways is not anƟcipated to affect operaƟon of City streets.

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24» 37

REFERENCES
AusƟn‐Foust Associates, Inc. 2005. Mountain Park Specific Plan Traffic Analysis. February.

City of Anaheim. 2016. Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan.
______. 2020. Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for California Environmental Quality Act Analysis.

June 2020.
_____. n.d. Criteria for PreparaƟon of Traffic Impact Studies.

InsƟtute of TransportaƟon Engineers (ITE). 2021. ITE Trip GeneraƟon, 11th EdiƟon.

TransportaƟon Research Board of the NaƟonal Academies. 2016. HCM Highway Capacity Manual, Sixth EdiƟon.

Urban Crossroads. 2022. Yorba Linda Housing Element and General Plan Update Traffic Analysis.

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24»

APPENDIX A

TRAFFIC VOLUME DATA
File Name : 01_YLA_GC_La P AM
Site Code : 00322954
Start Date : 10/20/2022
Page No : 1
City of Yorba Linda
N/S: Bryant Ranch Rd/Gypsum Canyon Rd
E/W: La Palma Avenue
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Total Volume
Bryant Ranch Road
Southbound
La Palma Avenue
Westbound
Gypsum Canyon Road
Northbound
La Palma Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 0 2 3 5 84 31 0 115 40 1 26 67 2 18 40 60 247
07:15 AM 3 6 1 10 80 42 1 123 34 0 27 61 2 17 48 67 261 07:30 AM 6 5 7 18 94 62 0 156 47 3 38 88 1 15 63 79 341 07:45 AM 0 2 8 10 83 72 4 159 48 0 27 75 6 28 61 95 339 Total 9 15 19 43 341 207 5 553 169 4 118 291 11 78 212 301 1188 08:00 AM 2 3 3 8 83 85 1 169 37 2 30 69 1 34 46 81 327
08:15 AM 1 1 5 7 70 52 1 123 28 2 22 52 2 37 33 72 254
08:30 AM 0 1 0 1 77 52 0 129 45 2 31 78 1 47 44 92 300
08:45 AM 0 2 2 4 57 28 1 86 45 0 32 77 1 39 41 81 248
Total 3 7 10 20 287 217 3 507 155 6 115 276 5 157 164 326 1129 Grand Total 12 22 29 63 628 424 8 1060 324 10 233 567 16 235 376 627 2317 Apprch % 19 34.9 46 59.2 40 0.8 57.1 1.8 41.1 2.6 37.5 60 Total % 0.5 0.9 1.3 2.7 27.1 18.3 0.3 45.7 14 0.4 10.1 24.5 0.7 10.1 16.2 27.1 Bryant Ranch Road
Southbound
La Palma Avenue
Westbound
Gypsum Canyon Road
Northbound
La Palma Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:15 AM
07:15 AM 3 6 1 10 80 42 1 123 34 0 27 61 2 17 48 67 261 07:30 AM 6 5 7 18 94 62 0 156 47 3 38 88 1 15 63 79 341 07:45 AM 0 2 8 10 83 72 4 159 48 0 27 75 6 28 61 95 339 08:00 AM 2 3 3 8 83 85 1 169 37 2 30 69 1 34 46 81 327
Total Volume 11 16 19 46 340 261 6 607 166 5 122 293 10 94 218 322 1268 % App. Total 23.9 34.8 41.3 56 43 1 56.7 1.7 41.6 3.1 29.2 67.7 PHF .458 .667 .594 .639 .904 .768 .375 .898 .865 .417 .803 .832 .417 .691 .865 .847 .930 Counts Unlimited, Inc.

PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951)268-6268
File Name : 01_YLA_GC_La P AM
Site Code : 00322954
Start Date : 10/20/2022
Page No : 2
City of Yorba Linda
N/S: Bryant Ranch Rd/Gypsum Canyon Rd
E/W: La Palma Avenue
Weather: Clear
Bryant Ranch Road
La Palma Avenue
La Palma Avenue
Gypsum Canyon Road
Right
19 Thru
16 Left
11 Out In Total
21 46 67
Right
6 Thru
261
Left
340
Out Total In
227 607 834
Left
166
Thru
5 Right
122
Out In Total
574 293 867
Left
10 Thru
94 Right
218
Total Out In
446 322 768
Peak Hour Begins at 07:15 AM
Total Volume
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
07:15 AM 07:15 AM 07:15 AM 07:45 AM
+0 mins. 3 6 1 10 80 42 1 123 34 0 27 61 6 28 61 95
+15 mins. 6 5 7 18 94 62 0 156 47 3 38 88 1 34 46 81
+30 mins. 0 2 8 10 83 72 4 159 48 0 27 75 2 37 33 72
+45 mins. 2 3 3 8 83 85 1 169 37 2 30 69 1 47 44 92
Total Volume 11 16 19 46 340 261 6 607 166 5 122 293 10 146 184 340 % App. Total 23.9 34.8 41.3 56 43 1 56.7 1.7 41.6 2.9 42.9 54.1 PHF .458 .667 .594 .639 .904 .768 .375 .898 .865 .417 .803 .832 .417 .777 .754 .895 Counts Unlimited, Inc.

PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951)268-6268
File Name : 01_YLA_GC_La P PM
Site Code : 00322954
Start Date : 10/20/2022
Page No : 1
City of Yorba Linda
N/S: Bryant Ranch Rd/Gypsum Canyon Rd
E/W: La Palma Avenue
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Total Volume
Bryant Ranch Road
Southbound
La Palma Avenue
Westbound
Gypsum Canyon Road
Northbound
La Palma Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 04:00 PM 1 3 1 5 17 55 0 72 17 0 10 27 10 95 230 335 439 04:15 PM 0 0 3 3 16 66 1 83 25 2 15 42 4 96 215 315 443 04:30 PM 1 2 6 9 10 62 2 74 24 0 23 47 6 90 187 283 413 04:45 PM 0 3 5 8 22 61 0 83 30 0 18 48 7 80 173 260 399 Total 2 8 15 25 65 244 3 312 96 2 66 164 27 361 805 1193 1694 05:00 PM 0 0 3 3 25 57 0 82 22 0 14 36 8 114 187 309 430 05:15 PM 0 2 4 6 30 62 0 92 22 2 20 44 7 75 195 277 419 05:30 PM 1 0 8 9 12 56 1 69 19 1 18 38 2 104 219 325 441 05:45 PM 1 2 5 8 21 59 0 80 26 0 15 41 5 96 166 267 396 Total 2 4 20 26 88 234 1 323 89 3 67 159 22 389 767 1178 1686 Grand Total 4 12 35 51 153 478 4 635 185 5 133 323 49 750 1572 2371 3380 Apprch % 7.8 23.5 68.6 24.1 75.3 0.6 57.3 1.5 41.2 2.1 31.6 66.3 Total % 0.1 0.4 1 1.5 4.5 14.1 0.1 18.8 5.5 0.1 3.9 9.6 1.4 22.2 46.5 70.1 Bryant Ranch Road
Southbound
La Palma Avenue
Westbound
Gypsum Canyon Road
Northbound
La Palma Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:00 PM
04:00 PM 1 3 1 5 17 55 0 72 17 0 10 27 10 95 230 335 439 04:15 PM 0 0 3 3 16 66 1 83 25 2 15 42 4 96 215 315 443 04:30 PM 1 2 6 9 10 62 2 74 24 0 23 47 6 90 187 283 413 04:45 PM 0 3 5 8 22 61 0 83 30 0 18 48 7 80 173 260 399 Total Volume 2 8 15 25 65 244 3 312 96 2 66 164 27 361 805 1193 1694 % App. Total 8 32 60 20.8 78.2 1 58.5 1.2 40.2 2.3 30.3 67.5 PHF .500 .667 .625 .694 .739 .924 .375 .940 .800 .250 .717 .854 .675 .940 .875 .890 .956 Counts Unlimited, Inc.

PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951)268-6268
File Name : 01_YLA_GC_La P PM
Site Code : 00322954
Start Date : 10/20/2022
Page No : 2
City of Yorba Linda
N/S: Bryant Ranch Rd/Gypsum Canyon Rd
E/W: La Palma Avenue
Weather: Clear
Bryant Ranch Road
La Palma Avenue
La Palma Avenue
Gypsum Canyon Road
Right
15 Thru
8 Left
2 Out In Total
32 25 57
Right
3 Thru
244
Left
65 Out Total In
429 312 741
Left
96 Thru
2 Right
66 Out In Total
878 164 1042
Left
27 Thru
361
Right
805
Total Out In
355 1193 1548
Peak Hour Begins at 04:00 PM
Total Volume
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
04:30 PM 04:30 PM 04:30 PM 04:00 PM
+0 mins. 1 2 6 9 10 62 2 74 24 0 23 47 10 95 230 335
+15 mins. 0 3 5 8 22 61 0 83 30 0 18 48 4 96 215 315
+30 mins. 0 0 3 3 25 57 0 82 22 0 14 36 6 90 187 283
+45 mins. 0 2 4 6 30 62 0 92 22 2 20 44 7 80 173 260
Total Volume 1 7 18 26 87 242 2 331 98 2 75 175 27 361 805 1193 % App. Total 3.8 26.9 69.2 26.3 73.1 0.6 56 1.1 42.9 2.3 30.3 67.5 PHF .250 .583 .750 .722 .725 .976 .250 .899 .817 .250 .815 .911 .675 .940 .875 .890 Counts Unlimited, Inc.

PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951)268-6268
File Name : 02_YLA_GC_91W AM
Site Code : 00322954
Start Date : 10/20/2022
Page No : 1
City of Yorba Linda
N/S: Gypsum Canyon Road
E/W: Featherly Pk/SR-91 Westbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Total Volume
Gypsum Canyon Road
Southbound
SR-91 Westbound Ramps
Westbound
Gypsum Canyon Road
Northbound
Featherly Park
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 0 123 2 125 9 0 32 41 0 37 0 37 0 0 2 2 205
07:15 AM 0 139 0 139 14 0 32 46 0 30 3 33 1 0 5 6 224
07:30 AM 0 159 0 159 17 1 38 56 1 48 1 50 0 0 3 3 268
07:45 AM 0 135 2 137 10 1 36 47 1 36 0 37 0 0 5 5 226
Total 0 556 4 560 50 2 138 190 2 151 4 157 1 0 15 16 923 08:00 AM 0 131 3 134 16 0 28 44 2 42 1 45 0 0 4 4 227
08:15 AM 0 100 2 102 26 1 21 48 2 28 1 31 3 0 3 6 187
08:30 AM 0 120 1 121 14 2 36 52 0 43 1 44 3 0 8 11 228
08:45 AM 0 100 0 100 13 1 39 53 0 38 2 40 0 0 4 4 197
Total 0 451 6 457 69 4 124 197 4 151 5 160 6 0 19 25 839 Grand Total 0 1007 10 1017 119 6 262 387 6 302 9 317 7 0 34 41 1762 Apprch % 0 99 1 30.7 1.6 67.7 1.9 95.3 2.8 17.1 0 82.9
Total % 0 57.2 0.6 57.7 6.8 0.3 14.9 22 0.3 17.1 0.5 18 0.4 0 1.9 2.3 Gypsum Canyon Road
Southbound
SR-91 Westbound Ramps
Westbound
Gypsum Canyon Road
Northbound
Featherly Park
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:15 AM
07:15 AM 0 139 0 139 14 0 32 46 0 30 3 33 1 0 5 6 224
07:30 AM 0 159 0 159 17 1 38 56 1 48 1 50 0 0 3 3 268
07:45 AM 0 135 2 137 10 1 36 47 1 36 0 37 0 0 5 5 226
08:00 AM 0 131 3 134 16 0 28 44 2 42 1 45 0 0 4 4 227
Total Volume 0 564 5 569 57 2 134 193 4 156 5 165 1 0 17 18 945 % App. Total 0 99.1 0.9 29.5 1 69.4 2.4 94.5 3 5.6 0 94.4 PHF .000 .887 .417 .895 .838 .500 .882 .862 .500 .813 .417 .825 .250 .000 .850 .750 .882 Counts Unlimited, Inc.

PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951)268-6268
File Name : 02_YLA_GC_91W AM
Site Code : 00322954
Start Date : 10/20/2022
Page No : 2
City of Yorba Linda
N/S: Gypsum Canyon Road
E/W: Featherly Pk/SR-91 Westbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Gypsum Canyon Road
Featherly Park
SR-91 Westbound Ramps
Gypsum Canyon Road
Right
5 Thru
564
Left
0 Out In Total
291 569 860
Right
134
Thru
2 Left
57 Out Total In
5 193 198
Left
4 Thru
156
Right
5 Out In Total
638 165 803
Left
1 Thru
0 Right
17 Total Out In
11 18 29
Peak Hour Begins at 07:15 AM
Total Volume
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
07:15 AM 08:00 AM 07:15 AM 07:45 AM
+0 mins. 0 139 0 139 16 0 28 44 0 30 3 33 0 0 5 5
+15 mins. 0 159 0 159 26 1 21 48 1 48 1 50 0 0 4 4
+30 mins. 0 135 2 137 14 2 36 52 1 36 0 37 3 0 3 6
+45 mins. 0 131 3 134 13 1 39 53 2 42 1 45 3 0 8 11
Total Volume 0 564 5 569 69 4 124 197 4 156 5 165 6 0 20 26 % App. Total 0 99.1 0.9 35 2 62.9 2.4 94.5 3 23.1 0 76.9 PHF .000 .887 .417 .895 .663 .500 .795 .929 .500 .813 .417 .825 .500 .000 .625 .591 Counts Unlimited, Inc.

PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951)268-6268
File Name : 02_YLA_GC_91W PM
Site Code : 00322954
Start Date : 10/20/2022
Page No : 1
City of Yorba Linda
N/S: Gypsum Canyon Road
E/W: Featherly Pk/SR-91 Westbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Total Volume
Gypsum Canyon Road
Southbound
SR-91 Westbound Ramps
Westbound
Gypsum Canyon Road
Northbound
Featherly Park
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 04:00 PM 0 189 0 189 6 0 25 31 0 1 0 1 2 0 2 4 225
04:15 PM 0 207 5 212 11 2 31 44 0 7 0 7 1 0 3 4 267
04:30 PM 0 189 2 191 13 2 45 60 1 1 0 2 2 0 1 3 256
04:45 PM 0 216 3 219 9 2 43 54 2 1 0 3 0 0 2 2 278
Total 0 801 10 811 39 6 144 189 3 10 0 13 5 0 8 13 1026 05:00 PM 0 190 4 194 10 2 27 39 1 6 1 8 3 0 0 3 244
05:15 PM 0 174 3 177 9 3 43 55 0 2 0 2 0 0 5 5 239
05:30 PM 0 209 3 212 5 1 29 35 1 5 0 6 0 0 2 2 255
05:45 PM 0 220 3 223 3 0 35 38 0 4 0 4 1 0 3 4 269
Total 0 793 13 806 27 6 134 167 2 17 1 20 4 0 10 14 1007 Grand Total 0 1594 23 1617 66 12 278 356 5 27 1 33 9 0 18 27 2033 Apprch % 0 98.6 1.4 18.5 3.4 78.1 15.2 81.8 3 33.3 0 66.7 Total % 0 78.4 1.1 79.5 3.2 0.6 13.7 17.5 0.2 1.3 0 1.6 0.4 0 0.9 1.3 Gypsum Canyon Road
Southbound
SR-91 Westbound Ramps
Westbound
Gypsum Canyon Road
Northbound
Featherly Park
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:15 PM
04:15 PM 0 207 5 212 11 2 31 44 0 7 0 7 1 0 3 4 267
04:30 PM 0 189 2 191 13 2 45 60 1 1 0 2 2 0 1 3 256
04:45 PM 0 216 3 219 9 2 43 54 2 1 0 3 0 0 2 2 278
05:00 PM 0 190 4 194 10 2 27 39 1 6 1 8 3 0 0 3 244
Total Volume 0 802 14 816 43 8 146 197 4 15 1 20 6 0 6 12 1045 % App. Total 0 98.3 1.7 21.8 4.1 74.1 20 75 5 50 0 50
PHF .000 .928 .700 .932 .827 1.00 .811 .821 .500 .536 .250 .625 .500 .000 .500 .750 .940 Counts Unlimited, Inc.

PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951)268-6268
File Name : 02_YLA_GC_91W PM
Site Code : 00322954
Start Date : 10/20/2022
Page No : 2
City of Yorba Linda
N/S: Gypsum Canyon Road
E/W: Featherly Pk/SR-91 Westbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Gypsum Canyon Road
Featherly Park
SR-91 Westbound Ramps
Gypsum Canyon Road
Right
14 Thru
802
Left
0 Out In Total
167 816 983
Right
146
Thru
8 Left
43 Out Total In
1 197 198
Left
4 Thru
15 Right
1 Out In Total
851 20 871
Left
6 Thru
0 Right
6 Total Out In
26 12 38
Peak Hour Begins at 04:15 PM
Total Volume
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
04:15 PM 04:30 PM 04:15 PM 05:00 PM
+0 mins. 0 207 5 212 13 2 45 60 0 7 0 7 3 0 0 3
+15 mins. 0 189 2 191 9 2 43 54 1 1 0 2 0 0 5 5
+30 mins. 0 216 3 219 10 2 27 39 2 1 0 3 0 0 2 2
+45 mins. 0 190 4 194 9 3 43 55 1 6 1 8 1 0 3 4
Total Volume 0 802 14 816 41 9 158 208 4 15 1 20 4 0 10 14 % App. Total 0 98.3 1.7 19.7 4.3 76 20 75 5 28.6 0 71.4 PHF .000 .928 .700 .932 .788 .750 .878 .867 .500 .536 .250 .625 .333 .000 .500 .700 Counts Unlimited, Inc.

PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951)268-6268
File Name : 03_ANA_GC_91E AM
Site Code : 00322954
Start Date : 10/20/2022
Page No : 1
City of Anaheim
N/S: Gypsum Canyon Road
E/W: SR-91 Eastbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Total Volume
Gypsum Canyon Road
Southbound
SR-91 Eastbound On Ramp
Westbound
Gypsum Canyon Road
Northbound
SR-91 Eastbound Ramps
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 0 16 39 55 0 0 0 0 0 6 4 10 31 0 0 31 96
07:15 AM 0 26 48 74 0 0 0 0 0 5 13 18 30 3 1 34 126
07:30 AM 0 32 58 90 0 0 0 0 0 3 9 12 43 1 2 46 148
07:45 AM 0 41 50 91 0 0 0 0 0 6 10 16 32 1 1 34 141
Total 0 115 195 310 0 0 0 0 0 20 36 56 136 5 4 145 511
08:00 AM 0 25 46 71 0 0 0 0 0 4 10 14 42 1 1 44 129
08:15 AM 0 31 37 68 0 0 0 0 0 9 6 15 26 2 1 29 112
08:30 AM 0 26 36 62 0 0 0 0 0 9 8 17 32 1 1 34 113
08:45 AM 0 18 43 61 0 0 0 0 0 8 7 15 31 0 3 34 110
Total 0 100 162 262 0 0 0 0 0 30 31 61 131 4 6 141 464
Grand Total 0 215 357 572 0 0 0 0 0 50 67 117 267 9 10 286 975 Apprch % 0 37.6 62.4 0 0 0 0 42.7 57.3 93.4 3.1 3.5
Total % 0 22.1 36.6 58.7 0 0 0 0 0 5.1 6.9 12 27.4 0.9 1 29.3 Gypsum Canyon Road
Southbound
SR-91 Eastbound On Ramp
Westbound
Gypsum Canyon Road
Northbound
SR-91 Eastbound Ramps
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:15 AM
07:15 AM 0 26 48 74 0 0 0 0 0 5 13 18 30 3 1 34 126
07:30 AM 0 32 58 90 0 0 0 0 0 3 9 12 43 1 2 46 148
07:45 AM 0 41 50 91 0 0 0 0 0 6 10 16 32 1 1 34 141
08:00 AM 0 25 46 71 0 0 0 0 0 4 10 14 42 1 1 44 129
Total Volume 0 124 202 326 0 0 0 0 0 18 42 60 147 6 5 158 544 % App. Total 0 38 62 0 0 0 0 30 70 93 3.8 3.2
PHF .000 .756 .871 .896 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .750 .808 .833 .855 .500 .625 .859 .919 Counts Unlimited, Inc.

PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951)268-6268
File Name : 03_ANA_GC_91E AM
Site Code : 00322954
Start Date : 10/20/2022
Page No : 2
City of Anaheim
N/S: Gypsum Canyon Road
E/W: SR-91 Eastbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Gypsum Canyon Road
SR-91 Eastbound Ramps
SR-91 Eastbound On Ramp
Gypsum Canyon Road
Right
202
Thru
124
Left
0 Out In Total
165 326 491
Right
0 Thru
0 Left
0 Out Total In
48 0 48
Left
0 Thru
18 Right
42 Out In Total
129 60 189
Left
147
Thru
6 Right
5 Total Out In
202 158 360
Peak Hour Begins at 07:15 AM
Total Volume
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
07:15 AM 07:00 AM 07:45 AM 07:15 AM
+0 mins. 0 26 48 74 0 0 0 0 0 6 10 16 30 3 1 34
+15 mins. 0 32 58 90 0 0 0 0 0 4 10 14 43 1 2 46
+30 mins. 0 41 50 91 0 0 0 0 0 9 6 15 32 1 1 34
+45 mins. 0 25 46 71 0 0 0 0 0 9 8 17 42 1 1 44
Total Volume 0 124 202 326 0 0 0 0 0 28 34 62 147 6 5 158 % App. Total 0 38 62 0 0 0 0 45.2 54.8 93 3.8 3.2
PHF .000 .756 .871 .896 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .778 .850 .912 .855 .500 .625 .859 Counts Unlimited, Inc.

PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951)268-6268
File Name : 03_ANA_GC_91E PM
Site Code : 00322954
Start Date : 10/20/2022
Page No : 1
City of Anaheim
N/S: Gypsum Canyon Road
E/W: SR-91 Eastbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Total Volume
Gypsum Canyon Road
Southbound
SR-91 Eastbound On Ramp
Westbound
Gypsum Canyon Road
Northbound
SR-91 Eastbound Ramps
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 04:00 PM 0 29 154 183 0 0 0 0 0 1 211 212 1 0 1 2 397
04:15 PM 0 32 183 215 0 0 0 0 0 7 230 237 0 0 2 2 454
04:30 PM 2 27 177 206 0 0 0 0 0 2 228 230 0 2 0 2 438
04:45 PM 14 29 188 231 0 0 0 0 0 2 232 234 1 0 0 1 466
Total 16 117 702 835 0 0 0 0 0 12 901 913 2 2 3 7 1755
05:00 PM 1 37 152 190 0 0 0 0 0 5 231 236 4 0 1 5 431
05:15 PM 1 23 152 176 0 0 0 0 0 1 210 211 2 0 1 3 390
05:30 PM 3 33 178 214 0 0 0 0 0 6 233 239 1 0 0 1 454
05:45 PM 16 35 181 232 0 0 0 0 0 2 230 232 3 1 1 5 469
Total 21 128 663 812 0 0 0 0 0 14 904 918 10 1 3 14 1744 Grand Total 37 245 1365 1647 0 0 0 0 0 26 1805 1831 12 3 6 21 3499 Apprch % 2.2 14.9 82.9 0 0 0 0 1.4 98.6 57.1 14.3 28.6
Total % 1.1 7 39 47.1 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 51.6 52.3 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.6 Gypsum Canyon Road
Southbound
SR-91 Eastbound On Ramp
Westbound
Gypsum Canyon Road
Northbound
SR-91 Eastbound Ramps
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:15 PM
04:15 PM 0 32 183 215 0 0 0 0 0 7 230 237 0 0 2 2 454
04:30 PM 2 27 177 206 0 0 0 0 0 2 228 230 0 2 0 2 438
04:45 PM 14 29 188 231 0 0 0 0 0 2 232 234 1 0 0 1 466
05:00 PM 1 37 152 190 0 0 0 0 0 5 231 236 4 0 1 5 431
Total Volume 17 125 700 842 0 0 0 0 0 16 921 937 5 2 3 10 1789 % App. Total 2 14.8 83.1 0 0 0 0 1.7 98.3 50 20 30
PHF .304 .845 .931 .911 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .571 .992 .988 .313 .250 .375 .500 .960 Counts Unlimited, Inc.

PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951)268-6268
File Name : 03_ANA_GC_91E PM
Site Code : 00322954
Start Date : 10/20/2022
Page No : 2
City of Anaheim
N/S: Gypsum Canyon Road
E/W: SR-91 Eastbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Gypsum Canyon Road
SR-91 Eastbound Ramps
SR-91 Eastbound On Ramp
Gypsum Canyon Road
Right
700
Thru
125
Left
17 Out In Total
21 842 863
Right
0 Thru
0 Left
0 Out Total In
940 0 940
Left
0 Thru
16 Right
921
Out In Total
128 937 1065
Left
5 Thru
2 Right
3 Total Out In
700 10 710
Peak Hour Begins at 04:15 PM
Total Volume
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
04:15 PM 04:00 PM 04:15 PM 05:00 PM
+0 mins. 0 32 183 215 0 0 0 0 0 7 230 237 4 0 1 5
+15 mins. 2 27 177 206 0 0 0 0 0 2 228 230 2 0 1 3
+30 mins. 14 29 188 231 0 0 0 0 0 2 232 234 1 0 0 1
+45 mins. 1 37 152 190 0 0 0 0 0 5 231 236 3 1 1 5
Total Volume 17 125 700 842 0 0 0 0 0 16 921 937 10 1 3 14 % App. Total 2 14.8 83.1 0 0 0 0 1.7 98.3 71.4 7.1 21.4 PHF .304 .845 .931 .911 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .571 .992 .988 .625 .250 .750 .700 Counts Unlimited, Inc.

PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951)268-6268
File Name : 04_ANA_GC_SAC AM
Site Code : 00322954
Start Date : 10/20/2022
Page No : 1
City of Anaheim
N/S: Gypsum Canyon Road
E/W: Santa Ana Canyon Road
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Total Volume
Gypsum Canyon Road
Southbound
Gypsum Canyon Road
Northbound
Santa Ana Canyon Road
Eastbound
Start Time Thru Right App. Total Left Thru App. Total Left Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 0 19 19 0 0 0 13 0 13 32
07:15 AM 0 25 25 0 0 0 15 0 15 40
07:30 AM 1 33 34 0 1 1 11 0 11 46
07:45 AM 0 40 40 0 0 0 16 0 16 56
Total 1 117 118 0 1 1 55 0 55 174
08:00 AM 0 26 26 0 0 0 13 0 13 39
08:15 AM 0 28 28 0 0 0 15 0 15 43
08:30 AM 0 29 29 0 0 0 16 0 16 45
08:45 AM 0 20 20 0 1 1 14 0 14 35
Total 0 103 103 0 1 1 58 0 58 162
Grand Total 1 220 221 0 2 2 113 0 113 336
Apprch % 0.5 99.5 0 100 100 0
Total % 0.3 65.5 65.8 0 0.6 0.6 33.6 0 33.6
Gypsum Canyon Road
Southbound
Gypsum Canyon Road
Northbound
Santa Ana Canyon Road
Eastbound
Start Time Thru Right App. Total Left Thru App. Total Left Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:30 AM
07:30 AM 1 33 34 0 1 1 11 0 11 46
07:45 AM 0 40 40 0 0 0 16 0 16 56
08:00 AM 0 26 26 0 0 0 13 0 13 39
08:15 AM 0 28 28 0 0 0 15 0 15 43
Total Volume 1 127 128 0 1 1 55 0 55 184
% App. Total 0.8 99.2 0 100 100 0
PHF .250 .794 .800 .000 .250 .250 .859 .000 .859 .821
Counts Unlimited, Inc.

PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951)268-6268
File Name : 04_ANA_GC_SAC AM
Site Code : 00322954
Start Date : 10/20/2022
Page No : 2
City of Anaheim
N/S: Gypsum Canyon Road
E/W: Santa Ana Canyon Road
Weather: Clear
Gypsum Canyon Road
Santa Ana Canyon Road
Gypsum Canyon Road
Right
127
Thru
1 Out In Total
56 128 184
Left
0 Thru
1 Out In Total
1 1 2
Left
55 Right
0 Total Out In
127 55 182
Peak Hour Begins at 07:30 AM
Total Volume
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
07:30 AM 07:00 AM 07:45 AM
+0 mins. 1 33 34 0 0 0 16 0 16
+15 mins. 0 40 40 0 0 0 13 0 13
+30 mins. 0 26 26 0 1 1 15 0 15
+45 mins. 0 28 28 0 0 0 16 0 16
Total Volume 1 127 128 0 1 1 60 0 60
% App. Total 0.8 99.2 0 100 100 0
PHF .250 .794 .800 .000 .250 .250 .938 .000 .938
Counts Unlimited, Inc.

PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951)268-6268
File Name : 04_ANA_GC_SAC PM
Site Code : 00322954
Start Date : 10/20/2022
Page No : 1
City of Anaheim
N/S: Gypsum Canyon Road
E/W: Santa Ana Canyon Road
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Total Volume
Gypsum Canyon Road
Southbound
Gypsum Canyon Road
Northbound
Santa Ana Canyon Road
Eastbound
Start Time Thru Right App. Total Left Thru App. Total Left Right App. Total Int. Total 04:00 PM 0 5 5 0 2 2 193 3 196 203
04:15 PM 1 7 8 0 2 2 206 1 207 217
04:30 PM 0 7 7 0 2 2 207 3 210 219
04:45 PM 0 1 1 0 3 3 198 2 200 204
Total 1 20 21 0 9 9 804 9 813 843
05:00 PM 2 6 8 0 2 2 203 2 205 215
05:15 PM 1 6 7 0 2 2 197 1 198 207
05:30 PM 1 4 5 0 3 3 202 2 204 212
05:45 PM 0 7 7 0 2 2 202 0 202 211
Total 4 23 27 0 9 9 804 5 809 845
Grand Total 5 43 48 0 18 18 1608 14 1622 1688
Apprch % 10.4 89.6 0 100 99.1 0.9
Total % 0.3 2.5 2.8 0 1.1 1.1 95.3 0.8 96.1
Gypsum Canyon Road
Southbound
Gypsum Canyon Road
Northbound
Santa Ana Canyon Road
Eastbound
Start Time Thru Right App. Total Left Thru App. Total Left Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:15 PM
04:15 PM 1 7 8 0 2 2 206 1 207 217
04:30 PM 0 7 7 0 2 2 207 3 210 219
04:45 PM 0 1 1 0 3 3 198 2 200 204
05:00 PM 2 6 8 0 2 2 203 2 205 215
Total Volume 3 21 24 0 9 9 814 8 822 855
% App. Total 12.5 87.5 0 100 99 1
PHF .375 .750 .750 .000 .750 .750 .983 .667 .979 .976
Counts Unlimited, Inc.

PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951)268-6268
File Name : 04_ANA_GC_SAC PM
Site Code : 00322954
Start Date : 10/20/2022
Page No : 2
City of Anaheim
N/S: Gypsum Canyon Road
E/W: Santa Ana Canyon Road
Weather: Clear
Gypsum Canyon Road
Santa Ana Canyon Road
Gypsum Canyon Road
Right
21 Thru
3 Out In Total
823 24 847
Left
0 Thru
9 Out In Total
11 9 20
Left
814
Right
8 Total Out In
21 822 843
Peak Hour Begins at 04:15 PM
Total Volume
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
05:00 PM 04:45 PM 04:15 PM
+0 mins. 2 6 8 0 3 3 206 1 207
+15 mins. 1 6 7 0 2 2 207 3 210
+30 mins. 1 4 5 0 2 2 198 2 200
+45 mins. 0 7 7 0 3 3 203 2 205
Total Volume 4 23 27 0 10 10 814 8 822
% App. Total 14.8 85.2 0 100 99 1
PHF .500 .821 .844 .000 .833 .833 .983 .667 .979
Counts Unlimited, Inc.

PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951)268-6268

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24»

APPENDIX B

ICU LEVEL OF SERVICE WORKSHEETS

ANAHEIM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEETS
PROJECT: Anaheim PROJECT: Anaheim
SCENARIO: Existing SCENARIO: Existing
INTERSECTION: 1 Gypsum Canyon Road/La Palma Avenue INTERSECTION: 2 Gypsum Canyon Rd / SR-91 WB Ramps

MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.3 2,861 166 0.06 * 2,956 96 0.03 * NBL 1.0 1,700 4 0.00 * 1,700 4 0.00 * NBT 0.3 86 5 0.06 62 2 0.03 NBT 1.0 1,700 157 0.09 1,700 15 0.01 NBR 1.3 2,102 122 0.06 2,032 66 0.03 NBR Free 5 1
SBL 0.0 11 2 SBL 0.0 0 0
SBT 1.0 1,700 16 0.02 * 1,700 8 0.01 * SBT 2.0 3,400 569 0.17 * 3,400 863 0.26 * SBR 1.0 1,700 19 0.01 1,700 15 0.01 SBR 0.0 5 15
EBL 1.0 1,700 10 0.01 1,700 27 0.02 EBL 0.0 1 * 6 *
EBT 1.0 1,700 94 0.06 * 1,700 361 0.21 * EBT 1.0 1,700 0 0.01 1,700 0 0.01 EBR 1.0 1,700 218 0.13 * 1,700 805 0.47 * EBR 0.0 17 6
WBL 1.0 1,700 340 0.20 * 1,700 65 0.04 * WBL 1.0 1,700 57 0.03 1,700 43 0.03 WBT 2.0 3,400 261 0.08 3,400 244 0.07 WBT 1.0 1,700 2 0.08 * 1,700 8 0.09 * WBR 0.0 6 3 WBR 0.0 135 143
Split Phasing N/S Movements 0.07 0.04 N/S Movements 0.17 0.26 E/W Movements 0.26 0.25 Split Phasing E/W Movements 0.09 0.10 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.23 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.39 0.57 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.31 0.41

LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A
PROJECT: Anaheim PROJECT: Anaheim
SCENARIO: Existing SCENARIO: Existing
INTERSECTION: 3 Gypsum Canyon Rd / SR-91 EB Ramps INTERSECTION: 4 Gypsum Canyon Rd / Santa Ana Canyon Rd

AM PEAK HOUR

MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0.0 0 * 0 * NBL 0.0 0 * 0 *
NBT 1.0 1,700 18 0.01 1,700 16 0.01 NBT 1.0 1,700 1 0.00 1,700 10 0.01 NBR Free 42 921 NBR 0.0 0 0
SBL 0.0 0 0 SBL 0.0 0 0
SBT 1.0 1,700 124 0.07 * 1,700 125 0.07 * SBT 1.0 1,700 1 0.08 * 1,700 16 0.08 * SBR Free 202 717 SBR 0.0 134 114
EBL 1.0 1,700 147 0.09 * 1,700 5 0.00 * EBL 0.0 59 927
EBT 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBT 1.0 1,700 0 0.03 * 1,700 0 0.55 * EBR 1.0 1,700 11 0.01 * 1,700 5 0.00 * EBR 0.0 0 8
WBL 0.0 0 0 WBL 0.0 0 0 *
WBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * WBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00
WBR 0.0 0 0 WBR 0.0 0 0
N/S Movements 0.07 0.07 N/S Movements 0.08 0.08
E/W Movements 0.09 0.00 E/W Movements 0.03 0.55
Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.21 0.13 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.16 0.68

LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B

AM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR

PM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR

PM PEAK HOUR

AM PEAK HOUR

ANAHEIM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEETS
PROJECT: Anaheim PROJECT: Anaheim
SCENARIO: Existing Plus Project SCENARIO: Existing Plus Project INTERSECTION: 1 Gypsum Canyon Road/La Palma Avenue INTERSECTION: 2 Gypsum Canyon Rd / SR-91 WB Ramps

MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.3 2,572 166 0.06 * 2,691 99 0.04 * NBL 1.0 1,700 4 0.00 * 1,700 4 0.00 * NBT 0.3 77 5 0.06 54 2 0.04 NBT 1.0 1,700 157 0.09 1,700 18 0.01 NBR 1.0 1,890 122 0.06 1,794 66 0.04 NBR Free 9 50
SBL 0.0 11 2 SBL 0.0 0 0
SBT 1.0 1,700 16 0.02 * 1,700 8 0.01 * SBT 2.0 3,400 570 0.17 * 3,400 864 0.26 * SBR 1.0 1,700 19 0.01 1,700 15 0.01 SBR 0.0 5 15
EBL 1.0 1,700 10 0.01 1,700 27 0.02 EBL 0.0 1 * 6 *
EBT 1.0 1,700 94 0.06 * 1,700 361 0.21 * EBT 1.0 1,700 0 0.01 1,700 0 0.01 EBR 1.0 1,700 219 0.13 * 1,700 806 0.47 * EBR 0.0 17 6
WBL 1.0 1,700 340 0.20 * 1,700 65 0.04 * WBL 1.0 1,700 58 0.03 1,700 44 0.03 WBT 2.0 3,400 261 0.08 3,400 244 0.07 WBT 1.0 1,700 2 0.08 * 1,700 8 0.09 * WBR 0.0 6 3 WBR 0.0 135 143
Split Phasing N/S Movements 0.08 0.04 N/S Movements 0.17 0.26 E/W Movements 0.26 0.25 Split Phasing E/W Movements 0.09 0.10 Rt. Turn Component 0.01 0.22 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.39 0.57 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.31 0.41

LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A
PROJECT: Anaheim PROJECT: Anaheim
SCENARIO: Existing Plus Project SCENARIO: Existing Plus Project INTERSECTION: 3 Gypsum Canyon Rd / SR-91 EB Ramps INTERSECTION: 4 Gypsum Canyon Rd / Santa Ana Canyon Rd

MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0.0 0 * 0 * NBL 0.0 1 * 3 *
NBT 1.0 1,700 22 0.01 1,700 68 0.04 NBT 1.0 1,700 5 0.00 1,700 65 0.04 NBR Free 42 924 NBR 0.0 0 0
SBL 0.0 0 0 SBL 0.0 0 0
SBT 1.0 1,700 126 0.07 * 1,700 127 0.07 * SBT 1.0 1,700 25 0.09 * 1,700 40 0.09 * SBR Free 202 717 SBR 0.0 134 114
EBL 1.0 1,700 147 0.09 * 1,700 5 0.00 * EBL 0.0 59 927
EBT 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBT 1.0 1,700 0 0.04 * 1,700 0 0.55 * EBR 1.0 1,700 33 0.02 * 1,700 27 0.02 * EBR 0.0 1 9
WBL 0.0 0 0 WBL 0.0 0 0 *
WBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * WBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00
WBR 0.0 0 0 WBR 0.0 0 0
N/S Movements 0.07 0.07 N/S Movements 0.09 0.09
E/W Movements 0.09 0.00 E/W Movements 0.04 0.55
Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.01 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.21 0.14 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.18 0.69

LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B

AM PEAK HOUR

AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR

AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR

ANAHEIM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEETS
PROJECT: Anaheim PROJECT: Anaheim
SCENARIO: Opening Year No Project SCENARIO: Opening Year No Project INTERSECTION: 1 Gypsum Canyon Road/La Palma Avenue INTERSECTION: 2 Gypsum Canyon Rd / SR-91 WB Ramps

MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.3 2,861 173 0.06 * 2,956 100 0.03 * NBL 1.0 1,700 4 0.00 * 1,700 4 0.00 * NBT 0.3 86 5 0.06 62 2 0.03 NBT 1.0 1,700 163 0.10 1,700 16 0.01 NBR 1.3 2,102 127 0.06 2,032 69 0.03 NBR Free 5 2
SBL 0.0 11 2 SBL 0.0 0 0
SBT 1.0 1,700 17 0.02 * 1,700 8 0.01 * SBT 2.0 3,400 592 0.18 * 3,400 898 0.27 * SBR 1.0 1,700 20 0.01 1,700 16 0.01 SBR 0.0 5 16
EBL 1.0 1,700 10 0.01 1,700 28 0.02 EBL 0.0 1 * 6 *
EBT 1.0 1,700 98 0.06 * 1,700 375 0.22 * EBT 1.0 1,700 0 0.01 1,700 0 0.01 EBR 1.0 1,700 227 0.13 * 1,700 837 0.49 * EBR 0.0 18 6
WBL 1.0 1,700 354 0.21 * 1,700 68 0.04 * WBL 1.0 1,700 59 0.03 1,700 45 0.03 WBT 2.0 3,400 271 0.08 3,400 254 0.08 WBT 1.0 1,700 2 0.08 * 1,700 8 0.09 * WBR 0.0 6 3 WBR 0.0 140 149
Split Phasing N/S Movements 0.08 0.04 N/S Movements 0.18 0.27 E/W Movements 0.27 0.26 E/W Movements 0.08 0.09
Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.24 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.41 0.59 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.31 0.41

LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A
PROJECT: Anaheim PROJECT: Anaheim
SCENARIO: Opening Year No Project SCENARIO: Opening Year No Project INTERSECTION: 3 Gypsum Canyon Rd / SR-91 EB Ramps INTERSECTION: 4 Gypsum Canyon Rd / Santa Ana Canyon Rd

AM PEAK HOUR

MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0.0 0 * 0 * NBL 0.0 0 * 0 *
NBT 1.0 1,700 19 0.01 1,700 17 0.01 NBT 1.0 1,700 1 0.00 1,700 10 0.01 NBR Free 44 958 NBR 0.0 0 0
SBL 0.0 0 0 SBL 0.0 0 0
SBT 1.0 1,700 129 0.08 * 1,700 130 0.08 * SBT 1.0 1,700 1 0.08 * 1,700 17 0.08 * SBR Free 210 746 SBR 0.0 139 119
EBL 1.0 1,700 154 0.09 * 1,700 5 0.00 * EBL 0.0 61 964
EBT 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBT 1.0 1,700 0 0.04 * 1,700 0 0.57 * EBR 1.0 1,700 11 0.01 * 1,700 5 0.00 * EBR 0.0 0 8
WBL 0.0 0 0 WBL 0.0 0 * 0 *
WBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * WBT 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00
WBR 0.0 0 0 WBR 0.0 0 0
N/S Movements 0.08 0.08 N/S Movements 0.08 0.08
E/W Movements 0.09 0.00 E/W Movements 0.04 0.57
Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.22 0.13 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.17 0.70

LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B

AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR

PM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR

ANAHEIM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEETS
PROJECT: Anaheim PROJECT: Anaheim
SCENARIO: Opening Year Plus Project SCENARIO: Opening Year Plus Project INTERSECTION: 1 Gypsum Canyon Road/La Palma Avenue INTERSECTION: 2 Gypsum Canyon Rd / SR-91 WB Ramps

MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.3 2,861 173 0.06 * 2,992 103 0.03 * NBL 1.0 1,700 4 0.00 * 1,700 4 0.00 * NBT 0.3 86 5 0.06 61 2 0.03 NBT 1.0 1,700 163 0.10 1,700 19 0.01 NBR 1.3 2,102 127 0.06 1,997 69 0.03 NBR Free 9 51
SBL 0.0 11 2 SBL 0.0 0 0
SBT 1.0 1,700 17 0.02 * 1,700 8 0.01 * SBT 2.0 3,400 593 0.18 * 3,400 899 0.27 * SBR 1.0 1,700 20 0.01 1,700 16 0.01 SBR 0.0 5 16
EBL 1.0 1,700 10 0.01 1,700 28 0.02 EBL 0.0 1 * 6 *
EBT 1.0 1,700 98 0.06 * 1,700 375 0.22 * EBT 1.0 1,700 0 0.01 1,700 0 0.01 EBR 1.0 1,700 228 0.13 * 1,700 838 0.49 * EBR 0.0 18 6
WBL 1.0 1,700 354 0.21 * 1,700 68 0.04 * WBL 1.0 1,700 60 0.04 1,700 46 0.03 WBT 2.0 3,400 271 0.08 3,400 254 0.08 WBT 1.0 1,700 2 0.08 * 1,700 8 0.09 * WBR 0.0 6 3 WBR 0.0 140 149
Split Phasing N/S Movements 0.08 0.04 N/S Movements 0.18 0.27 E/W Movements 0.27 0.26 Split Phasing E/W Movements 0.09 0.10 Rt. Turn Component 0.02 0.24 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.41 0.59 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.32 0.42

LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) AA
PROJECT: Anaheim PROJECT: Anaheim
SCENARIO: Opening Year Plus Project SCENARIO: Opening Year Plus Project INTERSECTION: 3 Gypsum Canyon Rd / SR-91 EB Ramps INTERSECTION: 4 Gypsum Canyon Rd / Santa Ana Canyon Rd

AM PEAK HOUR

MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0.0 0 * 0 * NBL 0.0 1 * 3 *
NBT 1.0 1,700 23 0.01 1,700 69 0.04 NBT 1.0 1,700 5 0.00 1,700 65 0.04 NBR Free 44 961 NBR 0.0 0 0
SBL 0.0 0 0 SBL 0.0 0 0
SBT 1.0 1,700 131 0.08 * 1,700 132 0.08 * SBT 1.0 1,700 25 0.10 * 1,700 41 0.09 * SBR Free 210 746 SBR 0.0 139 119
EBL 1.0 1,700 154 0.09 * 1,700 5 0.00 * EBL 0.0 61 964
EBT 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBT 1.0 1,700 0 0.04 * 1,700 0 0.57 * EBR 1.0 1,700 33 0.02 * 1,700 27 0.02 * EBR 0.0 1 9
WBL 0.0 0 0 WBL 0.0 0 0 *
WBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * WBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00
WBR 0.0 0 0 WBR 0.0 0 0
N/S Movements 0.08 0.08 N/S Movements 0.10 0.09
E/W Movements 0.09 0.00 E/W Movements 0.04 0.57
Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.01 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.22 0.14 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.18 0.72

LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) AC

AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR

PM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR

ANAHEIM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEETS
PROJECT: Anaheim PROJECT: Anaheim
SCENARIO: 2045 No Project SCENARIO: 2045 No Project
INTERSECTION: 1 Gypsum Canyon Road/La Palma Avenue INTERSECTION: 2 Gypsum Canyon Rd / SR-91 WB Ramps

MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.3 2,645 352 0.13 * 1,700 199 0.12 NBL 1.0 1,700 4 0.00 * 1,700 4 0.00 * NBT 0.3 203 27 0.13 190 34 0.18 * NBT 2.0 3,400 336 0.10 3,400 663 0.20 NBR 1.3 2,201 293 0.13 3,210 586 0.18 NBR Free 110 36
SBL 0.0 11 2 * SBL 0.0 0 0
SBT 1.0 1,700 39 0.03 * 1,700 18 0.01 SBT 2.0 3,400 1,030 0.31 * 3,400 1,431 0.43 * SBR 1.0 1,700 19 0.01 1,700 15 0.01 SBR 0.0 11 24
EBL 1.0 1,700 10 0.01 1,700 27 0.02 EBL 0.0 2 * 6
EBT 1.0 1,700 94 0.06 * 1,700 467 0.27 * EBT 1.0 1,700 0 0.01 1,700 0 0.01 * EBR 1.0 1,700 263 0.15 1,700 1,011 0.59 * EBR 0.0 17 6
WBL 1.0 1,700 739 0.43 * 1,700 426 0.25 * WBL 1.0 1,700 247 0.15 1,700 229 0.13 * WBT 2.0 3,400 261 0.08 3,400 244 0.07 WBT 1.0 1,700 2 0.20 * 1,700 8 0.09 WBR 0.0 6 3 WBR 0.0 334 150
Split Phasing N/S Movements 0.16 0.19 N/S Movements 0.31 0.43 E/W Movements 0.49 0.53 Split Phasing E/W Movements 0.21 0.14 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.20 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.70 0.97 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.57 0.62

LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B E LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A B
PROJECT: Anaheim PROJECT: Anaheim
SCENARIO: 2045 No Project SCENARIO: 2045 No Project
INTERSECTION: 3 Gypsum Canyon Rd / SR-91 EB Ramps INTERSECTION: 4 Gypsum Canyon Rd / Santa Ana Canyon Rd

AM PEAK HOUR

MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0.0 0 * 0 * NBL 1.0 1,700 495 0.29 * 1,700 88 0.05 * NBT 2.0 3,400 197 0.06 3,400 208 0.06 NBT 2.0 3,400 365 0.11 3,400 215 0.06 NBR Free 230 1,183 NBR 0.0 0 0
SBL 0.0 0 0 SBL 0.0 0 0
SBT 2.0 3,400 544 0.16 * 3,400 594 0.17 * SBT 2.0 3,400 84 0.02 * 3,400 565 0.17 * SBR Free 378 1,002 SBR 1.0 1,700 484 0.28 * 1,700 120 0.07 EBL 1.0 1,700 253 0.15 * 1,700 495 0.29 * EBL 2.0 3,400 62 0.02 * 3,400 1,176 0.35 * EBT 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBT 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00
EBR 1.0 1,700 24 0.01 * 1,700 91 0.05 * EBR 1.0 1,700 121 0.07 * 1,700 26 0.02 * WBL 0.0 0 0 WBL 0.0 0 0 *
WBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * WBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00
WBR 0.0 0 0 WBR 0.0 0 0
N/S Movements 0.16 0.17 N/S Movements 0.32 0.22
E/W Movements 0.15 0.29 E/W Movements 0.02 0.35
Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.24 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.36 0.52 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.63 0.61

LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B B

AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR

PM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR

ANAHEIM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEETS
PROJECT: Anaheim PROJECT: Anaheim
SCENARIO: 2045 Plus Project SCENARIO: 2045 Plus Project INTERSECTION: 1 Gypsum Canyon Road/La Palma Avenue INTERSECTION: 2 Gypsum Canyon Rd / SR-91 WB Ramps

MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 1.3 2,401 272 0.11 * 1,700 282 0.17 NBL 1.0 1,700 4 0.00 * 1,700 4 0.00 * NBT 0.3 238 27 0.11 190 34 0.18 * NBT 2.0 3,400 272 0.08 3,400 731 0.22 NBR 1.3 2,410 273 0.11 3,210 576 0.18 NBR Free 15 63
SBL 0.0 11 2 * SBL 0.0 0 0
SBT 1.0 1,700 39 0.03 * 1,700 18 0.01 SBT 2.0 3,400 1,041 0.31 * 3,400 1,264 0.38 * SBR 1.0 1,700 19 0.01 1,700 15 0.01 SBR 0.0 11 22
EBL 1.0 1,700 10 0.01 1,700 27 0.02 EBL 0.0 2 * 6 *
EBT 1.0 1,700 94 0.06 * 1,700 467 0.27 * EBT 1.0 1,700 0 0.01 1,700 0 0.01 EBR 1.0 1,700 264 0.16 1,700 872 0.51 * EBR 0.0 17 6
WBL 1.0 1,700 749 0.44 * 1,700 396 0.23 * WBL 1.0 1,700 269 0.16 1,700 46 0.03 WBT 2.0 3,400 261 0.08 3,400 244 0.07 WBT 1.0 1,700 2 0.18 * 1,700 8 0.10 * WBR 0.0 6 3 WBR 0.0 298 155
Split Phasing N/S Movements 0.14 0.19 N/S Movements 0.31 0.38 E/W Movements 0.50 0.51 Split Phasing E/W Movements 0.19 0.10 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.07 Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.69 0.82 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.55 0.53

LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) B D LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A
PROJECT: Anaheim PROJECT: Anaheim
SCENARIO: 2045 Plus Project SCENARIO: 2045 Plus Project INTERSECTION: 3 Gypsum Canyon Rd / SR-91 EB Ramps INTERSECTION: 4 Gypsum Canyon Rd / Santa Ana Canyon Rd

AM PEAK HOUR

MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C MOVEMENT LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NBL 0.0 0 * 0 * NBL 1.0 1,700 4 0.00 * 1,700 21 0.01 *
NBT 2.0 3,400 40 0.01 3,400 138 0.04 NBT 1.0 1,700 24 0.01 1,700 82 0.05 NBR Free 44 1,169 NBR 0.0 0 0
SBL 0.0 0 0 SBL 0.0 0 0
SBT 2.0 3,400 622 0.18 * 3,400 205 0.06 * SBT 1.0 1,700 50 0.03 * 1,700 90 0.05 * SBR Free 333 1,041 SBR 1.0 1,700 605 0.36 * 1,700 142 0.08 EBL 1.0 1,700 251 0.15 * 1,700 660 0.39 * EBL 2.0 3,400 60 0.02 * 3,400 1,225 0.36 * EBT 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00 EBT 0.0 0 0.00 0 0.00
EBR 1.0 1,700 33 0.02 * 1,700 27 0.02 * EBR 1.0 1,700 13 0.01 * 1,700 9 0.01 * WBL 0.0 0 0 WBL 0.0 0 0 *
WBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00 * WBT 0.0 0 0.00 * 0 0.00
WBR 0.0 0 0 WBR 0.0 0 0
N/S Movements 0.18 0.06 N/S Movements 0.03 0.07
E/W Movements 0.15 0.39 E/W Movements 0.02 0.36
Rt. Turn Component 0.00 0.00 Rt. Turn Component 0.31 0.00 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05 Yellow Clearance 0.05 0.05
TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.38 0.50 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION 0.41 0.48

LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) A A

AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR

PM PEAK HOUR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24»

APPENDIX C

HCM LEVEL OF SERVICE WORKSHEETS
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Gypsum Canyon Road/Bryant Ranch Rd & La Palma Ave Exist NP AM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2023\Synchro AM\Exist NP AM.syn Synchro 12 Report 12/10/2023 Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 10 94 218 340 261 6 166 5 122 11 16 19 Future Volume (veh/h) 10 94 218 340 261 6 166 5 122 11 16 19 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 11 99 229 358 275 6 217 0 87 12 17 20 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 23 189 896 401 1113 24 1652 0 735 38 54 79
Arrive On Green 0.01 0.10 0.10 0.22 0.31 0.31 0.46 0.00 0.46 0.05 0.05 0.05 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 1585 1781 3556 77 3563 0 1585 758 1074 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 11 99 229 358 137 144 217 0 87 29 0 20 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 1585 1781 1777 1856 1781 0 1585 1832 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.6 5.0 7.3 19.5 5.7 5.8 3.5 0.0 3.1 1.5 0.0 1.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.6 5.0 7.3 19.5 5.7 5.8 3.5 0.0 3.1 1.5 0.0 1.2 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.04 1.00 1.00 0.41 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 23 189 896 401 556 581 1652 0 735 92 0 79 V/C Ratio(X) 0.47 0.52 0.26 0.89 0.25 0.25 0.13 0.00 0.12 0.32 0.00 0.25 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 89 337 1020 766 995 1040 1652 0 735 92 0 79 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 49.0 42.6 11.1 37.6 25.6 25.6 15.3 0.0 15.2 45.9 0.0 45.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 13.9 2.2 0.1 7.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.3 8.8 0.0 7.5 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 2.3 5.5 8.8 2.3 2.5 1.3 0.0 1.1 0.9 0.0 0.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 62.8 44.9 11.2 44.7 25.8 25.8 15.5 0.0 15.5 54.7 0.0 53.2 LnGrp LOS E D B D C C B B D D
Approach Vol, veh/h 339 639 304 49
Approach Delay, s/veh 22.7 36.4 15.5 54.1
Approach LOS C D B D
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 50.4 26.5 14.1 9.0 5.3 35.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.0 43.0 18.0 5.0 5.0 56.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.5 21.5 9.3 3.5 2.6 7.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.8 1.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 1.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 28.8
HCM 7th LOS C
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
2: Gypsum Canyon Road & Featherly Park/SR-91 WB Ramp Exist NP AM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2023\Synchro AM\Exist NP AM.syn Synchro 12 Report 12/10/2023 Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 1 0 17 57 2 135 4 157 5 0 569 5
Future Volume (veh/h) 1 0 17 57 2 135 4 157 5 0 569 5
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 1 0 18 60 2 142 4 165 0 0 599 5
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 2 0 31 205 3 180 9 1364 0 2453 20
Arrive On Green 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.01 0.73 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 84 0 1510 1781 22 1566 1781 1870 1585 0 3705 30 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 19 0 0 60 0 144 4 165 0 0 295 309
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1594 0 0 1781 0 1588 1781 1870 1585 0 1777 1865 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.2 0.0 0.0 3.1 0.0 8.8 0.2 2.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.2 0.0 0.0 3.1 0.0 8.8 0.2 2.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.05 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.02
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 33 0 0 205 0 183 9 1364 0 1207 1266 V/C Ratio(X) 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.79 0.43 0.12 0.00 0.24 0.24 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 415 0 0 463 0 413 89 1364 0 1207 1266 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.82 0.82 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.5 0.0 0.0 40.5 0.0 43.0 49.6 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 15.3 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 7.3 27.9 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.6 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 3.7 0.2 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 63.8 0.0 0.0 41.3 0.0 50.4 77.5 4.2 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 LnGrp LOS E D D E A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 19 204 169 604
Approach Delay, s/veh 63.8 47.7 5.9 0.4
Approach LOS E D A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 77.4 6.6 5.0 72.4 16.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 25.0 26.0 5.0 25.0 26.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.6 3.2 2.2 2.0 10.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.7 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.7
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 12.2
HCM 7th LOS B
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [NBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 7th TWSC
3: Gypsum Canyon Road & SR-91 EB Ramp Exist NP AM.syn
P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2023\Synchro AM\Exist NP AM.syn Synchro 12 Report 12/10/2023 Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 5.3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 147 0 11 0 0 0 0 18 42 0 124 202
Future Vol, veh/h 147 0 11 0 0 0 0 18 42 0 124 202
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - Free - - Free
Storage Length 0 - 0 - - - - - 150 - - 0
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 155 0 12 0 0 0 0 19 44 0 131 213
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 149 - 131 - 0 - - - 0
Stage 1 131 - - ------
Stage 2 19 - - ------
Critical Hdwy 6.42 - 6.22 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - ------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 - 3.318 ------
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 843 0 919 0 - 0 0 - 0
Stage 1 895 0 - 0 - 0 0 - 0
Stage 2 1004 0 - 0 - 0 0 - 0
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 843 0 919 ------
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 843 0 - ------
Stage 1 895 0 - ------
Stage 2 1004 0 - ------
Approach EB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s/v10.14 0 0

HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 843 919 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.184 0.013 -
HCM Control Delay (s/veh) - 10.2 9 -
HCM Lane LOS - B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0.7 0 -
HCM 7th AWSC
4: Gypsum Canyon Road & Santa Ana Canyon Road Exist NP AM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2023\Synchro AM\Exist NP AM.syn Synchro 12 Report 12/10/2023 Page 4
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 7.2
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 59 0 0 1 1 134
Future Vol, veh/h 59 0 0 1 1 134
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 62 0 0 1 1 141
Number of Lanes 100110
Approach EB NB SB
Opposing Approach SB NB
Opposing Lanes 0 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB EB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 0
Conflicting Approach Right NB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 7.8 7.2 7

