Daly City City Council
October 27, 2025

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 January 9, 2025
Attorney Client Privileged Page 4 of 25

Additionally, as previously noted, brough t prior complaints against DiGiovanni on behalf of himself and other City employees in 2023, which led to the prior investigation referenced in Section III.D.

F. Working Relationship With DiGiovanni
also explained that he is “constantly concerned and worried” about what could happen due to DiGiovanni’s dislike of him and He elaborated:

It’s very, very difficult to deal with as a staff member, especially because she is in such conflict with me and [ a nd I do often go on front of her when she’s on the dais. And I am constantly now, when I am around her, […] I’m constantly concerned and worried about, is something going to happen here that’s going to affect my job? That’s going to affect my ability to go in front of the Council and present something or ask for the authority to do something. added that he tries to avoid DiGiovanni to the extent possible. He explained, “I don’t want to interact with her, because almost every time I interact with her, she says something inappropriate.” G. Policies
I am charged with making factual findings only.3 I therefore do not assess whether pertinent policies have been violated. However, for the purposes of context, this section sets forth relevant policies identified during the course of the investigation.

City of Daly City Harassment Policy
Policy Statement
Harassment or discrimination of an […] employee […] by a […] elected or appointed official […] on the basis of race […], national origin, ancestry […] or any other protected classification will not be tolerated.

The City of Daly City is committed to maintaining a culture of diversity, equity and inclusion. We are dedicated to a nondiscriminatory approach and to provide equal opportunity for all. We foster a diverse, equitable and inclusive environment that reflects the value that each employee’s unique experiences, perspectives and viewpoints add to the workplace and to our community. […]

3 Although I utilize a legal analysis in reaching the factual determinations in this Report, I do not reach policy or legal conclusions.

Instead, these findings are intended to facilitate the rendering of legal advice by the City’s counsel.

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 January 9, 2025
Attorney Client Privileged Page 5 of 25

Policy
The City of Daly City will not accept or tolerate any conduct that violates this Policy. Conduct need not rise to the level of a violation of law to violate this Policy. A single act can violate this Policy and provide grounds for discipline.

Harassment or discrimination against an […] employee by a […] elected or appointed official […] on the basis of race […], national origin, ancestry […] or any other protected classification […] will not be tolerated. […]
Definitions
A. Protected Classifications: This Policy prohibits harassment or discrimination because of an individual’s protected classification. “Protected classification” includes race, […] national origin, ancestry […].

B. Policy Coverage: This Policy prohibits the City of Daly City, elected or appointed officials […] from harassing or discriminating against […] employees […] because of: 1) an individual’s protected classification; 2) the perception that an individual has a protected classification; or 3) the individual associates with a person who has or is perceived to have a protected classification.

C. Discrimination: This policy prohibits treating individuals differently because of the individual’s protected classification as defined in this Policy.

D. Harassment may include, but is not limited to, the following types of behavior that is taken because of a person’s protected classification. Note that harassment is not limited to conduct that employer’s employees take. Under certain circumstances, harassment can also include conduct taken by those who are not employees, such as elected officials […].
(1) Speech, such as epithets, derogatory comments or slurs […] on the basis of a protected classification. […]
[…]
E. Guidelines for Identifying Harassment: To help clarify what constitutes harassment in violation of this Policy, use the following guidelines:
(1) Harassment includes any conduct which would be “unwelcome” to an individual of the recipient’s same protected classification and which is taken because of the recipient’s protected classification.
(2) It is no defense that the recipient appears to have voluntarily “consented” to the conduct at issue. A recipient may not protest for many legitimate reasons, including the need to avoid being insubordinate or to avoid being ostracized. […]

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 January 9, 2025
Attorney Client Privileged Page 6 of 25

(5) Conduct can constitute harassment in violation of this Policy even if the individual engaging in the conduct has no intention to harass. Even well- intentioned conduct can violate this Policy if the conduct is directed at, or implicates a protected classification, and if an individual of the recipient’s same protected classification would find it offensive […].

Attachment 4.

IV. On May 23, 2024, At The City’s Memorial Day Event, Did DiGiovanni State In The Presence Of One Or More City Employees That She Was Going To Get “A Real Samoan” To Run For City Council?
reported that informed him that, on May 23, 2024, at
the City’s Memorial Day Event, DiGiovanni told that she was going to get “a real Samoan” to run for City Council.
and the witnesses’ relevant perspectives are discussed below.

A. Reported Concern
In his November 8, 2024 memo to wrote the following related to a comment DiGiovanni allegedly made to at the City’s Memorial Day Event:

On May 23, 2024, at [the City’s] Memorial Day event, Councilmember DiGiovanni approached [ and stated that sh e “was going to get a real Samoan” to run for City Council. [ was ve ry uncomfortable with this statement as it was uninvited and offensive to him.

Attachment 1.

In his investigative interview, elaborated on this allegation. He explained that informed him about the comment on October 31, 2024 when asked to m eet with to discuss what witnessed at the October 30, 2024 Italian Flag Raising ev ent (discussed in Section VIII below). It was understanding that DiGiovanni was referring to Theresa Faapuaa, a Samoan woman who was running for City Council at the time. According to DiGiovanni was supporting Faapuaa for Council, because DiGiovanni wanted to be part of the majority on the Council in order to “fire” as believed DiGiovanni’s comment made uncomfortable, because (along with other employees) have expressed to him that they believe they can be fired by a Councilmember. assured that Councilmembers do not have the right to fire employees within
B. Witness Statements
Three witnesses had information to provide related to this allegation. and confirmed that DiGiovanni made the alleged
comment and that the comment made them uncomfortable.
also heard the comment.

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 January 9, 2025
Attorney Client Privileged Page 7 of 25

stated that he was standing next to
4 when DiGiovanni remarked to “We’re going to get the right Samoan lady in office.” understood this to be a reference to Faapuaa, a Samoan woman who was running for City Council at the time.

The comment “threw [ off guard,” gave him a “weird” feeling, and made him uncomfortable.

He did not understand why DiGiovanni would make the comment, especially since he did not know Faapuaa. Several months later, at the end of October 2024, told about the comment after called into his office to discuss what witnessed at the October 30, 2024 Italian Flag Raising Event (discussed in Section VIII below).

confirmed that he heard DiGiovanni state that she was going to get “a real Samoan” on the City Council. understood this to be a refere nce to Faapuaa. Like was “thrown off” by the comment and thought it was “weird.” self-identifies as Polynesian.

recalled hearing DiGiovanni remark that
she was going to get a “real Samoan” on the City Council. did not recall when this happened, but recalled DiGiovanni making the comment in the presence of him and several “Polynesian guys,” including 6 and possibly also
C. Findings and Analysis – On May 23, 2024, At The City’s Memorial Day Event, Did DiGiovanni State In The Presence Of One Or More City Employees That She Was Going To Get “A Real Samoan” To Run For City Council?
Yes. After a thorough review of the evidence, I make the following findings by a preponderance of the evidence.
 On May 23, 2024, at the City’s Memorial Day Event, DiGiovanni commented in the presence of several employees that she was going to get a “real Samoan” to run for City Council. This comment made employees who heard the comment uncomfortable.

I make these findings for the following reasons.

First, there is direct corroboration that DiGiovanni made the comment. and were present when DiGiovanni made the comment and described DiGiovanni’s comment in a consistent manner.

Second, there is indirect corroboration supporting that the comment was made. reported the comment to

6 I interviewed after therefore, I di d not ask if he heard the alleged comment.

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 January 9, 2025
Attorney Client Privileged Page 8 of 25

Third, there is evidence based on credible account that three other employees ( were also present with and when DiGiovanni made the
comment. Four of these employees ( and are of Polynesian ancestry and is married to a Samoan woman.

Fourth, and confirmed th at the comment made them uncomfortable.

Fifth, the witnesses who heard the comment had no apparent motive to falsify allegations against DiGiovanni.

V. On September 26, 2024, At The City’s Employee Service Awards Event, Did DiGiovanni Tell To “Make Sure You Have Everyone Vote For Faapuaa”?
alleged that, on September 26, 2024, at the Employee Service Awards Event, DiGiovanni told him to “make sure you have everyone vote for [Theresa] Faapuaa.” As previously noted, Faapuaa was running for City Council at the time.
and witnesses’ relevant perspectives are discussed below.

A. Reported Concern
On September 27, 2024, sent the following email to
I am sending you this email to inform you of the conversation [I] had with [DiGiovanni] as I was waiting to be signed in for the Employee Awards Lunch.

During her conversing, a statement was made “make sure you have everyone vote for [Theresa] Faapuaa.”
7 I just brushed it off but felt it was not a place I
should be discussing any political activity. Later when I was talking to [ about this as I grabbed my soda , chimed in that he heard her also make that statement.”
Attachment 2.

Thereafter, after requested a dditional information, informed that he was inside City Hall when DiGiovanni made the comment. He also noted that when she made the comment, DiGiovanni was “leaning on” him and “tapping [his] shoulder,” however, he noted he “did not feel there was any ill intent.” He also added that he “did not feel harassed or threatened.” Instead, he “felt the political conversation at the event was not the correct forum.” Attachment 2.

In his investigative interview, elaborated on this allegation. stated that he told what DiGiovanni said shortly after DiGiovanni made the comment, while the event was still underway. In response, agreed with that it was inappropriate for DiGiovanni to “politicize” an event intended to celebrate employees. also repeated in his investigative interview that told him that he heard DiGiovanni’s comment.

7 In her Candidate Statement, Faapuaa noted that she had DiGiovanni’s endorsement. https://www.dalycity.org/1209/2024- Election

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 January 9, 2025
Attorney Client Privileged Page 9 of 25

B. Wit
ness Statements
Two witnesses had information to provide related to this allegation. recalled that told him what happened on the same day of the event and said he heard state that he also heard the comment. stated in his investigative interview that he did not recall hearing the comment. confirmed that told him at the September 26, 2024 Employee Service Awards Event that DiGiovanni told to “make sure you have everyone vote for Faapuaa.” stated that he was also present at the same event when informed and that he had heard DiGiovanni’s comment to
explained that he first observed DiGiovanni interacting with when was still on the third floor of City Hall. explained that cameras face various locations in City Hall so he was able to see on a big screen TV that DiGiovanni was on the second floor of City Hall near According to DiGiovanni was “invading ] space,” “putting [her] hand right up to face,” and “shouldering” him. Shortly thereafter, when went downstairs he asked if he was “all right.” In response, to ld him he was okay but that DiGiovanni told him, “You need to get everybody to vote for Theresa Faapuaa.” When was discussing what happened with approached and said he had heard what DiGiovanni said to

. . confirmed
that he was present at the Employee Service Awards Event on September 26, 2024 and that he spoke with at the event. However, he claimed not to recall hearing DiGiovanni tell to make sure everyone voted for Faapuaa for City Council. He also did not recall telling and that he heard the comment.

C. Findings and Analysis – On September 26, 2024, At The City’s Employee Service Awards Event, Did DiGiovanni Tell To “Make Sure You Have Everyone Vote For Faapuaa”? Yes. After a thorough review of the evidence, I make the following findings by a preponderance of the evidence.
 On September 26, 2024, at the City’s Employee Service Awards Event, DiGiovanni told to “make sure you have everyone vote for [Faapuaa].” was on duty at the time DiGiovanni made the comment and the incident occurred at City Hall.

I make these findings for the following reasons.

First, there is indirect corroboration supporting account. reported what happened to in writing, one day after the event. also recalled that told him about the comment on the day of the event. further observed DiGiovanni interacting with on the day of the event before told him what DiGiovanni had said.

Second, both and heard co nfirm that he heard the comment. While claimed not to recall hearing the comment, he did not deny the possibility that DiGiovanni made the comment. I find account, which is corrobo rated by his contemporaneous documentation of the

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 January 9, 2025
Attorney Client Privileged Page 10 of 25

incident, and corroboration to be more persuasive than claimed lack of recollection, which may have been influenced by his apprehension about becoming involved in this investigation.

Third, it is plausible DiGiovanni made the comment given her prior comment (discussed in Section IV) that she would get a “real Samoan” to run for City Council. Faapuaa was running for City Council at the time and is Samoan. She also had DiGiovanni’s endorsement for the Council seat.

Fourth, and had no apparent motive to falsify allega tions against DiGiovanni. While I recognize that, based on his own account, ha s a strained working relationship with DiGiovanni, I found no evidence to conclude that would make false claims against DiGiovanni.

Fifth, it is undisputed that was on duty at the time DiGiovanni made the comment and that the incident occurred at City Hall.

VI. On October 11, 2024, At The City’s Open House Event, Did DiGiovanni Remark To “Oh, You’re Actually Going To Spend Time With Your Family” After Informed DiGiovanni That He Was Not Going To Attend A City Event Scheduled For The Following Day?
alleged that, on October 11, 2024, at the City’s Open Ho use Event, DiGiovanni remarked, “Oh, you’re actually going to spend time with your family” after informed DiGiovanni that he was not going to attend a City event scheduled for the following day. The comment offended account is discussed below. No witnesses were present.

A. Reported Concern
In his November 8, 2024 memo to wr ote the following related to an incident that allegedly occurred between him and DiGiovanni at the City’s October 11, 2024 Open House Event:

On October 11, 2024, at [the City’s] Open House event, Councilmember DiGiovanni approached me unprovoked and asked if I was going to be attending an event taking place the next day (Bayshore Block Party). I replied to her that I was not going to attend, but that I would be “spending time with my family.” Councilmember DiGiovanni replied in an offensive tone, “Oh, you’re actually going to spend time with your family.” The tone and tenor of how she said it made me feel as if she was trying to embarrass me for working at too many events and not spending enough time with my family. I felt offended and belittled by what she said and how she said it to me.

Attachment 1.

In his investigative interview, elaborated on this allegation. He explained that he took offense to the comment, because he believed DiGiovanni was implying that worked too hard and did not spend enough time with his family. He also described the tone and tenor of the comment as “dismissive,” “unsympathetic,” “sarcastic,” and non-empathetic.

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 January 9, 2025
Attorney Client Privileged Page 11 of 25

B. Witness Statements
No witnesses had information to provide related to this allegation. According to no one else was present when DiGiovanni made the comment.

C. Findings and Analysis – On October 11, 2024, At The City’s Open House Event, Did DiGiovanni Remark To “Oh, You’re Actually Going To Spend Time With Your Family” After Informed DiGiovanni That He Was Not Going To Attend A City Event Scheduled For The Following Day?
Yes. After a thorough review of the evidence, I make the following findings by a preponderance of the evidence.
 On October 11, 2024, at the City’s Open House Event, DiGiovanni remarked to “Oh, you’re actually going to spend time with your family,” after informed DiGiovanni that he was not going to attend a City event scheduled for the following day. The comment offended

I make these findings for the following reasons.

First, even though there were no witnesses to the comment, there is indirect corroboration supporting account. repo rted what happened to in writing, within a month of the alleged comment.

Second, the fact that I find DiGiovanni made other comments to that offended him and made him uncomfortable lends support for finding that DiGiovanni also made the comment alleged at the City’s Open House Event. (See Sections IX and X below for other findings related to DiGiovanni’s comments directed at
Third, I find had no apparent motive to falsify allegations against DiGiovanni. Although he disclosed that he has a close relationship with who indisputably has a strained relationship with DiGiovanni, I found no evidence to suggest that would make false allegations against DiGiovanni.

VII. On October 19, 2024, At The City’s Top Of The Hill Festival, Did DiGiovanni Become Angry At Several City Employees When She Was Prevented From Getting On The Event Stage And Into The VIP Section Because She Did Not Have A Pass To Be On The Stage Or In The VIP Section?
and six other witnesses alleged that DiGiovanni became angry at several City employees when she was prevented from getting on the event stage and into the VIP section at the Top of the Hill Festival, because she did not have a pass to be on the stage or in the VIP section. DiGiovanni’s conduct made employees uncomfortable.
and witnesses’ relevant perspectives are discussed below.