HCM LOS A A A
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 0% 100% 0%
Vol Thru, % 100% 0% 1%
Vol Right, % 0% 0% 99%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 1 59 135
LT Vol 0 59 0
Through Vol 1 0 1
RT Vol 0 0 134
Lane Flow Rate 1 62 142
Geometry Grp 1 1 1
Degree of Util (X) 0.001 0.076 0.136
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.15 4.382 3.447
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes
Cap 857 819 1035
Service Time 2.202 2.402 1.488
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 0.076 0.137
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 7.2 7.8 7
HCM Lane LOS A A A
HCM 95th-tile Q 0 0.2 0.5
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Gypsum Canyon Road/Bryant Ranch Rd & La Palma Ave Existing NP PM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2023\Synchro PM\Existing NP PM.syn Synchro 12 Report 12/10/2023 Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 27 361 805 65 244 3 96 2 66 2 8 15 Future Volume (veh/h) 27 361 805 65 244 3 96 2 66 2 8 15 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 28 380 847 68 257 3 123 0 47 2 8 16 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 44 527 1251 88 1103 13 1807 0 804 14 57 61
Arrive On Green 0.02 0.28 0.28 0.05 0.31 0.31 0.51 0.00 0.51 0.04 0.04 0.04 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 1585 1781 3598 42 3563 0 1585 370 1481 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 28 380 847 68 127 133 123 0 47 10 0 16 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 1585 1781 1777 1863 1781 0 1585 1852 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.0 23.8 31.5 4.9 6.9 6.9 2.3 0.0 2.0 0.7 0.0 1.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.0 23.8 31.5 4.9 6.9 6.9 2.3 0.0 2.0 0.7 0.0 1.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.02 1.00 1.00 0.20 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 44 527 1251 88 545 571 1807 0 804 71 0 61 V/C Ratio(X) 0.64 0.72 0.68 0.77 0.23 0.23 0.07 0.00 0.06 0.14 0.00 0.26 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 137 575 1292 397 806 845 1807 0 804 71 0 61 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 62.8 42.1 6.2 61.1 33.6 33.6 16.3 0.0 16.3 60.4 0.0 60.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 14.7 4.0 1.4 13.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 4.1 0.0 10.2 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.1 11.1 27.8 2.5 3.0 3.1 0.9 0.0 0.7 0.4 0.0 0.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 77.5 46.1 7.6 74.3 33.9 33.9 16.4 0.0 16.4 64.5 0.0 70.9 LnGrp LOS E D A E C C B B E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 1255 328 170 26
Approach Delay, s/veh 20.8 42.2 16.4 68.4
Approach LOS C D B E
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 69.9 10.4 40.6 9.0 7.2 43.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 40.0 29.0 40.0 5.0 10.0 59.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.3 6.9 33.5 3.3 4.0 8.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.5 0.1 3.1 0.0 0.0 1.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 25.0
HCM 7th LOS C
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
2: Gypsum Canyon Road & Featherly Park/SR-91 WB Ramp Existing NP PM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2023\Synchro PM\Existing NP PM.syn Synchro 12 Report 12/10/2023 Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 6 0 6 43 8 143 4 15 1 0 863 15
Future Volume (veh/h) 6 0 6 43 8 143 4 15 1 0 863 15
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 6 0 6 45 8 151 4 16 0 0 908 16
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 12 0 12 221 10 188 9 1360 0 2418 43
Arrive On Green 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.01 0.73 0.00 0.00 0.68 0.68 Sat Flow, veh/h 839 0 839 1781 80 1517 1781 1870 1585 0 3666 63 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 12 0 0 45 0 159 4 16 0 0 452 472
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1677 0 0 1781 0 1597 1781 1870 1585 0 1777 1859 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.7 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.0 9.7 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 11.0 11.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.7 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.0 9.7 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 11.0 11.0 Prop In Lane 0.50 0.50 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.03
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 24 0 0 221 0 198 9 1360 0 1202 1258 V/C Ratio(X) 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.80 0.43 0.01 0.00 0.38 0.38 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 436 0 0 463 0 415 89 1360 0 1202 1258 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.79 0.79 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.9 0.0 0.0 39.4 0.0 42.6 49.6 3.8 0.0 0.0 7.0 7.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 15.6 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 7.4 27.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.7 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.4 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 4.0 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 3.5 3.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 64.5 0.0 0.0 39.8 0.0 50.0 77.5 3.8 0.0 0.0 7.7 7.7 LnGrp LOS E D D E A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 12 204 20 924
Approach Delay, s/veh 64.5 47.8 18.5 7.7
Approach LOS E D B A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 77.2 5.9 5.0 72.2 16.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 25.0 26.0 5.0 25.0 26.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 2.7 2.2 13.0 11.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.2 0.7
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 15.5
HCM 7th LOS B
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [NBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 7th TWSC
3: Gypsum Canyon Road & SR-91 EB Ramp Existing NP PM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2023\Synchro PM\Existing NP PM.syn Synchro 12 Report 12/10/2023 Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.6
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 16 921 0 125 717
Future Vol, veh/h 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 16 921 0 125 717
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - Free - - Free
Storage Length 0 - 0 - - - - - 150 - - 0
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 17 969 0 132 755
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 148 - 132 - 0 - - - 0
Stage 1 132 - - ------
Stage 2 17 - - ------
Critical Hdwy 6.42 - 6.22 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - ------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 - 3.318 ------
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 844 0 918 0 - 0 0 - 0
Stage 1 895 0 - 0 - 0 0 - 0
Stage 2 1006 0 - 0 - 0 0 - 0
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 844 0 918 ------
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 844 0 - ------
Stage 1 895 0 - ------
Stage 2 1006 0 - ------
Approach EB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s/v 9.12 0 0

HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 844 918 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.006 0.006 -
HCM Control Delay (s/veh) - 9.3 8.9 -
HCM Lane LOS - A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0 0 -
HCM 7th AWSC
4: Gypsum Canyon Road & Santa Ana Canyon Road Existing NP PM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2023\Synchro PM\Existing NP PM.syn Synchro 12 Report 12/10/2023 Page 4
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 119.5
Intersection LOS F
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 927 8 0 10 16 114
Future Vol, veh/h 927 8 0 10 16 114
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 976 8 0 11 17 120
Number of Lanes 100110
Approach EB NB SB
Opposing Approach SB NB
Opposing Lanes 0 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB EB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 0
Conflicting Approach Right NB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 135.8 9.8 10.3

HCM LOS F A B
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 0% 99% 0%
Vol Thru, % 100% 0% 12%
Vol Right, % 0% 1% 88%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 10 935 130
LT Vol 0 927 0
Through Vol 10 0 16
RT Vol 0 8 114
Lane Flow Rate 11 984 137
Geometry Grp 1 1 1
Degree of Util (X) 0.018 1.241 0.202
Departure Headway (Hd) 6.658 4.54 5.868
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes
Cap 541 807 616
Service Time 4.658 2.555 3.868
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.02 1.219 0.222
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 9.8 135.8 10.3
HCM Lane LOS A F B
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.1 34.5 0.8
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Gypsum Canyon Road/Bryant Ranch Rd & La Palma Ave OpeningYear NP AM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro AM\OpeningYear NP AM.syn Synchro 12 Report 03/31/2024 Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 10 98 227 354 271 6 173 5 127 11 17 20 Future Volume (veh/h) 10 98 227 354 271 6 173 5 127 11 17 20 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 11 103 239 373 285 6 226 0 91 12 18 21 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 23 200 882 416 1164 24 1603 0 713 37 55 79
Arrive On Green 0.01 0.11 0.11 0.23 0.33 0.33 0.45 0.00 0.45 0.05 0.05 0.05 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 1585 1781 3559 75 3563 0 1585 733 1100 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 11 103 239 373 142 149 226 0 91 30 0 21 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 1585 1781 1777 1857 1781 0 1585 1834 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.6 5.2 7.9 20.3 5.8 5.9 3.7 0.0 3.4 1.6 0.0 1.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.6 5.2 7.9 20.3 5.8 5.9 3.7 0.0 3.4 1.6 0.0 1.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.04 1.00 1.00 0.40 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 23 200 882 416 581 607 1603 0 713 92 0 79 V/C Ratio(X) 0.47 0.52 0.27 0.90 0.24 0.25 0.14 0.00 0.13 0.33 0.00 0.26 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 89 337 998 766 995 1040 1603 0 713 92 0 79 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 49.0 42.2 11.6 37.2 24.6 24.6 16.2 0.0 16.1 45.9 0.0 45.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 13.9 2.1 0.2 7.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.4 9.3 0.0 8.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 2.4 5.8 9.2 2.4 2.5 1.5 0.0 1.2 1.0 0.0 0.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 62.8 44.3 11.7 44.2 24.8 24.8 16.3 0.0 16.4 55.1 0.0 53.7 LnGrp LOS E D B D C C B B E D
Approach Vol, veh/h 353 664 317 51
Approach Delay, s/veh 22.8 35.7 16.4 54.6
Approach LOS C D B D
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 49.0 27.3 14.7 9.0 5.3 36.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.0 43.0 18.0 5.0 5.0 56.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.7 22.3 9.9 3.6 2.6 7.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.8 1.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 1.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 28.7
HCM 7th LOS C
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
2: Gypsum Canyon Road & Featherly Park/SR-91 WB Ramp OpeningYear NP AM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro AM\OpeningYear NP AM.syn Synchro 12 Report 03/31/2024 Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 1 0 18 59 2 140 4 163 5 0 592 5
Future Volume (veh/h) 1 0 18 59 2 140 4 163 5 0 592 5
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 1 0 19 62 2 147 4 172 0 0 623 5
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 2 0 32 211 3 186 9 1356 0 2438 20
Arrive On Green 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.01 0.73 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 80 0 1514 1781 21 1567 1781 1870 1585 0 3707 29 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 20 0 0 62 0 149 4 172 0 0 306 322
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1594 0 0 1781 0 1588 1781 1870 1585 0 1777 1865 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.2 0.0 0.0 3.2 0.0 9.1 0.2 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.2 0.0 0.0 3.2 0.0 9.1 0.2 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.05 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.02
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 34 0 0 211 0 188 9 1356 0 1199 1259 V/C Ratio(X) 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.79 0.43 0.13 0.00 0.26 0.26 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 414 0 0 463 0 413 89 1356 0 1199 1259 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.81 0.81 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.5 0.0 0.0 40.3 0.0 42.9 49.6 4.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 15.2 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 7.3 27.9 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.6 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 3.8 0.2 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 63.7 0.0 0.0 41.0 0.0 50.2 77.5 4.4 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 LnGrp LOS E D D E A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 20 211 176 628
Approach Delay, s/veh 63.7 47.5 6.0 0.4
Approach LOS E D A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 77.0 6.6 5.0 72.0 16.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 25.0 26.0 5.0 25.0 26.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.8 3.2 2.2 2.0 11.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.7 0.1 0.0 3.4 0.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 12.2
HCM 7th LOS B
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [NBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 7th TWSC
3: Gypsum Canyon Road & SR-91 EB Ramp OpeningYear NP AM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro AM\OpeningYear NP AM.syn Synchro 12 Report 03/31/2024 Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 5.4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 154 0 11 0 0 0 0 19 44 0 129 210
Future Vol, veh/h 154 0 11 0 0 0 0 19 44 0 129 210
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - Free - - Free
Storage Length 0 - 0 - - - - - 150 - - 0
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 162 0 12 0 0 0 0 20 46 0 136 221
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 156 - 136 - 0 - - - 0
Stage 1 136 - - - - - - - -
Stage 2 20 - - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy 6.42 - 6.22 - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 - 3.318 - - - - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 836 0 913 0 - 0 0 - 0
Stage 1 891 0 - 0 - 0 0 - 0
Stage 2 1003 0 - 0 - 0 0 - 0
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 836 0 913 - - - - - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 836 0 - - - - - - -
Stage 1 891 0 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 1003 0 - - - - - - -
Approach EB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s/v10.25 0 0

HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 836 913 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.194 0.013 -
HCM Control Delay (s/veh) - 10.3 9 -
HCM Lane LOS - B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0.7 0 -
HCM 7th AWSC
4: Gypsum Canyon Road & Santa Ana Canyon Road OpeningYear NP AM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro AM\OpeningYear NP AM.syn Synchro 12 Report 03/31/2024 Page 4
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 7.3
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 61 0 0 1 1 139
Future Vol, veh/h 61 0 0 1 1 139
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 64 0 0 1 1 146
Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0
Approach EB NB SB
Opposing Approach SB NB
Opposing Lanes 0 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB EB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 0
Conflicting Approach Right NB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 7.8 7.2 7.1

HCM LOS A A A
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 0% 100% 0%
Vol Thru, % 100% 0% 1%
Vol Right, % 0% 0% 99%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 1 61 140
LT Vol 0 61 0
Through Vol 1 0 1
RT Vol 0 0 139
Lane Flow Rate 1 64 147
Geometry Grp 1 1 1
Degree of Util (X) 0.001 0.078 0.141
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.159 4.392 3.451
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes
Cap 855 817 1033
Service Time 2.21 2.412 1.492
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 0.078 0.142
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 7.2 7.8 7.1
HCM Lane LOS A A A
HCM 95th-tile Q 0 0.3 0.5
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Gypsum Canyon Road/Bryant Ranch Rd & La Palma Ave OpeningYear NP PM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro PM\OpeningYear NP PM.syn Synchro 12 Report 03/31/2024 Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 28 375 837 68 254 3 100 2 69 2 8 16 Future Volume (veh/h) 28 375 837 68 254 3 100 2 69 2 8 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 29 395 881 72 267 3 129 0 49 2 8 17 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 44 556 1246 93 1168 13 1742 0 775 14 57 61
Arrive On Green 0.02 0.30 0.30 0.05 0.32 0.32 0.49 0.00 0.49 0.04 0.04 0.04 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 1585 1781 3600 40 3563 0 1585 370 1481 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 29 395 881 72 132 138 129 0 49 10 0 17 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 1585 1781 1777 1863 1781 0 1585 1852 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.1 24.5 34.8 5.2 7.0 7.0 2.5 0.0 2.1 0.7 0.0 1.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.1 24.5 34.8 5.2 7.0 7.0 2.5 0.0 2.1 0.7 0.0 1.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.02 1.00 1.00 0.20 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 44 556 1246 93 577 605 1742 0 775 71 0 61 V/C Ratio(X) 0.65 0.71 0.71 0.77 0.23 0.23 0.07 0.00 0.06 0.14 0.00 0.28 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 137 575 1263 397 806 846 1742 0 775 71 0 61 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 62.8 40.7 6.7 60.9 32.0 32.0 17.6 0.0 17.5 60.4 0.0 60.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 15.0 3.9 1.8 12.8 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.2 4.1 0.0 11.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.1 11.4 29.1 2.6 3.0 3.1 1.0 0.0 0.8 0.4 0.0 0.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 77.8 44.6 8.5 73.6 32.2 32.2 17.7 0.0 17.7 64.5 0.0 71.8 LnGrp LOS E D A E C C B B E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 1305 342 178 27
Approach Delay, s/veh 21.0 40.9 17.7 69.1
Approach LOS C D B E
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 67.6 10.8 42.6 9.0 7.2 46.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 40.0 29.0 40.0 5.0 10.0 59.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.5 7.2 36.8 3.4 4.1 9.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.6 0.1 1.9 0.0 0.0 1.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 25.0
HCM 7th LOS C
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
2: Gypsum Canyon Road & Featherly Park/SR-91 WB Ramp OpeningYear NP PM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro PM\OpeningYear NP PM.syn Synchro 12 Report 03/31/2024 Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 6 0 6 45 8 149 4 16 2 0 898 16
Future Volume (veh/h) 6 0 6 45 8 149 4 16 2 0 898 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 6 0 6 47 8 157 4 17 0 0 945 17
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 12 0 12 228 10 194 9 1352 0 2402 43
Arrive On Green 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.01 0.72 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.67 Sat Flow, veh/h 839 0 839 1781 77 1519 1781 1870 1585 0 3665 64 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 12 0 0 47 0 165 4 17 0 0 470 492
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1677 0 0 1781 0 1597 1781 1870 1585 0 1777 1859 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.7 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 10.0 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.0 11.8 11.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.7 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 10.0 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.0 11.8 11.8 Prop In Lane 0.50 0.50 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.03
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 24 0 0 228 0 204 9 1352 0 1195 1250 V/C Ratio(X) 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.81 0.43 0.01 0.00 0.39 0.39 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 436 0 0 463 0 415 89 1352 0 1195 1250 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.76 0.76 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.9 0.0 0.0 39.1 0.0 42.4 49.6 3.9 0.0 0.0 7.3 7.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 15.6 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 7.4 27.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.7 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.4 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 4.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 3.8 3.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 64.5 0.0 0.0 39.5 0.0 49.8 77.5 3.9 0.0 0.0 8.0 8.0 LnGrp LOS E D D E A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 12 212 21 962
Approach Delay, s/veh 64.5 47.5 17.9 8.0
Approach LOS E D B A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 76.8 5.9 5.0 71.8 17.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 25.0 26.0 5.0 25.0 26.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.3 2.7 2.2 13.8 12.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.2 0.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 15.7
HCM 7th LOS B
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [NBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 7th TWSC
3: Gypsum Canyon Road & SR-91 EB Ramp OpeningYear NP PM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro PM\OpeningYear NP PM.syn Synchro 12 Report 03/31/2024 Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.6
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 17 958 0 130 746
Future Vol, veh/h 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 17 958 0 130 746
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - Free - - Free
Storage Length 0 - 0 - - - - - 150 - - 0
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 18 1008 0 137 785
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 155 - 137 - 0 - - - 0
Stage 1 137 - - - - - - - -
Stage 2 18 - - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy 6.42 - 6.22 - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 - 3.318 - - - - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 837 0 912 0 - 0 0 - 0
Stage 1 890 0 - 0 - 0 0 - 0
Stage 2 1005 0 - 0 - 0 0 - 0
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 837 0 912 - - - - - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 837 0 - - - - - - -
Stage 1 890 0 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 1005 0 - - - - - - -
Approach EB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s/v 9.15 0 0

HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 837 912 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.006 0.006 -
HCM Control Delay (s/veh) - 9.3 9 -
HCM Lane LOS - A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0 0 -
HCM 7th AWSC
4: Gypsum Canyon Road & Santa Ana Canyon Road OpeningYear NP PM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro PM\OpeningYear NP PM.syn Synchro 12 Report 03/31/2024 Page 4
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 139.5
Intersection LOS F
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 964 8 0 10 17 119
Future Vol, veh/h 964 8 0 10 17 119
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 1015 8 0 11 18 125
Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0
Approach EB NB SB
Opposing Approach SB NB
Opposing Lanes 0 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB EB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 0
Conflicting Approach Right NB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 158.9 9.9 10.6