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 January 9, 2025
Attorney Client Privileged Page 12 of 25

A. Reported Concern
In his November 8, 2024 memo to wr ote the following related to DiGiovanni’s alleged conduct at the City’s October 18, 2024 Top of the Hill Festival:

On October 19, 2024, at [the City’s] Top of the Hill Festival, Councilmember DiGiovanni approached and
who were assisting the
of the event and attempted to walk on stage. All three told her that only those with “All Access” passes could go on stage. Both were instructed by the that for security reasons, and through discussions with the entertainers, those without the passes could not be on stage. Councilmember DiGiovanni still insisted on going on stage by saying, “I’m part of the City Council”, this [not letting me on stage] is to embarrass me”, and she pointed her finger at them all and said “shame”.
expressed to me that they were very uncomfortable with the way Councilmember DiGiovanni spoke to them and they were afraid it might affect their employment.

Attachment 1.
reiterated during his investigative interview that and informed him that DiGiovanni became “upset” with them, “wagged” her finger at them, and told them “shame” when they did not allow her on the stage because she did not have a pass to be on stage. DiGiovanni also reportedly told and that they were trying to “embarrass” her by not letting her on stage. recalled that and shar ed this information with him two days after the Top of the Hill Festival, on October 21, 2024. According to and expressed concern that their jobs might be at risk because they did not allow DiGiovanni on the stage. Although was not present at the time DiGiovanni allegedly got upset with and witnessed DiGiovanni appearing to “yell” at However, was not close enough to hear what DiGiovanni said to
B. Witness Statements
Six witnesses had information to provide related to this allegation. All the witnesses confirmed that DiGiovanni became angry at the event when she was initially not allowed onto the stage or into the VIP section. The witnesses confirmed that DiGiovanni’s conduct made employees uncomfortable. confirmed that DiGiovanni be came upset with him and when they did not allow her on the stage at the Top of the Hill Festival. provided the following account:

We were told that nobody should enter the stage without a pass. So, she was trying to come up on stage and we told her, “Sorry, you can’t come up on stage without a pass.” And she said, “Well, I’m a Councilmember.” And I said, “I understand but you can’t come up here without any pass.” And she said, “Oh, I know what you guys are trying to do. You’re trying to embarrass me. Shame on you guys. I’m a Councilmember. I shouldn’t be treated like this.” And I said, “I’m sorry, I’m just told to do my job.”

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 January 9, 2025
Attorney Client Privileged Page 13 of 25

Shortly thereafter, DiGiovanni got the attention of one of the speakers on the stage – San Mateo County Supervisor David Canepa. Once he noticed DiGiovanni, Canepa invited DiGiovanni on stage. confirmed that the way DiGiovanni treated him made him uncomfortable given that he was simply following the instruction he received not to allow people on stage without a pass.

Like noticed DiGiovanni “yelling” at after she was not allowed onstage by and However, due to the noise near the stage, was unable to hear what DiGiovanni said to
is a
confirme d that DiGiovanni became upset with him and
when they did not allow her on the stage at the Top of the Hill Festival. provided the following account:

I was basically told not to let anybody without a pass to get [on the stage]. So, I informed [DiGiovanni] that I was given those instructions no matter what position anybody held. […] And basically she was just infuriated. She’s mad that she wasn’t able to get up on the stage and she just kept repeating the same thing saying that she’s a Councilmember and that what we were doing is ridiculous. […] I was just doing my job.
also recalled DiGiovanni pointing her finger at and and stating “shame” as she walked away from the stage. Thereafter, DiGiovanni got attention and he invited her onto the stage. confirmed that the in cident made him uncomfortable given DiGiovanni’s position as a Councilmember and the fact she was angry because and did not let her onto the stage.

was present near the stage at the Top of the Hill
Festival and witnessed DiGiovanni become “livid” when the “bouncers” on the stage did not let DiGiovanni onto the stage. recalled DiGiovanni “pacing like an animal” as she tried to get onto the stage. DiGiovanni was not allowed onto the stage until she was invited onto the stage by Supervisor Canepa, along with a group of employees, which included recalled that DiGiovanni got angry when
and did not provide DiGiovanni with a pass to
get on the stage and into the VIP section. DiGiovanni complained to that the employees told her she could not obtain a pass because she did not vote in favor of allocating funds for the event.

However, when looked into the matt er, he learned that had instead informed DiGiovanni that she could not get a pass because she had not RSVP’d for the event, which was required to obtain a pass. also heard from some one at the event (he did not recall from whom) that DiGiovanni was upset that and did not allow her onto the stage without a pass. also witnessed DiGiovanni pointing at and when she was near the stage. is an a position she has held since June 2023
when she was hired by the City. was responsible for organizing the Top of the Hill Festival.

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 January 9, 2025
Attorney Client Privileged Page 14 of 25

noted that was resp onsible for “taking care of the VIP list” and stated that “we were very, very stern about” not letting anyone into the VIP section who had not RSVP’d.

At the Top of the Hill Festival, was responsible for checking in individuals who had RSVP’d for the event and were on the VIP list. recalled that DiGiovanni approached her and asked for a badge. At that point, did not know DiGiovanni was a Councilmember. When saw that DiGiovanni was not on the VIP list, told DiGiovanni she was not allowed to give her a badge. referred DiGiovanni to th e “or his crew.” DiGiovanni “left in a huff.” She returned shortly thereafter and told that the referred her back to to obtain a badge. At that point, DiGiovanni informed that she was a Councilmember. reiterated that she did not have the “authority” to provide a badge to anyone who was not on the VIP list. At that point, DiGiovanni responded, “This is bullshit. This is so fucking unfair. What the fuck is going on?” DiGiovanni pointed her finger at during this exchange. then approached and told DiGiovanni that she was not on the VIP list because she had not RSVP’d for the event. DiGiovanni replied to “That’s bullshit. There’s no fucking way I shouldn’t have a ticket.” Then she “stormed off.” After she walked away, heard DiGiovanni “yelling” “profanities” at others. She believed DiGiovanni was yelling at the “two security people” that did not let her onto the stage.

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 January 9, 2025
Attorney Client Privileged Page 15 of 25

confirmed that DiGiovanni’s co nduct made her uncomfortable. She explained, “It made me nervous. I’m a new employee and I’m just trying to work.” did not understand DiGiovanni’s “combativeness.” Since the Top of the Hill Festival, has avoided DiGiovanni.

C. Findings and Analysis – On October 19, 2024, At The City’s Top Of The Hill Festival, Did DiGiovanni Become Angry At Several Employees When She Was Prevented From Getting On The Event Stage And Into The VIP Section Because She Did Not Have A Pass To Be On The Stage Or In The VIP Section?
Yes. After a thorough review of the evidence, I make the following findings by a preponderance of the evidence.
 On October 19, 2024, at the City’s Top of the Hill Festival, DiGiovanni became angry at several City employees when she was prevented from getting on the event stage and into the VIP section because she did not have a pass to be on the stage or in the VIP section. DiGiovanni’s conduct made employees uncomfortable.

I make these findings for the following reasons.

First, seven witnesses corroborated that DiGiovanni became angry at several employees who prevented her from getting onto the stage and into the VIP section because she did not have a pass to do so.

DiGiovanni pointed her finger at and told them “shame” when they did not allow her onstage without a pass, and told them they were trying to embarrass her. Four witnesses ( and corro borated and assertion that DiGiovanni
expressed her anger at them for not allowing her onstage without a pass. DiGiovanni’s conduct made and uncomfortable and they report ed what happened to within two days of the incident.

Additionally, DiGiovanni became angry at when did not allow DiGiovanni into the VIP section without a pass. DiGiovanni pointed her finger at and directed profanities at account of what occurred was corroborated by and DiGiovanni’s conduct made uncomfortable.

Second, I find no apparent motive for the witnesses to falsify allegations against DiGiovanni.

VIII. On October 30, 2024, At The City’s Inaugural Italian Flag Raising Event, Did DiGiovanni Become Angry In The Presence Of City Employees Because She Felt Excluded From The Flag Raising Ceremony?
and eight other witnesses alleged that DiGiovanni became angry at the Italian Flag Raising Event and complained to and other City employees about being excluded from participating in the flag raising ceremony. DiGiovanni’s conduct made employees uncomfortable. and witnesses’ relevant perspectives are discussed below.