HCM LOS F A B
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 0% 99% 0%
Vol Thru, % 100% 0% 13%
Vol Right, % 0% 1% 88%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 10 972 136
LT Vol 0 964 0
Through Vol 10 0 17
RT Vol 0 8 119
Lane Flow Rate 11 1023 143
Geometry Grp 1 1 1
Degree of Util (X) 0.018 1.297 0.211
Departure Headway (Hd) 6.786 4.563 5.98
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes
Cap 531 798 604
Service Time 4.786 2.573 3.98
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.021 1.282 0.237
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 9.9 158.9 10.6
HCM Lane LOS A F B
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.1 39 0.8
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Gypsum Canyon Road/Bryant Ranch Rd & La Palma Ave 2045NP AM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro AM\2045NP AM.syn Synchro 12 Report 03/31/2024 Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 10 94 263 739 261 6 352 27 293 11 39 19 Future Volume (veh/h) 10 94 263 739 261 6 352 27 293 11 39 19 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 11 99 277 778 275 6 478 0 215 12 41 20 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 23 298 571 766 2048 45 716 0 318 21 72 79
Arrive On Green 0.01 0.16 0.16 0.43 0.58 0.58 0.20 0.00 0.20 0.05 0.05 0.05 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 1585 1781 3556 77 3563 0 1585 419 1431 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 11 99 277 778 137 144 478 0 215 53 0 20 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 1585 1781 1777 1856 1781 0 1585 1849 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.6 4.7 13.6 43.0 3.5 3.6 12.4 0.0 12.5 2.8 0.0 1.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.6 4.7 13.6 43.0 3.5 3.6 12.4 0.0 12.5 2.8 0.0 1.2 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.04 1.00 1.00 0.23 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 23 298 571 766 1023 1069 716 0 318 92 0 79 V/C Ratio(X) 0.47 0.33 0.49 1.02 0.13 0.13 0.67 0.00 0.68 0.57 0.00 0.25 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 89 337 604 766 1023 1069 716 0 318 92 0 79 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.00 0.99 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 49.0 37.3 24.8 28.5 9.7 9.7 36.9 0.0 36.9 46.5 0.0 45.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 13.9 0.6 0.6 36.5 0.1 0.1 4.9 0.0 10.8 23.3 0.0 7.5 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 2.1 6.7 24.2 1.2 1.3 5.6 0.0 5.6 1.9 0.0 0.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 62.8 38.0 25.5 65.0 9.8 9.8 41.7 0.0 47.8 69.8 0.0 53.2 LnGrp LOS E D C F A A D D E D
Approach Vol, veh/h 387 1059 693 73
Approach Delay, s/veh 29.7 50.4 43.6 65.2
Approach LOS C D D E
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 24.1 47.0 19.9 9.0 5.3 61.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.0 43.0 18.0 5.0 5.0 56.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 14.5 45.0 15.6 4.8 2.6 5.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.9 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 1.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 45.1
HCM 7th LOS D
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
2: Gypsum Canyon Road & Featherly Park/SR-91 WB Ramp 2045NP AM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro AM\2045NP AM.syn Synchro 12 Report 03/31/2024 Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 2 0 17 247 2 334 4 336 110 0 1030 11 Future Volume (veh/h) 2 0 17 247 2 334 4 336 110 0 1030 11 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 2 0 18 260 2 352 4 354 0 0 1084 12 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 3 0 31 435 2 385 9 2130 0 1977 22
Arrive On Green 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.01 0.60 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 160 0 1442 1781 9 1577 1781 3554 1585 0 3694 40 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 20 0 0 260 0 354 4 354 0 0 535 561 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1603 0 0 1781 0 1586 1781 1777 1585 0 1777 1863 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.2 0.0 0.0 12.9 0.0 21.7 0.2 4.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.2 0.0 0.0 12.9 0.0 21.7 0.2 4.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.10 0.90 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.02
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 34 0 0 435 0 387 9 2130 0 976 1023 V/C Ratio(X) 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.91 0.43 0.17 0.00 0.55 0.55 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 417 0 0 463 0 412 89 2130 0 976 1023 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.42 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.5 0.0 0.0 33.4 0.0 36.8 49.6 8.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 14.9 0.0 0.0 1.9 0.0 23.8 27.9 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.9 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.6 0.0 0.0 5.5 0.0 10.4 0.2 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 63.4 0.0 0.0 35.3 0.0 60.5 77.5 9.1 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.9 LnGrp LOS E D E E A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 20 614 358 1096
Approach Delay, s/veh 63.4 49.9 9.8 0.9
Approach LOS E D A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 64.5 6.6 5.0 59.4 28.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 25.0 26.0 5.0 25.0 26.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.4 3.2 2.2 2.0 23.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.9 0.1 0.0 6.9 0.7
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 17.4
HCM 7th LOS B
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [NBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
3: Gypsum Canyon Road & SR-91 EB Ramp 2045NP AM.syn
P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro AM\2045NP AM.syn Synchro 12 Report 03/31/2024 Page 3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 253 0 24 0 0 0 0 197 230 0 544 378 Future Volume (veh/h) 253 0 24 0 0 0 0 197 230 0 544 378 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 0 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 266 0 25 0 207 0 0 573 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 389 0 346 0 1313 0 1313
Arrive On Green 0.22 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.37 0.00 0.00 0.37 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 0 1585 0 3647 1585 0 3647 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 266 0 25 0 207 0 0 573 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 0 1585 0 1777 1585 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 389 0 346 0 1313 0 1313
V/C Ratio(X) 0.68 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.44
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 2079 0 1850 0 4148 0 4148
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 7.8 0.0 6.8 0.0 4.6 0.0 0.0 5.2 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 10.0 0.0 6.9 0.0 4.7 0.0 0.0 5.4 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 291 207 573
Approach Delay, s/veh 9.7 4.7 5.4
Approach LOS A A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.6 9.3 12.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 25.5 25.5 25.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.9 5.0 4.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.1 0.8 3.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 6.4
HCM 7th LOS A
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [NBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
4: Gypsum Canyon Road & Santa Ana Canyon Road 2045NP AM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro AM\2045NP AM.syn Synchro 12 Report 03/31/2024 Page 4
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 62 121 495 365 84 484
Future Volume (veh/h) 62 121 495 365 84 484
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 65 127 521 384 88 509
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 394 181 591 2586 563 502
Arrive On Green 0.11 0.11 0.33 0.73 0.32 0.32
Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 1585 1781 3647 1870 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 65 127 521 384 88 509
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1728 1585 1781 1777 1777 1585
Q Serve(g_s), s 1.0 4.4 15.7 1.9 2.0 18.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.0 4.4 15.7 1.9 2.0 18.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 394 181 591 2586 563 502
V/C Ratio(X) 0.17 0.70 0.88 0.15 0.16 1.01
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1095 502 799 3001 563 502
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 22.7 24.3 17.9 2.4 14.0 19.4
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 4.9 8.8 0.0 0.1 43.7
Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.3 0.2 7.1 0.3 0.7 11.4
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 22.9 29.2 26.8 2.4 14.1 63.1
LnGrp LOS C C C A B F
Approach Vol, veh/h 192 905 597
Approach Delay, s/veh 27.1 16.4 55.9
Approach LOS C B E
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 45.9 11.0 23.4 22.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 48.0 18.0 25.5 18.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.9 6.4 17.7 20.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.8 0.4 1.2 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 31.5
HCM 7th LOS C
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Gypsum Canyon Road/Bryant Ranch Rd & La Palma Ave 2045NP PM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro PM\2045NP PM.syn Synchro 12 Report 03/31/2024 Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 27 467 1011 426 244 3 199 34 586 2 18 15 Future Volume (veh/h) 27 467 1011 426 244 3 199 34 586 2 18 15 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 28 492 1064 448 257 3 151 0 703 2 19 16 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 44 575 975 397 1822 21 548 0 975 7 65 61
Arrive On Green 0.02 0.31 0.31 0.22 0.51 0.51 0.31 0.00 0.31 0.04 0.04 0.04 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 1585 1781 3598 42 1781 0 3170 177 1684 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 28 492 1064 448 127 133 151 0 703 21 0 16 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 1585 1781 1777 1863 1781 0 1585 1861 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.0 32.1 40.0 29.0 4.9 4.9 8.3 0.0 25.6 1.4 0.0 1.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.0 32.1 40.0 29.0 4.9 4.9 8.3 0.0 25.6 1.4 0.0 1.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.02 1.00 1.00 0.10 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 44 575 975 397 900 943 548 0 975 72 0 61 V/C Ratio(X) 0.64 0.85 1.09 1.13 0.14 0.14 0.28 0.00 0.72 0.29 0.00 0.26 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 137 575 975 397 900 943 548 0 975 72 0 61 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.00 0.97 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 62.8 42.3 17.3 50.5 17.1 17.1 34.0 0.0 40.0 60.8 0.0 60.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 14.7 12.0 56.8 84.5 0.1 0.1 1.2 0.0 4.5 10.1 0.0 10.2 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.1 16.1 46.9 21.8 2.0 2.1 3.7 0.0 10.3 0.9 0.0 0.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 77.5 54.3 74.1 135.0 17.1 17.1 35.2 0.0 44.5 70.9 0.0 70.9 LnGrp LOS E D F F B B D D E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 1584 708 854 37
Approach Delay, s/veh 68.0 91.7 42.9 70.9
Approach LOS E F D E
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 44.0 33.0 44.0 9.0 7.2 69.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 40.0 29.0 40.0 5.0 10.0 59.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 27.6 31.0 42.0 3.4 4.0 6.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 66.6
HCM 7th LOS E
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
2: Gypsum Canyon Road & Featherly Park/SR-91 WB Ramp 2045NP PM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro PM\2045NP PM.syn Synchro 12 Report 03/31/2024 Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 6 0 6 229 8 150 4 663 36 0 1431 24 Future Volume (veh/h) 6 0 6 229 8 150 4 663 36 0 1431 24 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 6 0 6 241 8 158 4 698 0 0 1506 25
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 12 0 12 290 13 248 9 2445 0 2281 38
Arrive On Green 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.01 0.69 0.00 0.00 0.64 0.64 Sat Flow, veh/h 839 0 839 1781 77 1520 1781 3554 1585 0 3671 59 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 12 0 0 241 0 166 4 698 0 0 747 784 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1677 0 0 1781 0 1597 1781 1777 1585 0 1777 1860 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.7 0.0 0.0 13.1 0.0 9.7 0.2 7.6 0.0 0.0 26.3 26.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.7 0.0 0.0 13.1 0.0 9.7 0.2 7.6 0.0 0.0 26.3 26.4 Prop In Lane 0.50 0.50 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.03
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 24 0 0 290 0 260 9 2445 0 1133 1186 V/C Ratio(X) 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.83 0.00 0.64 0.43 0.29 0.00 0.66 0.66 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 436 0 0 463 0 415 89 2445 0 1133 1186 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.9 0.0 0.0 40.5 0.0 39.1 49.6 6.1 0.0 0.0 11.3 11.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 15.6 0.0 0.0 6.9 0.0 2.6 27.9 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.4 0.0 0.0 6.0 0.0 3.8 0.2 2.3 0.0 0.0 8.5 8.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 64.5 0.0 0.0 47.4 0.0 41.7 77.5 6.4 0.0 0.0 11.6 11.6 LnGrp LOS E D D E A B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 12 407 702 1531
Approach Delay, s/veh 64.5 45.1 6.8 11.6
Approach LOS E D A B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 73.3 5.9 5.0 68.3 20.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 25.0 26.0 5.0 25.0 26.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.6 2.7 2.2 28.4 15.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 3.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 15.7
HCM 7th LOS B
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [NBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
3: Gypsum Canyon Road & SR-91 EB Ramp 2045NP PM.syn
P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro PM\2045NP PM.syn Synchro 12 Report 03/31/2024 Page 3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 495 0 91 0 0 0 0 208 1183 0 594 1002 Future Volume (veh/h) 495 0 91 0 0 0 0 208 1183 0 594 1002 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 0 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 521 0 96 0 219 0 0 625 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 680 0 605 0 1136 0 1136
Arrive On Green 0.38 0.00 0.38 0.00 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 0 1585 0 3647 1585 0 3647 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 521 0 96 0 219 0 0 625 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 0 1585 0 1777 1585 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 7.7 0.0 1.2 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 4.4 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.7 0.0 1.2 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 4.4 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 680 0 605 0 1136 0 1136
V/C Ratio(X) 0.77 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.55
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1803 0 1604 0 2417 0 2417
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 8.1 0.0 6.1 0.0 7.4 0.0 0.0 8.5 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.8 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln1.4 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 10.0 0.0 6.3 0.0 7.5 0.0 0.0 8.9 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 617 219 625
Approach Delay, s/veh 9.4 7.5 8.9
Approach LOS A A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.1 16.0 14.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.5 30.5 20.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.3 9.7 6.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.0 1.9 3.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 8.9
HCM 7th LOS A
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [NBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
4: Gypsum Canyon Road & Santa Ana Canyon Road 2045NP PM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro PM\2045NP PM.syn Synchro 12 Report 03/31/2024 Page 4
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 1176 26 88 215 565 120
Future Volume (veh/h) 1176 26 88 215 565 120
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 1238 27 93 226 595 126
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 1391 638 126 1515 788 167
Arrive On Green 0.40 0.40 0.07 0.43 0.27 0.27
Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 1585 1781 3647 3013 617
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 1238 27 93 226 362 359
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1728 1585 1781 1777 1777 1759
Q Serve(g_s), s 17.5 0.5 2.7 2.0 9.8 9.9
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 17.5 0.5 2.7 2.0 9.8 9.9
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.35
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 1391 638 126 1515 480 475
V/C Ratio(X) 0.89 0.04 0.74 0.15 0.75 0.76
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1486 681 169 1920 639 633
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 14.6 9.5 24.0 9.2 17.6 17.6
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 6.8 0.0 10.8 0.0 3.6 3.7
Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln6.1 0.6 1.4 0.7 3.7 3.7
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 21.4 9.6 34.8 9.3 21.1 21.3
LnGrp LOS C A C A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1265 319 721
Approach Delay, s/veh 21.2 16.7 21.2
Approach LOS C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 26.9 25.7 8.2 18.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 28.4 22.6 5.0 18.9
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.0 19.5 4.7 11.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.4 1.6 0.0 2.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 20.6
HCM 7th LOS C
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Gypsum Canyon Road/Bryant Ranch Rd & La Palma Ave Exist WP AM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2023\Synchro AM\Exist WP AM.syn Synchro 12 Report 12/10/2023 Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 10 94 219 340 261 6 166 5 122 11 16 19 Future Volume (veh/h) 10 94 219 340 261 6 166 5 122 11 16 19 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 11 99 231 358 275 6 217 0 87 12 17 20 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 23 191 896 401 1116 24 1650 0 734 38 54 79
Arrive On Green 0.01 0.10 0.10 0.22 0.31 0.31 0.46 0.00 0.46 0.05 0.05 0.05 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 1585 1781 3556 77 3563 0 1585 758 1074 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 11 99 231 358 137 144 217 0 87 29 0 20 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 1585 1781 1777 1856 1781 0 1585 1832 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.6 5.0 7.4 19.5 5.7 5.8 3.5 0.0 3.1 1.5 0.0 1.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.6 5.0 7.4 19.5 5.7 5.8 3.5 0.0 3.1 1.5 0.0 1.2 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.04 1.00 1.00 0.41 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 23 191 896 401 558 583 1650 0 734 92 0 79 V/C Ratio(X) 0.47 0.52 0.26 0.89 0.25 0.25 0.13 0.00 0.12 0.32 0.00 0.25 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 89 337 1019 766 995 1040 1650 0 734 92 0 79 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 49.0 42.6 11.1 37.6 25.5 25.5 15.4 0.0 15.3 45.9 0.0 45.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 13.9 2.2 0.2 7.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.3 8.8 0.0 7.5 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 2.3 5.6 8.8 2.3 2.5 1.3 0.0 1.1 0.9 0.0 0.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 62.8 44.7 11.2 44.7 25.7 25.7 15.5 0.0 15.6 54.7 0.0 53.2 LnGrp LOS E D B D C C B B D D
Approach Vol, veh/h 341 639 304 49
Approach Delay, s/veh 22.6 36.4 15.5 54.1
Approach LOS C D B D
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 50.3 26.5 14.2 9.0 5.3 35.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.0 43.0 18.0 5.0 5.0 56.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.5 21.5 9.4 3.5 2.6 7.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.8 1.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 1.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 28.7
HCM 7th LOS C
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
2: Gypsum Canyon Road & Featherly Park/SR-91 WB Ramp Exist WP AM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2023\Synchro AM\Exist WP AM.syn Synchro 12 Report 12/10/2023 Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 1 0 17 58 2 135 4 157 9 0 570 5
Future Volume (veh/h) 1 0 17 58 2 135 4 157 9 0 570 5
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 1 0 18 61 2 142 4 165 0 0 600 5
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 2 0 31 205 3 180 9 1364 0 2452 20
Arrive On Green 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.01 0.73 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 84 0 1510 1781 22 1566 1781 1870 1585 0 3705 30 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 19 0 0 61 0 144 4 165 0 0 295 310
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1594 0 0 1781 0 1588 1781 1870 1585 0 1777 1865 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.2 0.0 0.0 3.1 0.0 8.8 0.2 2.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.2 0.0 0.0 3.1 0.0 8.8 0.2 2.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.05 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.02
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 33 0 0 205 0 183 9 1364 0 1207 1266 V/C Ratio(X) 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.79 0.43 0.12 0.00 0.24 0.24 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 415 0 0 463 0 413 89 1364 0 1207 1266 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.82 0.82 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.5 0.0 0.0 40.5 0.0 43.0 49.6 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 15.3 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 7.3 27.9 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.6 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 3.7 0.2 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 63.8 0.0 0.0 41.3 0.0 50.3 77.5 4.2 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 LnGrp LOS E D D E A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 19 205 169 605
Approach Delay, s/veh 63.8 47.7 5.9 0.4
Approach LOS E D A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 77.4 6.6 5.0 72.4 16.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 25.0 26.0 5.0 25.0 26.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.6 3.2 2.2 2.0 10.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.7 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.7
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 12.2
HCM 7th LOS B
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [NBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 7th TWSC
3: Gypsum Canyon Road & SR-91 EB Ramp Exist WP AM.syn
P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2023\Synchro AM\Exist WP AM.syn Synchro 12 Report 12/10/2023 Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 5.5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 147 0 33 0 0 0 0 22 42 0 126 202
Future Vol, veh/h 147 0 33 0 0 0 0 22 42 0 126 202
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - Free - - Free
Storage Length 0 - 0 - - - - - 150 - - 0
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 155 0 35 0 0 0 0 23 44 0 133 213
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 156 - 133 - 0 - - - 0
Stage 1 133 - - ------
Stage 2 23 - - ------
Critical Hdwy 6.42 - 6.22 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - ------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 - 3.318 ------
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 836 0 917 0 - 0 0 - 0
Stage 1 894 0 - 0 - 0 0 - 0
Stage 2 999 0 - 0 - 0 0 - 0
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 836 0 917 ------
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 836 0 - ------
Stage 1 894 0 - ------
Stage 2 999 0 - ------
Approach EB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s/v10.06 0 0

HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 836 917 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.185 0.038 -
HCM Control Delay (s/veh) - 10.3 9.1 -
HCM Lane LOS - B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0.7 0.1 -
HCM 7th AWSC
4: Gypsum Canyon Road & Santa Ana Canyon Road Exist WP AM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2023\Synchro AM\Exist WP AM.syn Synchro 12 Report 12/10/2023 Page 4
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 7.4
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 59 1 1 5 25 134
Future Vol, veh/h 59 1 1 5 25 134
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 62 1 1 5 26 141
Number of Lanes 100110
Approach EB NB SB
Opposing Approach SB NB
Opposing Lanes 0 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB EB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 0
Conflicting Approach Right NB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 7.8 7.3 7.3

HCM LOS AAA
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 17% 98% 0%
Vol Thru, % 83% 0% 16%
Vol Right, % 0% 2% 84%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 6 60 159
LT Vol 1 59 0
Through Vol 5 0 25
RT Vol 0 1 134
Lane Flow Rate 6 63 167
Geometry Grp 1 1 1
Degree of Util (X) 0.007 0.078 0.165
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.206 4.423 3.543
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes
Cap 844 809 1006
Service Time 2.264 2.456 1.587
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.007 0.078 0.166
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 7.3 7.8 7.3
HCM Lane LOS A A A
HCM 95th-tile Q 0 0.3 0.6
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Gypsum Canyon Road/Bryant Ranch Rd & La Palma Ave Existing WP PM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2023\Synchro PM\Existing WP PM.syn Synchro 12 Report 12/10/2023 Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 27 361 806 65 244 3 99 2 66 2 8 15 Future Volume (veh/h) 27 361 806 65 244 3 99 2 66 2 8 15 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 28 380 848 68 257 3 126 0 47 2 8 16 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 44 528 1251 88 1105 13 1806 0 803 14 57 61
Arrive On Green 0.02 0.28 0.28 0.05 0.31 0.31 0.51 0.00 0.51 0.04 0.04 0.04 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 1585 1781 3598 42 3563 0 1585 370 1481 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 28 380 848 68 127 133 126 0 47 10 0 16 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 1585 1781 1777 1863 1781 0 1585 1852 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.0 23.8 31.6 4.9 6.9 6.9 2.4 0.0 2.0 0.7 0.0 1.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.0 23.8 31.6 4.9 6.9 6.9 2.4 0.0 2.0 0.7 0.0 1.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.02 1.00 1.00 0.20 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 44 528 1251 88 546 572 1806 0 803 71 0 61 V/C Ratio(X) 0.64 0.72 0.68 0.77 0.23 0.23 0.07 0.00 0.06 0.14 0.00 0.26 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 137 575 1291 397 806 845 1806 0 803 71 0 61 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 62.8 42.0 6.2 61.1 33.6 33.6 16.4 0.0 16.3 60.4 0.0 60.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 14.7 4.0 1.4 13.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 4.1 0.0 10.2 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.1 11.1 27.9 2.5 3.0 3.1 0.9 0.0 0.7 0.4 0.0 0.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 77.5 46.0 7.6 74.3 33.8 33.8 16.5 0.0 16.4 64.5 0.0 70.9 LnGrp LOS E D A E C C B B E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 1256 328 173 26
Approach Delay, s/veh 20.8 42.2 16.5 68.4
Approach LOS C D B E
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 69.9 10.4 40.7 9.0 7.2 43.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 40.0 29.0 40.0 5.0 10.0 59.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.4 6.9 33.6 3.3 4.0 8.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.5 0.1 3.1 0.0 0.0 1.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 25.0
HCM 7th LOS C
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
2: Gypsum Canyon Road & Featherly Park/SR-91 WB Ramp Existing WP PM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2023\Synchro PM\Existing WP PM.syn Synchro 12 Report 12/10/2023 Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 6 0 6 44 8 143 4 18 50 0 864 15
Future Volume (veh/h) 6 0 6 44 8 143 4 18 50 0 864 15
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 6 0 6 46 8 151 4 19 0 0 909 16
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 12 0 12 221 10 188 9 1360 0 2418 43
Arrive On Green 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.01 0.73 0.00 0.00 0.68 0.68 Sat Flow, veh/h 839 0 839 1781 80 1517 1781 1870 1585 0 3667 63 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 12 0 0 46 0 159 4 19 0 0 452 473
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1677 0 0 1781 0 1597 1781 1870 1585 0 1777 1859 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.7 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.0 9.7 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.0 11.0 11.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.7 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.0 9.7 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.0 11.0 11.0 Prop In Lane 0.50 0.50 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.03
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 24 0 0 221 0 198 9 1360 0 1202 1258 V/C Ratio(X) 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.80 0.43 0.01 0.00 0.38 0.38 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 436 0 0 463 0 415 89 1360 0 1202 1258 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.79 0.79 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.9 0.0 0.0 39.4 0.0 42.6 49.6 3.8 0.0 0.0 7.0 7.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 15.6 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 7.4 27.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.7 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.4 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 4.0 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 3.5 3.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 64.5 0.0 0.0 39.9 0.0 50.0 77.5 3.8 0.0 0.0 7.7 7.7 LnGrp LOS E D D E A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 12 205 23 925
Approach Delay, s/veh 64.5 47.7 16.6 7.7
Approach LOS E D B A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 77.2 5.9 5.0 72.2 16.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 25.0 26.0 5.0 25.0 26.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.3 2.7 2.2 13.0 11.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.2 0.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 15.5
HCM 7th LOS B
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [NBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 7th TWSC
3: Gypsum Canyon Road & SR-91 EB Ramp Existing WP PM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2023\Synchro PM\Existing WP PM.syn Synchro 12 Report 12/10/2023 Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 0 27 0 0 0 0 68 924 0 127 717
Future Vol, veh/h 5 0 27 0 0 0 0 68 924 0 127 717
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - Free - - Free
Storage Length 0 - 0 - - - - - 150 - - 0
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 5 0 28 0 0 0 0 72 973 0 134 755
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 205 - 134 - 0 - - - 0
Stage 1 134 - - ------
Stage 2 72 - - ------
Critical Hdwy 6.42 - 6.22 ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - ------
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - ------
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 - 3.318 ------
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 783 0 915 0 - 0 0 - 0
Stage 1 893 0 - 0 - 0 0 - 0
Stage 2 951 0 - 0 - 0 0 - 0
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 783 0 915 ------
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 783 0 - ------
Stage 1 893 0 - ------
Stage 2 951 0 - ------
Approach EB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s/v 9.15 0 0

HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 783 915 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.007 0.031 -
HCM Control Delay (s/veh) - 9.6 9.1 -
HCM Lane LOS - A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0 0.1 -
HCM 7th AWSC
4: Gypsum Canyon Road & Santa Ana Canyon Road Existing WP PM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2023\Synchro PM\Existing WP PM.syn Synchro 12 Report 12/10/2023 Page 4
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 137.2
Intersection LOS F
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 927 9 3 65 40 114
Future Vol, veh/h 927 9 3 65 40 114
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 976 9 3 68 42 120
Number of Lanes 100110
Approach EB NB SB
Opposing Approach SB NB
Opposing Lanes 0 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB EB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 0
Conflicting Approach Right NB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 167.1 10.8 11.3

HCM LOS F B B
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 4% 99% 0%
Vol Thru, % 96% 0% 26%
Vol Right, % 0% 1% 74%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 68 936 154
LT Vol 3 927 0
Through Vol 65 0 40
RT Vol 0 9 114
Lane Flow Rate 72 985 162
Geometry Grp 1 1 1
Degree of Util (X) 0.122 1.314 0.249
Departure Headway (Hd) 6.883 4.8 6.24
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes
Cap 524 759 579
Service Time 4.883 2.831 4.24
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.137 1.298 0.28
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 10.8 167.1 11.3
HCM Lane LOS B F B
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.4 38.7 1
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Gypsum Canyon Road/Bryant Ranch Rd & La Palma Ave OpeningYear WP AM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro AM\OpeningYear WP AM.syn Synchro 12 Report 05/15/2024 Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 10 98 228 354 271 6 173 5 127 11 17 20 Future Volume (veh/h) 10 98 228 354 271 6 173 5 127 11 17 20 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 11 103 240 373 285 6 226 0 91 12 18 21 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 23 200 882 416 1165 24 1601 0 712 37 55 79
Arrive On Green 0.01 0.11 0.11 0.23 0.33 0.33 0.45 0.00 0.45 0.05 0.05 0.05 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 1585 1781 3559 75 3563 0 1585 733 1100 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 11 103 240 373 142 149 226 0 91 30 0 21 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 1585 1781 1777 1857 1781 0 1585 1834 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.6 5.2 7.9 20.3 5.8 5.9 3.7 0.0 3.4 1.6 0.0 1.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.6 5.2 7.9 20.3 5.8 5.9 3.7 0.0 3.4 1.6 0.0 1.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.04 1.00 1.00 0.40 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 23 200 882 416 582 608 1601 0 712 92 0 79 V/C Ratio(X) 0.47 0.51 0.27 0.90 0.24 0.25 0.14 0.00 0.13 0.33 0.00 0.26 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 89 337 998 766 995 1040 1601 0 712 92 0 79 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 49.0 42.2 11.6 37.2 24.6 24.6 16.2 0.0 16.1 45.9 0.0 45.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 13.9 2.0 0.2 7.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.4 9.3 0.0 8.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 2.4 5.8 9.2 2.4 2.5 1.5 0.0 1.2 1.0 0.0 0.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 62.8 44.2 11.8 44.2 24.8 24.8 16.4 0.0 16.4 55.1 0.0 53.7 LnGrp LOS E D B D C C B B E D
Approach Vol, veh/h 354 664 317 51
Approach Delay, s/veh 22.8 35.7 16.4 54.6
Approach LOS C D B D
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 48.9 27.3 14.7 9.0 5.3 36.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.0 43.0 18.0 5.0 5.0 56.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.7 22.3 9.9 3.6 2.6 7.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.8 1.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 1.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 28.7
HCM 7th LOS C
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
2: Gypsum Canyon Road & Featherly Park/SR-91 WB Ramp OpeningYear WP AM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro AM\OpeningYear WP AM.syn Synchro 12 Report 05/15/2024 Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 1 0 18 60 2 140 4 163 9 0 593 5
Future Volume (veh/h) 1 0 18 60 2 140 4 163 9 0 593 5
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 1 0 19 63 2 147 4 172 0 0 624 5
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 2 0 32 211 3 186 9 1356 0 2438 20
Arrive On Green 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.01 0.73 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 80 0 1514 1781 21 1567 1781 1870 1585 0 3707 29 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 20 0 0 63 0 149 4 172 0 0 307 322
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1594 0 0 1781 0 1588 1781 1870 1585 0 1777 1865 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.2 0.0 0.0 3.2 0.0 9.1 0.2 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.2 0.0 0.0 3.2 0.0 9.1 0.2 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.05 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.02
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 34 0 0 211 0 188 9 1356 0 1199 1259 V/C Ratio(X) 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.79 0.43 0.13 0.00 0.26 0.26 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 414 0 0 463 0 413 89 1356 0 1199 1259 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.81 0.81 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.5 0.0 0.0 40.3 0.0 42.9 49.6 4.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 15.2 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 7.3 27.9 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.6 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 3.8 0.2 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 63.7 0.0 0.0 41.1 0.0 50.1 77.5 4.4 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 LnGrp LOS E D D E A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 20 212 176 629
Approach Delay, s/veh 63.7 47.4 6.0 0.4
Approach LOS E D A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 77.0 6.6 5.0 72.0 16.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 25.0 26.0 5.0 25.0 26.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.8 3.2 2.2 2.0 11.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.7 0.1 0.0 3.4 0.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 12.2
HCM 7th LOS B
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [NBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 7th TWSC
3: Gypsum Canyon Road & SR-91 EB Ramp OpeningYear WP AM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro AM\OpeningYear WP AM.syn Synchro 12 Report 05/15/2024 Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 5.6
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 154 0 33 0 0 0 0 23 44 0 131 210
Future Vol, veh/h 154 0 33 0 0 0 0 23 44 0 131 210
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - Free - - Free
Storage Length 0 - 0 - - - - - 150 - - 0
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 162 0 35 0 0 0 0 24 46 0 138 221
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 162 - 138 - 0 - - - 0
Stage 1 138 - - - - - - - -
Stage 2 24 - - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy 6.42 - 6.22 - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 - 3.318 - - - - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 829 0 910 0 - 0 0 - 0
Stage 1 889 0 - 0 - 0 0 - 0
Stage 2 998 0 - 0 - 0 0 - 0
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 829 0 910 - - - - - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 829 0 - - - - - - -
Stage 1 889 0 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 998 0 - - - - - - -
Approach EB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s/v10.17 0 0

HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 829 910 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.196 0.038 -
HCM Control Delay (s/veh) - 10.4 9.1 -
HCM Lane LOS - B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0.7 0.1 -
HCM 7th AWSC
4: Internal Access Road/Gypsum Canyon Road & Santa Ana Canyon Road OpeningYear WP AM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro AM\OpeningYear WP AM.syn Synchro 12 Report 05/15/2024 Page 4
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 7.5
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 61 1 1 5 25 139
Future Vol, veh/h 61 1 1 5 25 139
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 64 1 1 5 26 146
Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0
Approach EB NB SB
Opposing Approach SB NB
Opposing Lanes 0 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB EB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 0
Conflicting Approach Right NB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 7.9 7.3 7.3

HCM LOS A A A
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 17% 98% 0%
Vol Thru, % 83% 0% 15%
Vol Right, % 0% 2% 85%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 6 62 164
LT Vol 1 61 0
Through Vol 5 0 25
RT Vol 0 1 139
Lane Flow Rate 6 65 173
Geometry Grp 1 1 1
Degree of Util (X) 0.007 0.08 0.17
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.213 4.432 3.544
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes
Cap 843 807 1006
Service Time 2.273 2.467 1.589
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.007 0.081 0.172
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 7.3 7.9 7.3
HCM Lane LOS A A A
HCM 95th-tile Q 0 0.3 0.6
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Gypsum Canyon Road/Bryant Ranch Rd & La Palma Ave OpeningYear WP PM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro PM\OpeningYear WP PM.syn Synchro 12 Report 05/15/2024 Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 28 375 838 68 254 3 103 2 69 2 8 16 Future Volume (veh/h) 28 375 838 68 254 3 103 2 69 2 8 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 29 395 882 72 267 3 132 0 49 2 8 17 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 44 557 1246 93 1169 13 1741 0 775 14 57 61
Arrive On Green 0.02 0.30 0.30 0.05 0.32 0.32 0.49 0.00 0.49 0.04 0.04 0.04 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 1585 1781 3600 40 3563 0 1585 370 1481 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 29 395 882 72 132 138 132 0 49 10 0 17 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 1585 1781 1777 1863 1781 0 1585 1852 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.1 24.4 34.9 5.2 7.0 7.0 2.6 0.0 2.1 0.7 0.0 1.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.1 24.4 34.9 5.2 7.0 7.0 2.6 0.0 2.1 0.7 0.0 1.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.02 1.00 1.00 0.20 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 44 557 1246 93 577 605 1741 0 775 71 0 61 V/C Ratio(X) 0.65 0.71 0.71 0.77 0.23 0.23 0.08 0.00 0.06 0.14 0.00 0.28 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 137 575 1262 397 806 846 1741 0 775 71 0 61 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 62.8 40.7 6.7 60.9 32.0 32.0 17.6 0.0 17.5 60.4 0.0 60.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 15.0 3.9 1.8 12.8 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.2 4.1 0.0 11.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.1 11.4 29.1 2.6 3.0 3.1 1.0 0.0 0.8 0.4 0.0 0.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 77.8 44.6 8.5 73.6 32.2 32.2 17.7 0.0 17.7 64.5 0.0 71.8 LnGrp LOS E D A E C C B B E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 1306 342 181 27
Approach Delay, s/veh 21.0 40.9 17.7 69.1
Approach LOS C D B E
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 67.5 10.8 42.7 9.0 7.2 46.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 40.0 29.0 40.0 5.0 10.0 59.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.6 7.2 36.9 3.4 4.1 9.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.6 0.1 1.8 0.0 0.0 1.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 25.0
HCM 7th LOS C
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
2: Gypsum Canyon Road & Featherly Park/SR-91 WB Ramp OpeningYear WP PM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro PM\OpeningYear WP PM.syn Synchro 12 Report 05/15/2024 Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 6 0 6 46 8 149 4 19 51 0 899 16
Future Volume (veh/h) 6 0 6 46 8 149 4 19 51 0 899 16
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 6 0 6 48 8 157 4 20 0 0 946 17
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 12 0 12 228 10 194 9 1352 0 2402 43
Arrive On Green 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.01 0.72 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.67 Sat Flow, veh/h 839 0 839 1781 77 1519 1781 1870 1585 0 3665 64 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 12 0 0 48 0 165 4 20 0 0 471 492
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1677 0 0 1781 0 1597 1781 1870 1585 0 1777 1859 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.7 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 10.0 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.0 11.8 11.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.7 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 10.0 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.0 11.8 11.8 Prop In Lane 0.50 0.50 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.03
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 24 0 0 228 0 204 9 1352 0 1195 1250 V/C Ratio(X) 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.81 0.43 0.01 0.00 0.39 0.39 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 436 0 0 463 0 415 89 1352 0 1195 1250 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.76 0.76 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.9 0.0 0.0 39.1 0.0 42.4 49.6 3.9 0.0 0.0 7.3 7.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 15.6 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 7.4 27.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.7 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.4 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 4.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 3.8 4.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 64.5 0.0 0.0 39.5 0.0 49.8 77.5 3.9 0.0 0.0 8.0 8.0 LnGrp LOS E D D E A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 12 213 24 963
Approach Delay, s/veh 64.5 47.5 16.2 8.0
Approach LOS E D B A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 76.8 5.9 5.0 71.8 17.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 25.0 26.0 5.0 25.0 26.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.3 2.7 2.2 13.8 12.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.2 0.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 15.7
HCM 7th LOS B
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [NBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 7th TWSC
3: Gypsum Canyon Road & SR-91 EB Ramp OpeningYear WP PM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro PM\OpeningYear WP PM.syn Synchro 12 Report 05/15/2024 Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 0 27 0 0 0 0 69 961 0 132 746
Future Vol, veh/h 5 0 27 0 0 0 0 69 961 0 132 746
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - Free - - Free
Storage Length 0 - 0 - - - - - 150 - - 0
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 5 0 28 0 0 0 0 73 1012 0 139 785
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 212 - 139 - 0 - - - 0
Stage 1 139 - - - - - - - -
Stage 2 73 - - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy 6.42 - 6.22 - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 - 3.318 - - - - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 777 0 909 0 - 0 0 - 0
Stage 1 888 0 - 0 - 0 0 - 0
Stage 2 950 0 - 0 - 0 0 - 0
Platoon blocked, % - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 777 0 909 - - - - - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 777 0 - - - - - - -
Stage 1 888 0 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 950 0 - - - - - - -
Approach EB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s/v 9.18 0 0

HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - 777 909 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.007 0.031 -
HCM Control Delay (s/veh) - 9.7 9.1 -
HCM Lane LOS - A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0 0.1 -
HCM 7th AWSC
4: Internal Access Road/Gypsum Canyon Road & Santa Ana Canyon Road OpeningYear WP PM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro PM\OpeningYear WP PM.syn Synchro 12 Report 05/15/2024 Page 4
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 157.7
Intersection LOS F
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 964 9 3 65 41 119
Future Vol, veh/h 964 9 3 65 41 119
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 1015 9 3 68 43 125
Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0
Approach EB NB SB
Opposing Approach SB NB
Opposing Lanes 0 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB EB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 0
Conflicting Approach Right NB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 192 11 11.6

HCM LOS F B B
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 4% 99% 0%
Vol Thru, % 96% 0% 26%
Vol Right, % 0% 1% 74%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 68 973 160
LT Vol 3 964 0
Through Vol 65 0 41
RT Vol 0 9 119
Lane Flow Rate 72 1024 168
Geometry Grp 1 1 1
Degree of Util (X) 0.122 1.373 0.258
Departure Headway (Hd) 7.018 4.826 6.357
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes
Cap 514 758 569
Service Time 5.018 2.849 4.357
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.14 1.351 0.295
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 11 192 11.6
HCM Lane LOS B F B
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.4 43.4 1
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Gypsum Canyon Road/Bryant Ranch Rd & La Palma Ave 2045WP AM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro AM\2045WP AM.syn Synchro 12 Report 03/31/2024 Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 10 94 264 749 261 6 272 27 273 11 39 19 Future Volume (veh/h) 10 94 264 749 261 6 272 27 273 11 39 19 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 11 99 278 788 275 6 387 0 201 12 41 20 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 23 299 571 766 2050 45 714 0 318 21 72 79
Arrive On Green 0.01 0.16 0.16 0.43 0.58 0.58 0.20 0.00 0.20 0.05 0.05 0.05 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 1585 1781 3556 77 3563 0 1585 419 1431 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 11 99 278 788 137 144 387 0 201 53 0 20 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 1585 1781 1777 1856 1781 0 1585 1849 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.6 4.7 13.6 43.0 3.5 3.6 9.7 0.0 11.6 2.8 0.0 1.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.6 4.7 13.6 43.0 3.5 3.6 9.7 0.0 11.6 2.8 0.0 1.2 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.04 1.00 1.00 0.23 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 23 299 571 766 1024 1070 714 0 318 92 0 79 V/C Ratio(X) 0.47 0.33 0.49 1.03 0.13 0.13 0.54 0.00 0.63 0.57 0.00 0.25 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 89 337 603 766 1024 1070 714 0 318 92 0 79 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 49.0 37.3 24.8 28.5 9.7 9.7 35.9 0.0 36.6 46.5 0.0 45.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 13.9 0.6 0.6 40.1 0.1 0.1 2.9 0.0 9.3 23.3 0.0 7.5 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 2.1 6.7 25.0 1.2 1.3 4.3 0.0 5.1 1.9 0.0 0.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 62.8 37.9 25.5 68.6 9.8 9.8 38.8 0.0 45.9 69.8 0.0 53.2 LnGrp LOS E D C F A A D D E D
Approach Vol, veh/h 388 1069 588 73
Approach Delay, s/veh 29.7 53.1 41.2 65.2
Approach LOS C D D E
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 24.0 47.0 20.0 9.0 5.3 61.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.0 43.0 18.0 5.0 5.0 56.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 13.6 45.0 15.6 4.8 2.6 5.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.9 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 1.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 46.0
HCM 7th LOS D
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
2: Gypsum Canyon Road & Featherly Park/SR-91 WB Ramp 2045WP AM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro AM\2045WP AM.syn Synchro 12 Report 03/31/2024 Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 2 0 17 269 2 298 4 272 15 0 1041 11 Future Volume (veh/h) 2 0 17 269 2 298 4 272 15 0 1041 11 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 2 0 18 283 2 314 4 286 0 0 1096 12 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 3 0 31 401 2 355 9 2199 0 2047 22
Arrive On Green 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.01 0.62 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 160 0 1442 1781 10 1577 1781 3554 1585 0 3694 39 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 20 0 0 283 0 316 4 286 0 0 541 567 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1603 0 0 1781 0 1587 1781 1777 1585 0 1777 1863 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.2 0.0 0.0 14.6 0.0 19.3 0.2 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.2 0.0 0.0 14.6 0.0 19.3 0.2 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.10 0.90 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.02
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 34 0 0 401 0 357 9 2199 0 1010 1059 V/C Ratio(X) 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.71 0.00 0.89 0.43 0.13 0.00 0.54 0.54 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 417 0 0 463 0 413 89 2199 0 1010 1059 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.40 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.5 0.0 0.0 35.7 0.0 37.5 49.6 7.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 14.9 0.0 0.0 4.1 0.0 18.3 27.9 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.8 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.6 0.0 0.0 6.4 0.0 8.8 0.2 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 63.4 0.0 0.0 39.8 0.0 55.8 77.5 8.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.8 LnGrp LOS E D E E A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 20 599 290 1108
Approach Delay, s/veh 63.4 48.2 9.0 0.8
Approach LOS E D A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 66.4 6.6 5.0 61.4 27.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 25.0 26.0 5.0 25.0 26.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.3 3.2 2.2 2.0 21.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.5 0.1 0.0 7.0 1.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 16.7
HCM 7th LOS B
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [NBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
3: Gypsum Canyon Road & SR-91 EB Ramp 2045WP AM.syn
P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro AM\2045WP AM.syn Synchro 12 Report 03/31/2024 Page 3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 251 0 33 0 0 0 0 40 44 0 622 333 Future Volume (veh/h) 251 0 33 0 0 0 0 40 44 0 622 333
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 0 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 264 0 35 0 42 0 0 655 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 389 0 346 0 1405 0 1405
Arrive On Green 0.22 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 0 1585 0 3647 1585 0 3647 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 264 0 35 0 42 0 0 655 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 0 1585 0 1777 1585 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.2 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 3.2 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.2 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 3.2 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 389 0 346 0 1405 0 1405
V/C Ratio(X) 0.68 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.47
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1873 0 1667 0 4042 0 4042
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 8.4 0.0 7.3 0.0 4.3 0.0 0.0 5.2 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.6 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 10.4 0.0 7.4 0.0 4.3 0.0 0.0 5.5 0.0 LnGrp LOS B A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 299 42 655
Approach Delay, s/veh 10.1 4.3 5.5
Approach LOS B A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.7 9.6 13.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 26.5 24.5 26.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 5.2 5.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 0.8 4.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 6.8
HCM 7th LOS A
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [NBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
4: Gypsum Canyon Road & Santa Ana Canyon Road 2045WP AM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro AM\2045WP AM.syn Synchro 12 Report 03/31/2024 Page 4
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 60 13 4 24 50 605
Future Volume (veh/h) 60 13 4 24 50 605
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 63 14 4 25 53 637
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 270 124 10 1182 901 763
Arrive On Green 0.08 0.08 0.01 0.63 0.48 0.48
Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 1585 1781 1870 1870 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 63 14 4 25 53 637
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1728 1585 1781 1870 1870 1585
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.5 10.8
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.5 10.8
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 270 124 10 1182 901 763
V/C Ratio(X) 0.23 0.11 0.41 0.02 0.06 0.83
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 2004 919 287 1988 1416 1200
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 13.4 13.3 15.4 2.1 4.3 7.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.4 25.5 0.0 0.0 3.0
Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 1.6
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 13.9 13.7 40.9 2.1 4.3 10.0
LnGrp LOS B B D A A B
Approach Vol, veh/h 77 29 690
Approach Delay, s/veh 13.8 7.5 9.6
Approach LOS B A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 24.1 6.9 4.7 19.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 33.0 18.0 5.0 23.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 2.5 2.1 12.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 0.1 0.0 2.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 9.9
HCM 7th LOS A
HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Gypsum Canyon Road/Bryant Ranch Rd & La Palma Ave 2045WP PM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro PM\2045WP PM.syn Synchro 12 Report 03/31/2024 Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 27 467 872 396 244 3 282 34 576 2 18 15 Future Volume (veh/h) 27 467 872 396 244 3 282 34 576 2 18 15 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 28 492 918 417 257 3 210 0 723 2 19 16 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 44 575 975 397 1822 21 548 0 975 7 65 61
Arrive On Green 0.02 0.31 0.31 0.22 0.51 0.51 0.31 0.00 0.31 0.04 0.04 0.04 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 1585 1781 3598 42 1781 0 3170 177 1684 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 28 492 918 417 127 133 210 0 723 21 0 16 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 1585 1781 1777 1863 1781 0 1585 1861 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.0 32.1 40.0 29.0 4.9 4.9 12.0 0.0 26.6 1.4 0.0 1.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.0 32.1 40.0 29.0 4.9 4.9 12.0 0.0 26.6 1.4 0.0 1.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.02 1.00 1.00 0.10 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 44 575 975 397 900 943 548 0 975 72 0 61 V/C Ratio(X) 0.64 0.85 0.94 1.05 0.14 0.14 0.38 0.00 0.74 0.29 0.00 0.26 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 137 575 975 397 900 943 548 0 975 72 0 61 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.00 0.97 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 62.8 42.3 17.3 50.5 17.1 17.1 35.3 0.0 40.4 60.8 0.0 60.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 14.7 12.0 16.5 58.7 0.1 0.1 2.0 0.0 4.9 10.1 0.0 10.2 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.1 16.1 34.1 19.0 2.0 2.1 5.4 0.0 10.7 0.9 0.0 0.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 77.5 54.3 33.8 109.2 17.1 17.1 37.3 0.0 45.3 70.9 0.0 70.9 LnGrp LOS E D C F B B D D E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 1438 677 933 37
Approach Delay, s/veh 41.7 73.8 43.5 70.9
Approach LOS D E D E
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 44.0 33.0 44.0 9.0 7.2 69.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 40.0 29.0 40.0 5.0 10.0 59.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 28.6 31.0 42.0 3.4 4.0 6.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 49.6
HCM 7th LOS D
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.

User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
2: Gypsum Canyon Road & Featherly Park/SR-91 WB Ramp 2045WP PM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro PM\2045WP PM.syn Synchro 12 Report 03/31/2024 Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 6 0 6 46 8 155 4 731 63 0 1264 22 Future Volume (veh/h) 6 0 6 46 8 155 4 731 63 0 1264 22 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 6 0 6 48 8 163 4 769 0 0 1331 23
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 12 0 12 235 10 201 9 2555 0 2390 41
Arrive On Green 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.01 0.72 0.00 0.00 0.67 0.67 Sat Flow, veh/h 839 0 839 1781 75 1522 1781 3554 1585 0 3668 62 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 12 0 0 48 0 171 4 769 0 0 661 693
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1677 0 0 1781 0 1596 1781 1777 1585 0 1777 1859 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.7 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 10.4 0.2 7.8 0.0 0.0 19.6 19.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.7 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 10.4 0.2 7.8 0.0 0.0 19.6 19.7 Prop In Lane 0.50 0.50 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.03
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 24 0 0 235 0 210 9 2555 0 1188 1243 V/C Ratio(X) 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.81 0.43 0.30 0.00 0.56 0.56 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 436 0 0 463 0 415 89 2555 0 1188 1243 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.31 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.9 0.0 0.0 38.7 0.0 42.2 49.6 5.0 0.0 0.0 8.7 8.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 15.6 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 7.4 27.9 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.6 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.4 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 4.3 0.2 2.2 0.0 0.0 6.1 6.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 64.5 0.0 0.0 39.2 0.0 49.6 77.5 5.3 0.0 0.0 9.3 9.3 LnGrp LOS E D D E A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 12 219 773 1354
Approach Delay, s/veh 64.5 47.3 5.7 9.3
Approach LOS E D A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 76.4 5.9 5.0 71.4 17.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 25.0 26.0 5.0 25.0 26.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.8 2.7 2.2 21.7 12.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 4.3 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 11.9
HCM 7th LOS B
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [NBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
3: Gypsum Canyon Road & SR-91 EB Ramp 2045WP PM.syn
P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro PM\2045WP PM.syn Synchro 12 Report 03/31/2024 Page 3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 660 0 27 0 0 0 0 138 1169 0 205 1041 Future Volume (veh/h) 660 0 27 0 0 0 0 138 1169 0 205 1041 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 0 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 695 0 28 0 145 0 0 216 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 867 0 772 0 651 0 651
Arrive On Green 0.49 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 0 1585 0 3647 1585 0 3647 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 695 0 28 0 145 0 0 216 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 0 1585 0 1777 1585 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 9.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 867 0 772 0 651 0 651
V/C Ratio(X) 0.80 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.33
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 2122 0 1888 0 2410 0 2410
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 5.9 0.0 3.7 0.0 9.5 0.0 0.0 9.7 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 7.7 0.0 3.7 0.0 9.7 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 723 145 216
Approach Delay, s/veh 7.5 9.7 10.0
Approach LOS A A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.5 17.8 9.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.5 32.5 18.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.9 11.0 3.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.6 2.4 1.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 8.3
HCM 7th LOS A
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [NBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary
4: Gypsum Canyon Road & Santa Ana Canyon Road 2045WP PM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2024\Synchro PM\2045WP PM.syn Synchro 12 Report 03/31/2024 Page 4
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 1225 9 21 82 90 142
Future Volume (veh/h) 1225 9 21 82 90 142
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 1289 9 22 86 95 149
Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 1611 739 48 563 294 249
Arrive On Green 0.47 0.47 0.03 0.30 0.16 0.16
Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 1585 1781 1870 1870 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 1289 9 22 86 95 149
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1728 1585 1781 1870 1870 1585
Q Serve(g_s), s 12.3 0.1 0.5 1.3 1.7 3.4
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 12.3 0.1 0.5 1.3 1.7 3.4
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 1611 739 48 563 294 249
V/C Ratio(X) 0.80 0.01 0.45 0.15 0.32 0.60
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 2100 963 230 1330 871 738
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 8.8 5.5 18.5 9.9 14.5 15.2
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.7 0.0 6.5 0.1 0.6 2.3
Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln2.4 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.6 1.1
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 10.5 5.5 25.0 10.0 15.1 17.4
LnGrp LOS B A C B B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 1298 108 244
Approach Delay, s/veh 10.5 13.1 16.5
Approach LOS B B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.1 22.5 5.6 10.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 27.5 23.5 5.0 18.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.3 14.3 2.5 5.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.4 3.8 0.0 0.7
Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 11.5
HCM 7th LOS B

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24»

APPENDIX D

TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT WORKSHEETS
California MUTCD 2014 Edition Page 855
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2009 Edition, including Revisions 1,2, &3, as amended for use in California) Chapter 4C – Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies November 7, 2014 Part 4 – Highway Traffic Signals
Existing
Santa Ana Canyon Road
Gypsum Canyon Road
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
1300
14001500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
399
56 92 105 93 99 107 48 34
862 817 818 811 798 833 445
California MUTCD 2014 Edition Page 856
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2009 Edition, including Revisions 1,2, &3, as amended for use in California) Chapter 4C – Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies November 7, 2014 Part 4 – Highway Traffic Signals
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
935
130
x
1800
11900
700
16001800
818 811 798 833
93 99 107 48
Existing

0.37 vehicle-hour
California MUTCD 2014 Edition Page 850
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2009 Edition, including Revisions 1,2, &3, as amended for use in California) Chapter 4C – Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies November 7, 2014 Part 4 – Highway Traffic Signals
_____________________________________________________________________________________ +
+ +
+
+ Existing Plus Project
**
*
*
* Existing
California MUTCD 2014 Edition Page 851
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2009 Edition, including Revisions 1,2, &3, as amended for use in California) Chapter 4C – Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies November 7, 2014 Part 4 – Highway Traffic Signals
_____________________________________________________________________________________ *
+
* Existing
+ Existing Plus Project
California MUTCD 2014 Edition Page 855
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2009 Edition, including Revisions 1,2, &3, as amended for use in California) Chapter 4C – Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies November 7, 2014 Part 4 – Highway Traffic Signals
Existing Plus Project
Santa Ana Canyon Road
Gypsum Canyon Road
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
1300
14001500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
400 863 818 819 812 799 834 446
80 116 129 117 123 131 72 58
California MUTCD 2014 Edition Page 856
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2009 Edition, including Revisions 1,2, &3, as amended for use in California) Chapter 4C – Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies November 7, 2014 Part 4 – Highway Traffic Signals
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
936
154
x
1800
11900
700
16001800
819 812 7989 834
117 123 131 72
Existing Plus Project

0.47 vehicle-hour
California MUTCD 2014 Edition Page 855
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2009 Edition, including Revisions 1,2, &3, as amended for use in California) Chapter 4C – Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies November 7, 2014 Part 4 – Highway Traffic Signals
Opening Year
Santa Ana Canyon Road
Gypsum Canyon Road
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
1300
14001500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
411 888 842 843 835 822 858 458
58 95 108 96 102 110 49 35
California MUTCD 2014 Edition Page 856
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2009 Edition, including Revisions 1,2, &3, as amended for use in California) Chapter 4C – Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies November 7, 2014 Part 4 – Highway Traffic Signals
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
972
136
x
1800
11900
700
16001800
843 835 822 858
96 102 110 49
Opening Year

0.40 vehicle-hour
California MUTCD 2014 Edition Page 850
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2009 Edition, including Revisions 1,2, &3, as amended for use in California) Chapter 4C – Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies November 7, 2014 Part 4 – Highway Traffic Signals
_____________________________________________________________________________________ +
* Opening Year
+ Opening Plus Project
*
+
+
+
*
*
*
California MUTCD 2014 Edition Page 851
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2009 Edition, including Revisions 1,2, &3, as amended for use in California) Chapter 4C – Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies November 7, 2014 Part 4 – Highway Traffic Signals
_____________________________________________________________________________________ *
+
* Opening Year
+ Opening Plus Project
California MUTCD 2014 Edition Page 855
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2009 Edition, including Revisions 1,2, &3, as amended for use in California) Chapter 4C – Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies November 7, 2014 Part 4 – Highway Traffic Signals
Opening Year Plus Project
Santa Ana Canyon Road
Gypsum Canyon Road
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
1300
14001500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
82 119 132 120 126 134 73 59
412 889 843 844 836 823 859 459
California MUTCD 2014 Edition Page 856
(FHWA’s MUTCD 2009 Edition, including Revisions 1,2, &3, as amended for use in California) Chapter 4C – Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies November 7, 2014 Part 4 – Highway Traffic Signals
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
988
168
x
1800
11900
700
16001800
844 836 823 859
120 126 134 73
Opening Year
Plus Project

0.56 vehicle-hour

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS
MAY 2024

GYPSUM C ANYON CEMETERIES

A NAHEIM , C ALIFORNIA
P:\OCC2001\Doc\Traffic Study3.docx «05/16/24»

APPENDIX E

INTERNAL INTERSECTION QUEUEING AND

LEVEL OF SERVICE WORKSHEETS
HCM 7th TWSC
5: Internal Access Road & Public Cemetery OpeningYear WP AM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2023\Synchro AM\OpeningYear WP AM.syn Synchro 12 Report 12/10/2023 Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.2
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 2 3 0 11 14
Future Vol, veh/h 0 2 3 0 11 14
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 -----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 2 3 0 12 15
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 41 3 0 0 3 0
Stage 1 3 -----
Stage 2 38 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 970 1081 - - 1619 -
Stage 1 1020 -----
Stage 2 985 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 963 1081 - - 1619 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 963 -----
Stage 1 1020 -----
Stage 2 977 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s/v 8.34 0 3.19

HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 1081 792 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.002 0.007 -
HCM Control Delay (s/veh) - - 8.3 7.2 0
HCM Lane LOS - - A A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0 0 -
HCM 7th TWSC
5: Internal Access Road & Public Cemetery OpeningYear WP PM.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2023\Synchro PM\OpeningYear WP PM.syn Synchro 12 Report 12/10/2023 Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.6
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 26 32 0 11 14
Future Vol, veh/h 0 26 32 0 11 14
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - -----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 27 34 0 12 15
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 72 34 0 0 34 0
Stage 1 34 -----
Stage 2 38 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 933 1040 - - 1578 -
Stage 1 989 -----
Stage 2 985 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 926 1040 - - 1578 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 926 -----
Stage 1 989 -----
Stage 2 977 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s/v 8.56 0 3.21

HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 1040 792 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.026 0.007 -
HCM Control Delay (s/veh) - - 8.6 7.3 0
HCM Lane LOS - - A A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.1 0 -
HCM 7th TWSC
5: Internal Access Road & Public Cemetery OpeningYear WP Sat.syn P:\OCC2001\Synchro\Synchro 2023\Synchro PM\OpeningYear WP Sat.syn Synchro 12 Report 12/10/2023 Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.7
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 75 94 0 85 106
Future Vol, veh/h 0 75 94 0 85 106
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - -----
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 79 99 0 89 112
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 389 99 0 0 99 0
Stage 1 99 -----
Stage 2 291 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 614 957 - - 1494 -
Stage 1 925 -----
Stage 2 759 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 575 957 - - 1494 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 575 -----
Stage 1 925 -----
Stage 2 711 -----
Approach WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s/v 9.1 0 3.37

HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 957 801 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.083 0.06 -
HCM Control Delay (s/veh) - - 9.1 7.6 0
HCM Lane LOS - - A A A
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.3 0.2 -

CARLSBAD
CLOVIS
IRVINE

LOS ANGELES

PALM SPRINGS

POINT RICHMOND

RIVERSIDE

ROSEVILLE

SAN LUIS OBISPO
3210 El Camino Real, Suite 100, Irvine, California 92602     949.553.0666     www.lsa.net

MEMORANDUM
DATE: April 17, 2024
TO: Tim Deutsch, Orange County Cemetery District
FROM: Arthur Black, LSA
SUBJECT: Gypsum Canyon Cemeteries—Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis The Orange County Cemetery District (District) is proposing to construct a public cemetery on 283 acres of property within Development Area 5 of the Mountain Park Specific Plan. A veterans cemetery is also being considered within the 283 acre project site in a collaborative effort among the California Department of Veterans Affairs (CalVet), the County of Orange (County) and the District.

An approximately 80‐acre developable pad would be developed for the District cemetery within the project site that would provide up to approximately 50 acres of interment areas, an approximately 7,700 square foot (sf) administration building, a 30,150 sf maintenance yard and building, approximately 9,800 sf of committal shelters, approximately 15 acres of roads, walkways, parking, hardscape, and plaza niche areas, and approximately 15 acres of landscape area. Build‐out of the District cemetery would take place in phases as demand warrants and could include up to 150,000 interment spaces.

An approximately 100‐acre development area has been provided for within the upper pad of the project site. The ultimate design of the State veterans cemetery will be determined by CalVet; however, the exterior loop roadway and utility infrastructure have been designed to accommodate future development of the State veterans cemetery. Accessed via the main entry roadway, the State veterans cemetery would include an administrative building (approximately 2,000 sf), an assembly area, restrooms, a maintenance/operations building (approximately 3,000 sf), and a committal structure (approximately 600 sf) in addition to interment spaces. Build‐out of the State veterans cemetery would take place as demand warrants and is anticipated to span over 100 years and could include up to 200,000 interment spaces. LSA has prepared this analysis considering the development of these two cemeteries within the project site.

The City of Anaheim Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for California Environmental Quality Act Analysis (June 2020) establish methodology for transportation analysis consistent with Senate Bill 743 (SB 743), which eliminates consideration of vehicle level of service for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Rather than consider a project’s effect on vehicle level of service, CEQA now considers a project’s effect on vehicle miles traveled (VMT). The VMT generated by a project is a function of total trips and the length of those trips. 4/17/24 «P:\OCC2001\Doc\VMT Study2.docx»   2
The City of Anaheim’s (City) guidelines establish three screening criteria for projects that are not anticipated to result in significant increases in VMT and could be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. Among the Type 3 project screening criteria, projects that are public services are anticipated to have a less than significant impact on VMT. While the proposed project is a public service, a VMT assessment was nonetheless prepared.

The City’s guidelines establish VMT per service population (e.g., population plus employment) as the metric of analysis and Orange County as the regional average. The City’s guidelines further establish that VMT analysis and forecasting is to use the Orange County Transportation Analysis Model (OCTAM) to calculate project‐generated VMT and project effect on VMT for the project traffic analysis zone (TAZ) under four scenarios:
 Baseline conditions (i.e., OCTAM baseline conditions)  Baseline plus project (i.e., including the project land use in OCTAM base year model runs)  Cumulative no project (i.e., OCTAM future model conditions)  Cumulative plus project (i.e., including the project land use in OCTAM future‐year model runs) Two types of VMT are then to be summarized (1) project‐generated VMT per service population compared to the regional average threshold of significance and (2) the project’s effect on citywide VMT per service population compared to the no project condition.

LSA used the latest OCTAM travel demand model (OCTAM 5) to complete this analysis.