A. Reported Concern
In his November 8, 2024 memo to wr ote the following account related to DiGiovanni’s alleged conduct at the City’s October 30, 2024 Inaugural Italian Flag Raising Event:

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 January 9, 2025
Attorney Client Privileged Page 16 of 25

On October 30, 2024, at the inaugural Italian Flag Raising event held at City Hall, two employees that work in ap proached me with concern and worry after an interaction with Councilmember DiGiovanni. I spoke with both ( and (
at the event when they expressed their concern, and the next morning in my office as a follow-up.

Immediately following the Italian Flag Raising, Councilmember DiGiovanni approached and complained to him about the event.
remembers her saying the following words in a very agitated and angry way; “people didn’t want to recognize me”, and “I know who this is coming from”.

The last phrase was particularly concerning to because he believed this was Councilmember DiGiovanni complaining and directing anger toward the Thomas J. believed she was trying to create a
conflict between himself and which he did not want, nor did he even ask the Councilmember to come over and talk to him. As Councilmember DiGiovanni spoke these words, saw that
was near enough that he could hear the conversation which caused to feel extremely uncomfortable because he was being put by Councilmember DiGiovanni in a situation where he was being forced to agree with her or walk away from her immediately. was fearful of walking away from the Councilmember because he had an understanding that she could complain about him and cause him problems with his employment here at Daly City. His response to Councilmember DiGiovanni was that he knew nothing about the event and that he was just a worker for the City. He walked away from her and approached me immediately and explained what happened. His demeanor when he approached me was very anxious and worried as he told me Councilmember DiGiovanni’s words to him.

As the above took place, was next to and witnessed this incident.

After Councilmember DiGiovanni spoke these words to she spoke similar words to He was also concerned and uncomfortable with this interaction and immediately walked over to and told him what had just happened and then walked over to me.

Councilmember DiGiovanni continued to complain after speaking to and I witnessed her yelling at the following words; “I
should have been involved in this and should have been able to speak”, “I am the first female Italian American on the Council which was proven by the Colma Historical Society”, and “I wasn’t made aware of this event”. I then witnessed Councilmember DiGiovanni walk to City employees (DWWWR and DPW 8) and
continue to complain. […] asked her to stop poisoning the employees after which Councilmember DiGiovanni yelled back that she has “freedom of speech.” She then walked off to the City Hall parking lot.

Attachment 1.

8 Department of Public Works.

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 January 9, 2025
Attorney Client Privileged Page 17 of 25

In his investigative interview, elaborated on these allegations. He recalled that he first learned DiGiovanni was upset when came up to him, looking “very distressed,” and said that DiGiovanni was “complaining” about not being allowed to speak at the event. told that he did not know how to respond to DiGiovanni and told her, “I’m just a worker. I had nothing to do with any of this.” thanked for alerting him to the situation and told he would discuss the matter with him after the event. also he ard from that he was present with when DiGiovanni was complaining about not being allowed to speak at the event.

Soon thereafter, witnessed DiGiovanni “yelling” at walked closer to where DiGiovanni and were standing, to the point where he was within “arm’s length” of the two. He heard her state, “I’m the first Italian American on the Council. I should have been able to speak.” After “yelling” at saw DiGiovanni walk towards a group of City employees and complain to them about In response, told DiGiovanni to “stop poisoning the employees,” to which DiGiovanni “yelled out,” “freedom of speech.” She then walked to the parking lot and remained in the parking lot for a “long time”
The next day, October 31, 2024, spoke with and about what happened. Based on that conversation, he believed and were uncomfortable because of DiGiovanni’s conduct. explained in his investigative interview:
[ and [ […] have this misunderstanding of what a
Councilmember can do. They were worried about their jobs [and] also worried about her complaining about them publicly. So, they’re feeling […] very uncomfortable in the situation where they know what she’s doing. She’s complaining about their boss, the and they don’t know how to react. Do I sympathize with this Councilmember who has power, or at least has more power than she really does, or do I then look bad in front of my boss, the […].
further stated that the incident made him uncomfortable. He noted that DiGiovanni’s “ego just turns it into something about her and her grievances.” He added, “It’s just so difficult. This is our job.

We’re there during working hours and we’re being subject to someone turning an event into a personal grievance in front of all these people, our colleagues.” B. Witness Statements
Eight witnesses had information to provide related to this allegation. All of the witnesses confirmed that DiGiovanni became angry at the event because she felt she had been excluded from the flag raising ceremony. The witnesses also confirmed that DiGiovanni’s conduct made employees uncomfortable. confirmed that DiGiovanni engaged in conduct at the Italian Flag Raising event that made him uncomfortable. recalled that after the flag raising ceremony ended, he was walking with a cup of coffee and a pastry in his hands. At that time, DiGiovanni approached him and stated, “I’m Italian too. They didn’t even ask me about my heritage.” She blamed the Mayor and for excluding her from the ceremony and stated that they did not appreciate her contributions. She also told that she was not informed about the flag raising event until 11:00 p.m. the night before the event.

DiGiovanni was crying when sharing this information with

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 January 9, 2025
Attorney Client Privileged Page 18 of 25

DiGiovanni’s conduct made uncomfortable because he did not know how he should respond. He explained in his interview, “I’m just a regular guy and here you are, you’re a City Councilmember. You’re crying to me as though I’m part of the family or something. I didn’t know what to do.” recalled telling DiGiovanni, “I’m sorry to hear that.” He then walked over to and told him what happened. He told that DiGiovanni’s conduct made him uncomfortable. When he was talking to noticed that DiGi ovanni appeared to be “yelling” at however, he could not hear what she was saying to also la ter saw DiGiovanni “ranting and raving to herself” in the parking lot.
confirmed that he was present at the Italian Flag Raising event when DiGiovanni was complaining about what happened at the event and said that DiGiovanni’s conduct made him uncomfortable. He provided the following account:
[DiGiovanni] turned to me and says, “I’m a first generation Italian woman, my mother and my father are both Italian, and it’s not right what they did. I know who did this and this is not right. They didn’t let me talk.” And I just looked at her and said, “Hey, [DiGiovanni], I don’t know what to say. I’m sorry.” And she just kept yelling towards me saying, “This is not right. This is not right. I know what they’re doing to me.” And it was just a very weird moment, because everyone’s around and everyone’s just having a good time and this really threw it off. And it put me in a position like, […] “Whoa, what did I do?” And then she was going to other people saying the same thing. So, it was just an uncomfortable moment.

After DiGiovanni engaged in this conduct, immediately told what happened and told him that he thought what DiGiovanni did was “not cool.” did not recall what said in response.
assumed DiGiovanni was angry at because he recalled DiGiovanni saying, “I know it’s him. I know it’s him trying to do this to me.” DiGiovanni also claimed she did not know the event was happening until the day of the event. In response to that claim, heard state to DiGiovanni that he had informed everyone about the event two days prior. stated that DiGiovanni yelled at and argued with him at the Italian Flag Raising event. He recalled her stating, “You did this to me. You left me out. You did this to me.” She also stated that she is the only Italian American on the City Council. She also claimed she had no advance notice of the event even though all staff and Councilmembers were informed about the event two days prior.

After yelling at DiGiovanni approached a group of employees and started telling them that “did this” to her. was close enou gh to hear what she was saying and told DiGiovanni, “Councilmember, please stop poisoning the employees.” She replied, “It’s freedom of speech.” To which responded, “Elected [officials] are held to a higher standard.” In response, DiGiovanni “stomped off.”
further recalled that, following the event, of told
him that she heard what DiGiovanni had said and was offended and wanted to speak up in defense, but she did not feel comfortable doing so. As recalled, was offended because is of Italian ancestry and felt DiGiovanni was ruining the event “to try to make it all about her.”

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 January 9, 2025
Attorney Client Privileged Page 19 of 25

wa s present at the Italian Flag Raising Event and recalled hearing DiGiovanni “yelling” at At the time, had her back turned to DiGiovanni and and was conversing with someone else, but she was standing within five feet of DiGiovanni and recalled DiGiovanni state, “I have the right to do this. I have been talking about this for the last six to seven years.” She perceived that DiGiovanni was “berating the whole situation.” DiGiovanni’s conduct was “so disappointing” to because is It alian American and she felt that DiGiovanni was “stomping on” a “beautiful ceremony.”
wanted to turn around and say to DiGiovanni, “Could we just focus on this amazing event that just happened?” However, she chose not to say anything because she did not know if it would be appropriate for her to speak up. After DiGiovanni walked away, however, told that she wanted to say something. told her she sh ould have said something and he would have “had her back.”
was present at the Italian Flag Raising Event and recalled witnessing DiGiovanni’s anger. His recollection was vague because he was eating at the time but he recalled the following:

I was eating and I didn’t notice [anything] until everybody was looking at [DiGiovanni] and [ And then th at’s when I heard her yelling at him.

And then she looked at us and started saying, “Did you guys know?” And then that’s when I just walked away, trying to walk away fast. And then I just heard [ like, “Ma’am get away. Get away from my employees.” And then […] I believe I heard her say, “Freedom of speech” […]
was present during the Italian Flag Raising event and saw DiGiovanni “harassing” several employees at the event, including and some of the “Water guys.” ( did not know the names of the employees from heard DiGiovanni telling “what to do” but “didn’t stick around [long] enough to hear a full on sentence.” She also did not hear what DiGiovanni said to any employees from However, she believed DiGiovanni was “harassing” them by the look on the men’s faces and the fact their feet were pointing away from DiGiovanni, which suggested to th at DiGiovanni was making them uncomfortable.

Once saw DiGiovanni “harassing” other employees she decided, “I got to get out of here,” because she did not want to also be “harassed” by DiGiovanni.
was present during the Italian Flag Raising event and heard DiGiovanni state, “Well, I’m Italian. Why wasn’t I part of [the ceremony].” was standing next to when DiGiovanni made this comment. After hearing
DiGiovanni’s remark, “ran back” to her office because she did not want to be around once DiGiovanni became “animated.”

recalled seeing DiGiovanni walking around the
parking lot after the flag raising event ended, “glaring,” and seeming like she was “looking for a confrontation.” He heard DiGiovanni “scream,” “Equity, Equity,” but did not know the context for her exclamation. He noted that DiGiovanni created “an uncomfortable scene for everyone.” He later heard from that DiGiovanni was upset because she was not included in the flag raising ceremony.

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 January 9, 2025
Attorney Client Privileged Page 20 of 25

C. Findings and Analysis – On October 30, 2024, At Th e City’s Inaugural Italian Flag Raising Event, Did DiGiovanni Become Angry In The Presence Of City Employees Because She Felt Excluded From The Flag Raising Ceremony?
Yes. After a thorough review of the evidence, I make the following findings by a preponderance of the evidence.
 On October 30, 2024, at the City’s inaugural Italian Flag Raising Event, DiGiovanni became angry in the presence of numerous City employees when she felt excluded from the flag raising ceremony. DiGiovanni’s conduct made employees uncomfortable.

I make these findings for the following reasons.

First, nine witnesses corroborated that DiGiovanni became angry at the flag raising event after she apparently felt excluded from the flag raising ceremony. Based on the consistent witness accounts, DiGiovanni expressed her dismay to multiple employees who were present at the event, blamed for excluding her from the ceremony, and yelled at in the presence of numerous employees.

Second, seven witnesses ( and confirmed
that DiGiovanni’s conduct made them uncomfortable. Three of these witnesses ( and reported their concern about what happened to either or contemporaneous to the incident.

Third, I found no apparent motive for the witnesses to falsify allegations against DiGiovanni.

IX. On October 31, 2024, At The City’s Halloween Celebration Event, Did DiGiovanni Remark In Reference To And In The Presen ce Of Other City Employees, “Don’t Let Him Drive, He Might Get A DUI” And “He Shouldn’t Drink And Drive”? alleged that, on October 31, 2024, at the City’s Halloween Celebration Event, and in the presence
of other City employees, DiGiovanni remarked, in reference to him, “Don’t let him drive he might get a DUI” and “He shouldn’t drink and drive.” The comments offended and made him uncomfortable.
and a witness account are discussed below.

A. Reported Concern
In his November 8, 2024 memo to reported the following related to DiGiovanni’s alleged conduct at the City’s Halloween Celebration Event:

On October 31, 2024, at [the City’s] Halloween Celebration event, Councilmember DiGiovanni approached me as I was trying to take a picture with the other employees that participated in the event. She said directly to me, “don’t let him drive he might get a DUI and he shouldn’t drink and drive.” I was completely confused by her statement, did not know how to respond, and was extremely embarrassed in front of my colleagues and subordinates […].

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 January 9, 2025
Attorney Client Privileged Page 21 of 25

Attachment 1.

As he was
trying to take pictures with other employees, DiGiovanni approached the group and made the comments, “Don’t let him drive, he might get a DUI” and “He shouldn’t drink and drive.” felt offended and undermined in front of his subordinate employees. He “didn’t find it funny at all.” He further noted, “I don’t like the implication of drinking at all. I mean, I understand this is a costume event, but I don’t like that implication at all in front of people, especially not from a Councilmember.” further noted that no alcohol was served at the event and he had not drunk any alcohol. recalled three employees being “within earshot” when DiGiovanni made the comments, however, he was only certain that one employee heard the comment – B. Witness Statement
recalled DiGiovanni approaching and others at the Halloween Celebration Event while they were taking pictures. At that time, DiGiovanni remarked, in reference to “Don’t let him drink and drive” and “Don’t get a DUI.” recalled DiGiovanni making the comment related to drinking and driving approximately four times. perceived the comments were a “jab” at He could tell was offended by his “facial expression” and because he and talked about the comments after the event.

C. Findings and Analysis – On October 31, 2024, At The City’s Halloween Celebration Event, Did DiGiovanni Remark In Reference To And In The Presence Of Other City Employees, “Don’t Let Him Drive, He Might Get A DUI” And “He Shouldn’t Drink And Drive”? Yes. After a thorough review of the evidence, I make the following findings by a preponderance of the evidence.
 On October 31, 2024, at the City’s Halloween Celebration Event, DiGiovanni remarked, in reference to and in the presence of at least one City employee, “Don’t let him drive, he might get a DUI” and “He shouldn’t drink and drive.” The comments offended and made him uncomfortable.

I make these findings for the following reasons.

First, account was di rectly corroborated by who heard the comments and had no apparent motive to falsify allegations against DiGiovanni.

Second, it is undisputed the comments offended and made him uncomfortable given that the comments were made in the presence of other employees. The fact that DiGiovanni may have been joking does not
detract from the negative impact the comments had on corroborated that the comments offended also perceive d that DiGiovanni’s comments about drinking and driving, which she repeated multiple times, were intended as a “jab” at

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 January 9, 2025
Attorney Client Privileged Page 22 of 25

X. On November 7, 2024, At The City’s Veteran’s Day Event, Did DiGiovanni Comment On Appearance In The Presence Of Other City Employees?
alleged that, on November 7, 2024, at the City’s Vetera n’s Day Event, and in the presence of other City employees, DiGiovanni commented on his appearance. The comments about his appearance offended and made him uncomfortable
and a witness account are discussed below.

A. Reported Concern
In his November 8, 2024 memo to reported the following related to DiGiovanni’s alleged conduct at the City’s Veteran’s Day Event:

On November 7, 2024, at [the City’s] Veteran’s Day event, Councilmember DiGiovanni approached me as I was helping to collect the leftover food.

Councilmember DiGiovanni, unwelcome and unwanted by me, commented on my appearance. She said I am “always the best dresser” and that I “looked good.” She said this in front of subordinate employees within my Department […] I felt demeaned, embarrassed, and undermined by Councilmember DiGiovanni’s comments.

Attachment 1.