Significance Threshold
Table A summarizes the calculation of VMT per service population in Orange County. As Table A shows, total VMT with origins or destinations in Orange County increases from 148,018,452 in the baseline model to 165,852,595 in the future‐year model. This increase in VMT is more than offset by the increase in service population, and the VMT per service population in Orange County decreases from 30.3 to 30.1. The City establishes a significance threshold of 85 percent of the regional (i.e., Orange County) average, which is 25.7 VMT per service population for the baseline model and

25.6 VMT per service population for the future‐year model.

Table A: Countywide VMT and Significance Threshold
VMT Service Population VMT per Service
Population
Significance Threshold
(85% of County Average)
Baseline (2016) 148,018,452 4,889,773 30.3 25.7
Future Year (2045) 165,852,595 5,515,053 30.1 25.6
Source: Orange County Transportation Analysis Model 5 (2024).

County = County of Orange
VMT = vehicle miles traveled
Plan‐to‐Plan Comparison
In 2005 the City amended the 1991 Mountain Park Specific Plan located on approximately 3,000 acres generally in the Gypsum Canyon. As amended, the Mountain Park Specific Plan would include 4/17/24 «P:\OCC2001\Doc\VMT Study2.docx»   3
2,500 residential units as well as some institutional and commercial uses. The proposed project would replace two of the development areas (Development Areas 5 and 6) in the previously planned Mountain Park Specific Plan. A comparison is not necessary for the City’s guidelines or for analysis of the project under CEQA. However, a comparison of VMT generated by the proposed project and the development areas of the Mountain Park Specific Plan being replaced by the project helps to inform the results of the VMT analysis.

Table B summarizes the comparison of VMT generated by the proposed project and the replaced development areas of the Mountain Park Specific Plan. The Mountain Park Specific Plan is only present in the General Plan Buildout future scenario, so this comparison is only made for the future model condition. As Table B shows, Development Areas 5 and 6 of the Mountain Park Specific Plan have a higher service population (by 5,853) and generate higher VMT (by 254,602) than the proposed project. As a result, the proposed project’s VMT per service population is approximately half of the VMT per service population of the previously proposed land uses.

Table B: Comparison of Future Land Use
VMT Service Population VMT per Service
Population
Mountain Park Specific Plan Development Areas 5 and 6 265,732 6,337 41.7 Proposed Project 11,130 524 21.3
Difference (254,602) (5,853) (20.4)
Source: Orange County Transportation Analysis Model 5 (2024).

VMT = vehicle miles traveled
Project‐Generated VMT per Service Population
For the first part of disclosing project VMT impacts according to the City’s guidelines, OCTAM was used to calculate VMT per service population for trips with origins or destinations within the project TAZ. Then, VMT per service population was calculated against the significance threshold disclosed in Table A. The results of this analysis are summarized in Table C. As Table C shows, OCTAM calculates that the proposed project will generate 22.3 VMT per service population in the baseline model and

21.3 VMT per service population in the future‐year model. Both are below the significance threshold.

Table C: Project‐Generated VMT
VMT Service Population VMT per Service
Population
Significance Threshold
(85% of County Average)
Baseline (2016) 11,662 524 22.3 25.7
Future Year (2045) 11,130 524 21.3 25.6
Source: Orange County Transportation Analysis Model 5 (2024).

County = County of Orange
VMT = vehicle miles traveled
4/17/24 «P:\OCC2001\Doc\VMT Study2.docx»   4
Project Effect on Citywide VMT per Service Population
For the second part of disclosing project VMT impacts according to the City’s guidelines, OCTAM was used to calculate citywide conditions without and with the project. This was performed under both baseline conditions and cumulative conditions. Table D summarizes the results of this analysis. As Table D shows, the proposed project would not alter citywide VMT per service population under either baseline conditions or the cumulative conditions of the future model year.

Table D: Citywide VMT per Service Population
VMT Service Population VMT per Service Population
Baseline (2016)
Without Project 10,299,989 525,861 19.6
With Project 10,342,652 526,385 19.6
Future Year (2045)
Without Project 11,730,486 639,996 18.3
With Project 11,618,445 634,143 18.3
Source: Orange County Transportation Analysis Model 5 (2024).

VMT = vehicle miles traveled
As a result of project‐generated VMT per service population being below the significance threshold and the project having no effect on citywide VMT per service population compared to the no project condition, LSA concludes that the project would have a less than significant impact on VMT, which means a less than significant impact related to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b), analyzing transportation impacts consistent with SB 743.

CARLSBAD
CLOVIS
IRVINE

LOS ANGELES

PALM SPRINGS

POINT RICHMOND

RIVERSIDE

ROSEVILLE

SAN LUIS OBISPO
3210 El Camino Real, Suite 100, Irvine, California 92602 949.553.0666 www.lsa.net

MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 15, 2024
TO: Tim Deutsch, Orange County Cemetery District
FROM: Arthur Black, LSA Associates, Inc.

SUBJECT: Gypsum Canyon Cemeteries—Parking Demand Study
LSA has prepared this analysis considering the development of two cemeteries within an approximately 283-acre site at the termination of Gypsum Canyon Road in Anaheim. One 80-acre developable pad would be developed for a public cemetery to be operated by the Orange County Cemetery District. A second 100-acre developable pad would be developed for a veterans’ cemetery to be operated by the California Department of Veterans Affairs (CalVet) (see Figure 1, attached).

Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.42.040 establishes required off-street parking for nonresidential projects. For cemetery land uses, the Municipal Code requires preparation of a parking demand study per paragraph 18.42.040.010.0108. This paragraph requires preparation of a parking demand study or parking justification letter due to the unique nature of the use. This report provides the parking supply and demand calculations to satisfy the Municipal Code requirement.

Parking Supply
Cemeteries typically provide a parking lot with marked stalls near the administration building. These spaces are used by employees and by people making arrangements at the cemetery. Most visitors (during interments and routine visits) will use unmarked parallel parking spaces along a cemetery’s internal roadways. The total parking supply includes both the marked parking spaces in parking lots and on-street parallel parking.

The site plan for the public cemetery indicates 44 marked parking spaces in a parking lot near the administration building. The architect noted the number of potential on-street parking spaces (anticipating parking on only one side of the internal streets and a length of 22 feet per parallel parking space consistent with Anaheim Standard Detail 470) for each of the internal streets. A total of 361 on-street parking spaces are possible with the site plan for the public cemetery, for a total parking supply of 405 parking spaces. The parking lot near the administration building would be completed by project opening. Because the public cemetery would be constructed incrementally, on-street parking spaces parallel to the area developed would also be constructed incrementally.

The veterans’ cemetery plans 24 marked parking spaces in a parking lot near the administration building. Internal roadways totaling 8,375 linear feet could accommodate approximately 335 to 380 5/15/24 «P:\OCC2001\Doc\Parking Demand Study2.docx» 2
parking spaces. This indicates a total parking supply of approximately 359 to 404 parking spaces. The veterans’ cemetery would also be constructed incrementally with adjacent parallel parking spaces developed incrementally. The roadway connecting the two cemetery sites is approximately 3,530 feet between the public and veteran entrances, which could accommodate 141 to 160 additional parked vehicles during periods of unusually high parking demand. However, credit for the parking spaces along this connecting roadway are not taken into consideration in this parking analysis.

Parking Demand
LSA contracted with an independent data collection company to survey three cemetery sites in preparation for this analysis. Two of the sites are operated by the Orange County Cemetery District (El Toro Memorial Park and Santa Ana Cemetery). The third site is the Riverside National Cemetery, which was included to assist in determination of parking demand for the veterans’ cemetery.

Surveys were conducted during clear weather on typical weekdays (Wednesday, November 16, 2022, and Thursday, November 17, 2022) and a typical Saturday (Saturday, November 19, 2022). A survey at the Riverside National Cemetery was also conducted on Veterans’ Day. Survey data is included as an attachment.

In order to capture all of the vehicles potentially parked along the internal roadways, LSA collected inbound and outbound vehicle data at all entrances/exits at each site. Parking accumulation was calculated for each 15-minute interval as the difference between inbound vehicles and outbound vehicles. For example, if 10 vehicles entered and 5 vehicles exited, then 5 additional vehicles were determined to be parked. Total on-site parking was also calculated based on the parking accumulation. Table A summarizes the daily peak parking demand at each surveyed site.

Table A: Surveyed Cemetery Parking Demand
El Toro Memorial Park
(25 Acres)
Santa Ana Cemetery
(29 Acres)
Riverside National Cemetery
(220 Developed Acres)
Peak Demand Per Acre Peak Demand Per Acre Peak Demand Per Acre Wednesday 44 1.76 24 0.83 255 1.16
Thursday 32 1.28 32 1.10 264 1.20
Average Weekday 38 1.52 28 0.97 260 1.18
Saturday 77 3.08 57 1.97 60 0.27
Veterans’ Day - - - - 652 2.96
Source: Counts Unlimited (2022).

Table A also calculates the parking rate per developed acre. While the Riverside National Cemetery is the largest in the National Cemetery Administration, only approximately 220 acres of the total 1,250 acres are currently developed and could generate parking demand. As Table A shows, El Toro Memorial Park had higher parking demand than Santa Ana Cemetery on weekdays and on Saturday.

Rather than calculating an average parking rate, LSA conservatively applied the highest weekday and Saturday parking rates to the public portion of the proposed project. Similarly, the highest surveyed weekday parking rate at the Riverside National Cemetery was applied to the proposed veterans’ cemetery. The Riverside National Cemetery was open on the surveyed Saturday, and many vehicles entered and exited. However, nearly as many vehicles exited during each 15-minute survey period 5/15/24 «P:\OCC2001\Doc\Parking Demand Study2.docx» 3
as entered, and very little parking demand was determined to accumulate within the cemetery.

Table B applies the parking rates from Table A to the proposed project to calculate parking demand at buildout of both cemetery sites.

Table B: Project Parking Demand
Public Cemetery
(405 Parking Spaces)
Veterans’ Cemetery
(359 to 404 Parking Spaces)
Developable Area 80 acres 100 acres
Weekday Parking Rate 1.76 spaces per acre 1.20 spaces per acre Weekday Parking Demand 141 spaces 120 spaces
Saturday Parking Rate 3.08 spaces per acre 0.27 space per acre Saturday Parking Demand 246 spaces 27 spaces
Veterans’ Day Parking Rate - 2.96 spaces per acre
Veterans’ Day Parking Demand - 296 spaces
Minimum Surplus Parking 159 63
Source: Compiled by LSA (2023).

Table B shows that the project would have sufficient parking to accommodate peak demand at buildout for both cemeteries. As the project is incrementally constructed, parking demand from the developed areas and the parking supply along roadways adjacent to the developed areas would increase proportionately. Therefore, a proportionate surplus of parking is anticipated throughout development. The cemeteries would develop lawn and mausoleum areas simultaneously. Curbside parking is available throughout each site, allowing for ease of parking throughout. If parking demand is greater near mausoleums, this can be accommodated within the overall surplus of parking. The parking surplus at buildout, and proportionately with each phase, would result in available parking for visitors near their destination.

It should be noted that maintenance vehicles for the project will be housed in the maintenance garages or within the maintenance area and would not occupy a visitor parking space along the internal roadways.

Conclusion
As stated in the Parking Supply section, above, the public cemetery plans 405 parking spaces and it is anticipated that the veterans’ cemetery would provide approximately 359 to 404 parking spaces.

During times of abnormally high demand, an additional 141 to 160 vehicles could park along the access road. On a typical weekday, the proposed project is anticipated to generate parking demand for 141 spaces at the public cemetery and 120 spaces at the veterans’ cemetery. On a typical Saturday, the proposed project is anticipated to generate parking demand for 246 spaces at the public cemetery and a few additional spaces at the veterans’ cemetery. During these typical periods, parking supply far exceeds parking demand. As each phase is developed, a proportionate parking surplus is anticipated. Based on surveys taken on Veterans’ Day at the Riverside National Cemetery, holiday parking demand at the veterans’ cemetery is anticipated to be 296 parking spaces. It is anticipated that the public cemetery would experience typical weekday or weekend parking demand. The holiday parking demand should be accommodated within the on-site parking supply. 5/15/24 «P:\OCC2001\Doc\Parking Demand Study2.docx» 4
At buildout, the public cemetery is anticipated to provide a surplus of 159 parking spaces, and the veterans’ cemetery is anticipated to provide a surplus of 63 parking spaces. Therefore, the project will provide adequate parking to accommodate the expected peak parking demand. Should parking demand exceed expectations, additional parking spaces would be available along the access road, but they were not counted regarding the parking supply in this analysis.

Attachments: Figure 1
Survey Data
FIGURE 1
Site Plan
Gypsum Canyon Cemeteries
SOURCE: RJM Design Group
I:\OCC2001\G\Site_Plan.ai (4/15/2024)

NO SCALE
Santa Ana Canyon Road
91 Gypsum Canyon Road
City: Lake Forest
Location: El Toro Memorial Park
25751 Trabuco Road
Date:

Count Type:

Entering Exiting Total Entering Exiting Total Entering Exiting Parked 0:00 0 0 0 0:00 0 0 0 0:00 0 0 0
0:15 0 0 0 0:15 0 0 0 0:15 0 0 0
0:30 0 0 0 0:30 0 0 0 0:30 0 0 0
0:45 0 0 0 0:45 0 0 0 0:45 0 0 0
1:00 0 0 0 1:00 0 0 0 1:00 0 0 0
1:15 0 0 0 1:15 0 0 0 1:15 0 0 0
1:30 0 0 0 1:30 0 0 0 1:30 0 0 0
1:45 0 0 0 1:45 0 0 0 1:45 0 0 0
2:00 0 0 0 2:00 0 0 0 2:00 0 0 0
2:15 0 0 0 2:15 0 0 0 2:15 0 0 0
2:30 0 0 0 2:30 0 0 0 2:30 0 0 0
2:45 0 0 0 2:45 0 0 0 2:45 0 0 0
3:00 0 0 0 3:00 0 0 0 3:00 0 0 0
3:15 0 0 0 3:15 0 0 0 3:15 0 0 0
3:30 0 0 0 3:30 0 0 0 3:30 0 0 0
3:45 0 0 0 3:45 0 0 0 3:45 0 0 0
4:00 0 0 0 4:00 0 0 0 4:00 0 0 0
4:15 0 0 0 4:15 0 0 0 4:15 0 0 0
4:30 0 0 0 4:30 0 0 0 4:30 0 0 0
4:45 0 0 0 4:45 0 0 0 4:45 0 0 0
5:00 0 0 0 5:00 0 0 0 5:00 0 0 0
5:15 0 0 0 5:15 0 0 0 5:15 0 0 0
5:30 0 0 0 5:30 2 0 2 5:30 2 0 2
5:45 0 0 0 5:45 1 1 2 5:45 1 1 2
6:00 1 0 1 6:00 0 0 0 6:00 1 0 3
6:15 0 0 0 6:15 0 0 0 6:15 0 0 3
6:30 0 0 0 6:30 3 0 3 6:30 3 0 6
6:45 1 0 1 6:45 3 1 4 6:45 4 1 9
7:00 6 3 9 7:00 1 2 3 7:00 7 5 11
7:15 4 5 9 7:15 2 0 2 7:15 6 5 12
7:30 3 3 6 7:30 0 0 0 7:30 3 3 12
7:45 3 1 4 7:45 2 3 5 7:45 5 4 13
8:00 3 4 7 8:00 1 0 1 8:00 4 4 13
8:15 4 1 5 8:15 0 1 1 8:15 4 2 15
8:30 4 3 7 8:30 1 1 2 8:30 5 4 16
8:45 1 3 4 8:45 3 0 3 8:45 4 3 17
9:00 7 2 9 9:00 2 0 2 9:00 9 2 24
9:15 6 3 9 9:15 1 2 3 9:15 7 5 26
9:30 12 2 14 9:30 1 4 5 9:30 13 6 33
9:45 7 0 7 9:45 4 0 4 9:45 11 0 44
10:00 2 2 4 10:00 1 1 2 10:00 3 3 44
10:15 2 3 5 10:15 0 1 1 10:15 2 4 42
10:30 3 10 13 10:30 0 0 0 10:30 3 10 35
10:45 7 14 21 10:45 0 3 3 10:45 7 17 25
11:00 5 4 9 11:00 1 1 2 11:00 6 5 26
11:15 8 4 12 11:15 0 1 1 11:15 8 5 29
11:30 15 7 22 11:30 4 1 5 11:30 19 8 40
11:45 4 6 10 11:45 1 2 3 11:45 5 8 37
Old Trabuco Rd Drivweay TOTAL
Wednesday, November 16, 2022
Driveway Counts
Main Driveway
Counts Unlimited, Inc.

PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
City: Lake Forest
Location: El Toro Memorial Park
25751 Trabuco Road
Date:

Count Type:

Entering Exiting Total Entering Exiting Total Entering Exiting Parked Old Trabuco Rd Drivweay TOTAL
Wednesday, November 16, 2022
Driveway Counts
Main Driveway
12:00 3 8 11 12:00 0 2 2 12:00 3 10 30
12:15 6 8 14 12:15 1 0 1 12:15 7 8 29
12:30 4 1 5 12:30 2 2 4 12:30 6 3 32
12:45 6 8 14 12:45 3 2 5 12:45 9 10 31
13:00 2 4 6 13:00 1 0 1 13:00 3 4 30
13:15 4 5 9 13:15 0 0 0 13:15 4 5 29
13:30 3 8 11 13:30 2 0 2 13:30 5 8 26
13:45 8 6 14 13:45 0 1 1 13:45 8 7 27
14:00 6 3 9 14:00 1 0 1 14:00 7 3 31
14:15 7 7 14 14:15 5 2 7 14:15 12 9 34
14:30 11 7 18 14:30 4 2 6 14:30 15 9 40
14:45 4 5 9 14:45 0 1 1 14:45 4 6 38
15:00 7 6 13 15:00 3 2 5 15:00 10 8 40
15:15 6 5 11 15:15 4 1 5 15:15 10 6 44
15:30 4 12 16 15:30 3 5 8 15:30 7 17 34
15:45 4 7 11 15:45 1 5 6 15:45 5 12 27
16:00 3 9 12 16:00 3 0 3 16:00 6 9 24
16:15 9 9 18 16:15 4 1 5 16:15 13 10 27
16:30 5 21 26 16:30 1 0 1 16:30 6 21 12
16:45 5 8 13 16:45 1 1 2 16:45 6 9 9
17:00 0 9 9 17:00 0 0 0 17:00 0 9 0
17:15 0 0 0 17:15 0 0 0 17:15 0 0 0
17:30 0 0 0 17:30 0 0 0 17:30 0 0 0
17:45 0 0 0 17:45 0 0 0 17:45 0 0 0
18:00 0 0 0 18:00 0 0 0 18:00 0 0 0
18:15 0 0 0 18:15 0 0 0 18:15 0 0 0
18:30 0 0 0 18:30 0 0 0 18:30 0 0 0
18:45 0 0 0 18:45 0 0 0 18:45 0 0 0
19:00 0 0 0 19:00 0 0 0 19:00 0 0 0
19:15 0 0 0 19:15 0 0 0 19:15 0 0 0
19:30 0 0 0 19:30 0 0 0 19:30 0 0 0
19:45 0 0 0 19:45 0 0 0 19:45 0 0 0
20:00 0 0 0 20:00 0 0 0 20:00 0 0 0
20:15 0 0 0 20:15 0 0 0 20:15 0 0 0
20:30 0 0 0 20:30 0 0 0 20:30 0 0 0
20:45 0 0 0 20:45 0 0 0 20:45 0 0 0
21:00 0 0 0 21:00 0 0 0 21:00 0 0 0
21:15 0 0 0 21:15 0 0 0 21:15 0 0 0
21:30 0 0 0 21:30 0 0 0 21:30 0 0 0
21:45 0 0 0 21:45 0 0 0 21:45 0 0 0
22:00 0 0 0 22:00 0 0 0 22:00 0 0 0
22:15 0 0 0 22:15 0 0 0 22:15 0 0 0
22:30 0 0 0 22:30 0 0 0 22:30 0 0 0
22:45 0 0 0 22:45 0 0 0 22:45 0 0 0
23:00 0 0 0 23:00 0 0 0 23:00 0 0 0
23:15 0 0 0 23:15 0 0 0 23:15 0 0 0
23:30 0 0 0 23:30 0 0 0 23:30 0 0 0
23:45 0 0 0 23:45 0 0 0 23:45 0 0 0
Counts Unlimited, Inc.