In his investigative interview, elaborated on this allegation. He explained that he was dressed in a suit and tie out of respect for veterans. He further noted that he often dresses in a suit for City events. He was offended by DiGiovanni’s comment on his appearance, because she made the comment in front of his subordinate employees and he did not want to be “singled out” or “highlighted” by DiGiovanni concerning his appearance. perceived the comment was “demeaning” and that DiGiovanni was implying that he was “above everybody” or “better than” other employees because of how he dressed.
recalled three employees being within the vicinity when DiGiovanni commented on his appearance, however, he was only certain that one employee heard the comment – B. Witness Statement
recalled DiGiovanni remark on appearance at the Veteran’s Day Event. He recalled DiGiovanni remarking to “Are we so best dressed?” or words to that effect. perceived the comment as a “jab” at knew based on his subsequent discussion with that was offended th at DiGiovanni commented on his appearance.

C. Findings and Analysis – On November 7, 2024, At The City’s Veteran’s Day Event, Did DiGiovanni Comment On Appearance In The Presence Of Other City Employees? Yes. After a thorough review of the evidence, I make the following findings by a preponderance of the evidence.

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 January 9, 2025
Attorney Client Privileged Page 23 of 25

 On November 7, 2024, at the City’s Veteran’s Day Event, and in the presence of at least one City employee, DiGiovanni commented on appearance. The comments offended and made him uncomfortable.

I make these findings for the following reasons.

First, account was di rectly corroborated by who heard DiGiovanni comment on appearance and had no apparent motive to falsify allegations against DiGiovanni.

Second, it is undisputed the comments made uncomfortable and offended him given that he felt his appearance was being “singled out” by DiGiovanni in front of other employees. did not perceive the comments about him being the “best dresser” were complimentary and also believed the comment was a “jab” at also knew based on his discussion with that was offended by DiGiovanni commenting on his appearance. ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦
This concludes the investigation.

Respectfully Submitted,

Nikki Hall

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 January 9, 2025
Attorney Client Privileged Page 24 of 25

Appendix – Methodology
I conducted the investigation using specific methodology following industry standards. This section provides an overview of the investigative processes.9
A. Witnesses
I interviewed the following witnesses:

Name of Interviewee Title Date(s) of Interview*
November 25, 2024

November 19, 2024
November 20, 2024
November 26, 2024

November 19, 2024
November 19, 2024
November 20, 2024
November 26, 2024

November 26, 2024

November 20, 2024

November 20, 2024

November 20, 2024
*All interviews were conducted via videoconference.

I advised interviewees that this is a confidential personnel matter and that they were subject to governing policies prohibiting retaliation for either bringing a claim or participating in an investigation. I also advised interviewees of their duty to respond to my questions in a forthcoming and truthful manner.

Witness statements were recorded.

DiGiovanni did not respond to repeated invitations to participate in the investigation. first emailed DiGi ovanni to inform her of the investigation and request that she participate in an investigative interview on December 3, 2024. On the same day, I emailed DiGiovanni requesting to schedule an interview. After receiving no response, I followed up with DiGiovanni by email on December 6, 2024 to again attempt to schedule an investigative interview. I informed DiGiovanni that I would assume she did not intend to participate in the investigation if I did not hear back from her by December 19, 2024. DiGiovanni did not respond to any of these emails. On December 20, 2024, I sent a letter to DiGiovanni’s home address via U.S. Certified Mail again requesting her participation in the

9 I was retained to use my legal skills to assist the City in developing a response to the allegations. Specifically, I used my expertise in employment law to arrive at findings based on a professional evaluation of the evidence.

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 January 9, 2025
Attorney Client Privileged Page 25 of 25

investigation. I told her that if I did not receive a response by January 6, 2025, I would assume she was declining to participate in the investigation. I did not receive a response to the letter. Attachment 5.

B. Documents
I reviewed the following documents. The documents should be read in their entirety in conjunction with this Report to fully understand the underlying reasoning and findings herein.

Attachment Document
1 Memorandum from to dated November 8, 2024
2 Email correspondence between and dated September 27, 2024 and October 28, 2024
3 Memorandum from to City of Da ly City Councilmembers, dated October 30, 2024
4 City of Daly City Harassment Policy
5 Correspondence to DiGiovanni, dated December 3, 2024, December 6, 2024, and December 20, 2024
C. Evidentiary Standard
I reviewed, compared, and analyzed evidence under a preponderance of the evidence standard to determine whether the allegations were with or without merit. “Preponderance of the evidence,” for purposes of this Report, means that the evidence on one side outweighs, or is more than, the evidence on the other side. This is a qualitative, not quantitative, standard.

I have drawn the conclusions in this Report from the totality of the evidence and a thorough analysis of all the facts, and where necessary, I made credibility determinations.10 D. Independence
Independence is an important component of this investigation. The City and its representatives allowed me discretion to conduct the investigation as I determined to be necessary. I was given complete access to all requested witnesses and documents. No person interfered with, or attempted to influence, the findings in this Report.
♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦
This concludes the Appendix.

10 I considered and gave appropriate weight to information that might be considered to be hearsay in legal proceedings.

2. May 16, 2025 Supplemental Report

C O N F I D E N T I A L

I N V E S T I G A T I V E R E P O R T
City of Daly City
Supplemental Report Concerning Councilmember Pamela DiGiovanni May 16, 2025

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT | CITY OF DALY CITY
VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS | State Bar 184233 May 16, 2025
Attorn e y C lient Pr ivileged Page i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 II. Summary Of Findings .................................................................................................................. 1 III. Factual Background ..................................................................................................................... 1 A. The Parties ........................................................................................................................... 1 B. Prior Investigations .............................................................................................................. 2 IV. On March 26, 2025, At The Walk Audit At Marjorie H. Tobias Elementary School, Did DiGiovanni Interact With Proaño In A Manner That Made City Employees And Proaño Uncomfortable? .. 2 A. Allegations ........................................................................................................................... 2 B. Response ............................................................................................................................. 3 C. Witness Statements ............................................................................................................ 3 D. Findings and Analysis – On March 26, 2025, At The Walk Audit At Marjorie H. Tobias Elementary School, Did DiGiovanni Interact With Proaño In a Manner That Made City Employees And Proaño Uncomfortable? .................................................................................................................. 5 Appendix – Methodology.................................................................................................................... 7 A. Witnesses ............................................................................................................................ 7 B. Evidentiary Standard ........................................................................................................... 7 C. Independence ...................................................................................................................... 8

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 May 16, 2025
Attorn e y C lient Pr ivileged Page 1 of 8

I. Introduction
On April 7, 2025, Van Dermyden Makus Law Corporation commenced an independent investigation for the City of Daly City (City). The City initiated this investigation in response to allegations made against City Councilmember Pamela DiGiovanni.

On April 3, 2025, reported a concern about DiGiovanni to and Human Resources Director Natalie Sakkal. alleged that, on March 26, 2025, at a walk audit event at Marjorie H. Tobias Elementary School in Daly City, DiGiovanni interacted with Councilmember Teresa Proaño in a manner that made uncomfortable. 1 DiGiovanni declined to participate in the investigation. Because DiGiovanni did not participate in the investigation, I was unable to interview her regarding specific examples, context, dates, witnesses, or other potential evidence related to the allegations. Accordingly, I necessarily relied upon witness accounts.

This Confidential Investigative Report (Report) summarizes relevant evidence and provides factual findings regarding the allegations.

II. Summary Of Findings
This section summarizes the findings for the convenience of the reader. The remainder of the Report details the evidence and analyses supporting each finding.

After a thorough review of the evidence, I make the following findings by a preponderance of the evidence:
➢ On March 26, 2025, At The Walk Audit At Marjorie H. Tobias Elementary School, Did DiGiovanni Interact With Proaño In A Manner That Made City Employees And Proaño Uncomfortable? Yes. I find that, on March 26, 2025, at the walk audit at Marjorie H. Tobias Elementary School, DiGiovanni engaged in conduct toward Proaño that made Proaño and uncomfortable.

III. Factual Background
The following facts provide relevant background and context to the allegations. See the Appendix for the investigative methodology.

A. The Parties

1 explained that the purpose of the walk audits is to view the streets around a school and determine safer ways for students and parents to walk and drive around the school.

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 May 16, 2025
Attorn e y C lient Pr ivileged Page 2 of 8

Pamela DiGiovanni. DiGiovanni is a City Councilmember. She was first elected to the City Council in 2018 and re-elected in 2022. Her current term expires in November 2026. DiGiovanni declined to participate in this investigation. The attempts made to secure DiGiovanni’s participation in the investigation are addressed in the Appendix.

B. Prior Investigations
DiGiovanni’s conduct has been the subject of two prior investigations over the past two years.

In 2023, Ellis Investigations Law Corporation conducted an investigation into allegations of misconduct that certain City employees made against DiGiovanni. The investigator sustained 18 of 21 allegations against DiGiovanni and, on January 22, 2024, the City Council voted to approve a resolution admonishing DiGiovanni based on the results of the 2023 investigation.2 Thereafter, in late 2024, I conducted an investigation into concerns that and
, reported about DiGiovanni’s conduct towards City employees at seven City-sponsored events during 2024. I sustained all of the allegations against DiGiovanni.

IV. On March 26, 2025, At The Walk Audit At Marjorie H. Tobias Elementary School, Did DiGiovanni Interact With Proaño In A Manner That Made City Employees And Proaño Uncomfortable?
reported that, on March 26, 2025, at the walk audit at Marjorie H. Tobias Elementary School, DiGiovanni interacted with Proaño in a manner that made uncomfortable . and the witnesses’ relevant perspectives are discussed below.

A. Allegations
On March 26, 2025, at the walk audit, witnessed two interactions between DiGiovanni and Proaño that made him uncomfortable. provided the following account.

First, was standing outside the school, directly next to Proaño, when DiGiovanni approached Proaño, questioned why Proaño was present, and told Proaño she needed to leave. Proaño responded that she had a right to be at the event. When DiGiovanni kept “peppering” Proaño with questions about why she was present, Proaño responded, “[DiGiovanni], we don’t need to talk about this here. We can talk about this later, but I’m not leaving.” Proaño’s response “squashed” further commentary from DiGiovanni. did not recall DiGiovanni explaining why she thought Proaño should not be at the event. estimated the volume of DiGiovanni’s voice at a two or three on a scale of one to 10, with one being a whisper and 10 being screaming. noted that DiGiovanni’s comments to Proaño did not appear to “disrupt” the person who was speaking to the group at the time.3 Second, after event participants entered the school cafeteria, Proaño began recording an adult who was presenting to the group. DiGiovanni then “tapped” who was sitting between DiGiovanni and

2 The resolution passed by a vote of 3-1. Current Councilmembers Juslyn Manalo and Dr. Roderick Daus-Magbual voted in favor of the resolution, as did now former Councilmember Raymond Buenaventura. DiGiovanni voted against the resolution.

Councilmember Glenn Sylvester was not present at the January 22, 2024 Council meeting. 3 estimated that approximately 20 people were present.

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 May 16, 2025
Attorn e y C lient Pr ivileged Page 3 of 8

Proaño, and stated, “She can’t be recording. She can’t record kids.” believed Proaño heard DiGiovanni, because she turned her head to the left, where DiGiovanni was seated. “brushed off” DiGiovanni’s comment because he did not want to get involved. DiGiovanni then repeated it to a man sitting to her left, reiterating that Proaño should not be recording. estimated the volume of DiGiovanni’s voice in both instances was a two or three on a scale of one to 10. He noted, “It was fairly quiet” and “wasn’t a loud outburst.” Next, DiGiovanni went to the back of the cafeteria to speak to the . He did not hear what DiGiovanni said to the . Thereafter, the announced to the group that no one should be recording the children without obtaining permission.

Proaño then spoke up and said she was not recording the children but had been recording an adult who had presented to the group. then noticed that Proaño began recording again. He did not know why she did so.
recalled being present at the event.4 He recalled the
stood directly to his left when DiGiovanni approached Proaño outside the school and said Proaño needed to leave. He did not know if the heard what DiGiovanni said. Once the group was inside the cafeteria, the were on the far right side of the cafeteria, a “good distance away” from DiGiovanni, and Proaño. Therefore, “highly doubted” the heard what DiGiovanni said about Proaño recording the speaker. reported what he witnessed to his chain of command because it was an “awkward” situation and he did not want “something to come up” or be reprimanded for not reporting the incident. further explained that DiGiovanni’s conduct made uncomfortable , because he did not “want to be in the middle of” DiGiovanni’s and Proaño’s “bickering.”
B. Response
DiGiovanni declined to participate in the investigation.

C. Witness Statements
Proaño confirmed that DiGiovanni treated her in a manner that made her uncomfortable at the walk audit. Three who also attended the walk audit ( and did not recall observing any interaction between DiGiovanni and Proaño.

Teresa Proaño. Proaño is a City Councilmember. She was appointed on April 1, 2024, and was later elected to the Council in November 2024. At the beginning of the walk audit, DiGiovanni told Proaño in front of a group of people that Proaño “shouldn’t be here.” Later at the walk audit, DiGiovanni approached Proaño while she was taking a photo of an adult with her phone. DiGiovanni “came right at” Proaño’s face, and said Proaño “can’t record the kids.” DiGiovanni’s conduct at the walk audit made Proaño uncomfortable. Proaño provided the following account.

As background, Proaño first met DiGiovanni in 2013 or 2014 and interacted with her occasionally. Proaño did not recall having any conflict with DiGiovanni until Proaño ran for City Council in 2024. DiGiovanni supported Proaño’s opponent, Theresa Faapuaa. During the campaign, Proaño heard from others that DiGiovanni was “spewing lies” about her.

4 The employees were later identified as and

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 May 16, 2025
Attorn e y C lient Pr ivileged Page 4 of 8

Proaño was invited to the walk audit by email, as were all the other City Councilmembers. Proaño believed the email came from a representative of the Marjorie H. Tobias Elementary School, but was not certain. Proaño responded to the invite and confirmed she would attend the event.

Shortly after Proaño arrived at the walk audit, she approached a circle of approximately 20 people that included DiGiovanni. DiGiovanni approached Proaño and said, “I’m the rep, you shouldn’t be here.” DiGiovanni was speaking in a “loud” way, at a volume of five or six on a scale of one to 10, with one being a whisper and 10 being screaming, such that at least half of the circle of people could hear what DiGiovanni said. Proaño was not sure what DiGiovanni meant, but asked DiGiovanni if they could talk about it later. DiGiovanni then repeated herself, telling Proaño she “shouldn’t be here,” which embarrassed Proaño.

Later, once the walk audit group moved to the cafeteria, DiGiovanni approached Proaño again. Proaño first saw a woman speak to DiGiovanni and then look directly at Proaño as if DiGiovanni was talking about Proaño in a negative way. Then, during presentations in the cafeteria, Proaño took a picture of an adult presenter. Proaño’s photo included the backs of children’s heads, but no faces. DiGiovanni then approached Proaño and “came right at” Proaño’s face and said Proaño “can’t record the kids.” Proaño responded that she knew she could not record kids. At the time, Proaño was not recording a video, rather she was taking photos. Later, Proaño spoke with
. Proaño told him she did not record or take photos of children’s faces. The replied that it was “okay.”
DiGiovanni’s conduct at the walk audit made Proaño feel uncomfortable. Proaño believed DiGiovanni treated her in a “hurtful” way.

. .
attended the walk audit but did not see or hear
DiGiovanni interact with Proaño. provided the following account. attended the walk audit . estimated that approximately 20 to 30 people attended the event. When first arrived, he greeted DiGiovanni and discussed with DiGiovanni how often she attended walk audits. also participated in a group discussion with DiGiovanni at the end of the walk audit and prepared a presentation with her that included recommendations.
did not notice DiGiovanni speak with anyone else at the walk audit. did not notice whether DiGiovanni spoke with Proaño and did not see Proaño record anything. did not see DiGiovanni do or say anything that made him feel uncomfortable at the walk audit and did not hear anyone else mention anything about DiGiovanni at or after the event. had interacted with DiGiovanni before the walk audit but had not seen or heard DiGiovanni do or say anything that ever made him uncomfortable. likewise had not heard anyone comment about feeling uncomfortable around DiGiovanni.

.
attended the walk audit but did not see or hear DiGiovanni interact with Proaño. provided the following account.

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 May 16, 2025
Attorn e y C lient Pr ivileged Page 5 of 8

attended the walk audit .
estimated approximately 15 people attended the event. When first arrived, he greeted DiGiovanni and introduced himself as the “ .” He did not interact with DiGiovanni any further after meeting her.
did not notice DiGiovanni speak with anyone else at the walk audit. did not notice whether DiGiovanni spoke with Proaño and did not see Proaño record anything. did not know Proaño was present at the walk audit until he saw her leaving at the end. did not see DiGiovanni do or say anything that made him feel uncomfortable at the walk audit and did not hear anyone else mention anything about DiGiovanni during or after the walk audit. had not met DiGiovanni prior to the event. .

attended the walk audit and saw DiGiovanni interact with Proaño but did not overhear their interaction. provided the following account.
attended the walk audit . estimated that approximately 20 people attended the walk audit. spoke with DiGiovanni at the event and saw her interact with others but did not hear what DiGiovanni said to them. saw DiGiovanni speak to Proaño but did not overhear what they said and did not notice anything “out of the ordinary.” described the volume of DiGiovanni’s voice as “on the louder side,” when DiGiovanni speaks to others in public. believed DiGiovanni was “a little bit louder” than other people normally and did not notice that DiGiovanni spoke any louder at the walk audit than her normal speaking volume. did not notice whether DiGiovanni was “questioning” Proaño when DiGiovanni spoke with Proaño. stood 10 to 15 feet away from DiGiovanni and Proaño when they interacted with one another.

However, other conversations were also happening in the space between and the two Councilmembers. did not notice whether Proaño was recording anything during the walk audit and could not tell whether DiGiovanni was “questioning” Proaño. interacted with Proaño at the event but did not notice Proaño acting any different than normal. spoke with Proaño when and Proaño were in the same group during the group activity at the end of the walk audit. did not notice Proaño act any different than usual, though acknowledged that Proaño was a “newer” Councilmember and would not have known whether Proaño was acting normal or not.

Nothing DiGiovanni did or said at the event made uncomfortable . However, tended to limit her interactions with DiGiovanni in general. In the past, found DiGiovanni to be “very vocal” in her interactions. described herself as an “introvert” and said DiGiovanni made her “uncomfortable” because DiGiovanni was “on the louder side.” found it harder to be “social” and found DiGiovanni to be “more out there,” though could not point to any specific incidents that bothered her.

D. Findings and Analysis – On March 26, 2025, At The Walk Audit At Marjorie H. Tobias Elementary School, Did DiGiovanni Interact With Proaño In a Manner That Made City Employees And Proaño Uncomfortable?
Yes. After a thorough review of the evidence, I find by a preponderance that, on March 26, 2025, at the walk audit at Marjorie H. Tobias Elementary School, DiGiovanni engaged in conduct toward Proaño that made Proaño and uncomfortable. I make this finding for the following reasons.

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 May 16, 2025
Attorn e y C lient Pr ivileged Page 6 of 8

First, was standing and sitting directly next to DiGiovanni and Proaño during the walk audit event and witnessed two separate interactions between DiGiovanni and Proaño. In the first interaction, observed DiGiovanni “peppering” Proaño with questions about why she was present at the event and telling Proaño she needed to leave. In the second interaction, observed DiGiovanni insisting to and others that Proaño was prohibited from recording minors, even though Proaño asserted that she was not recording any of the minors present at the event. Proaño’s account of what happened at the walk audit was consistent with account.

Second, both and Proa ño asserted that DiGiovanni’s conduct made them uncomfortable and no evidence was revealed in the investigation to contradict their assertions. In fact, DiGiovanni’s conduct made uncomfortable enough that he felt the need to report what happened to his in order to avoid any potential repercussions for not reporting what happened.

Third, had no apparent motive to fabricate what he witnessed and, as previously noted, his account of what occurred was consistent with Proaño’s account.

I considered that three other who were present at the event ( and did not observe any interactions between DiGiovanni and Proaño that made them uncomfortable. However, this does not negate what reported witnessing and it is most likely the other employees were not situated close enough to DiGiovanni and Proaño to witness what occurred.    
This concludes the investigation.

Respectfully Submitted,

Nikki Hall

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 May 16, 2025
Attorn e y C lient Pr ivileged Page 7 of 8

Appendix – Methodology
I conducted the investigation using specific methodology following industry standards. This section provides an overview of the investigative processes.5
A. Witnesses
I interviewed the following witnesses:

Name of Interviewee Title Date(s) of Interview*

April 18, 2025
April 10, 2025
Teresa Proaño City Councilmember April 24, 2025

April 17, 2025

April 16, 2025
*All interviews were conducted via videoconference.

Interviewees were advised that this is a confidential personnel matter and that they were subject to governing policies prohibiting retaliation for either bringing a claim or participating in an investigation.

Interviewees were also advised of their duty to respond to questions in a forthcoming and truthful manner.

Witness statements were recorded.

DiGiovanni declined to participate in the investigation. On April 29, 2025, Human Resources Director Natalie Sakkal emailed a notice of the investigation to DiGiovanni. DiGiovanni did not acknowledge receipt of the email. On the same day, my associate, Lauren Firestein, requested to interview DiGiovanni and offered dates for the interview. DiGiovanni did not respond to the email. Firestein followed up by email with DiGiovanni on May 8, 2025 and informed DiGiovanni that if she did not respond by May 12, 2025, we would assume she was declining to participate in the investigation. DiGiovanni did not respond to this email. Attachment 1.

B. Evidentiary Standard
I reviewed, compared, and analyzed evidence under a preponderance of the evidence standard to determine whether the allegations were with or without merit. “Preponderance of the evidence,” for purposes of this Report, means that the evidence on one side outweighs, or is more than, the evidence on the other side. This is a qualitative, not quantitative, standard.

I have drawn the conclusions in this Report from the totality of the evidence and a thorough analysis of all the facts, and where necessary, I made credibility determinations.6

5 I was retained to use my legal skills to assist the City. Specifically, I used my expertise in employment law to arrive at findings based on a professional evaluation of the evidence.
6 I considered and gave appropriate weight to information that might be considered to be hearsay in legal proceedings.

CONFIDENTIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (FINAL DRAFT) | CITY OF DALY CITY

VAN DERMYDEN MAKUS| State Bar 184233 May 16, 2025
Attorn e y C lient Pr ivileged Page 8 of 8

C. Independence
Independence is an important component of this investigation. The City and its representatives allowed me discretion to conduct the investigation as I determined to be necessary. I was given complete access to all requested witnesses and documents. No person interfered with, or attempted to influence, the findings in this Report.
   
This concludes the Appendix.

1

1 Lisa Mabie
From: Natalie Sakkal <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2025 5:07 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Lauren Firestein
Subject: City of Daly City Investigation Notice
Attachments: Administrative Investigation- Interview Notice Pamela DiGiovanni - 4.29.25.pdf Importance: High
CAUTION: This email originated from outside Van Dermyden Makus Law Corp. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender's email address and know the content is safe.

Dear Ms. DiGiovanni:

Please see the attached notice in regard to an investigation interview.

Please acknowledge receipt of this email.

Sincerely,

Natalie Sakkal (she/her/hers)
Director of Human Resources
City of Daly City
295 89th Street, Suite 105, Daly City, CA 94015
650-991-8284
[email protected]
NOTICE REGARDING CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION: The information contained in this e-mail message may contain confidential and/or privileged information and is intended solely for the use of the intended recipient(s). Access for any review, re-transmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in regard and reliance upon this e-mail message by a person or entity(ies) other than the intended recipient(s) is unauthorized. If you are NOT the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail immediately and destroy all copies of the original message and any attachments

HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT

CITY OF DALY CITY

CEDAR HILL OFFICE BUILDING
295 89TH STREET, SUITE 105
DALY CITY, CALIFORNIA 94015-1691
(650) 991-8028

CONFIDENTIAL

April 29, 2025

Sent via email

To: Pamela DiGiovanni, Councilmember, City of Daly City

From: Natalie Sakkal, Director of Human Resources

This is to notify you that the City recently received complaints made against you concerning allegations of unprofessional conduct.

The City has retained an outside investigator , Lauren Firestein of Van Dermyden Makus Law Corporation to conduct an investigation. Following this email you will receive an email from Ms. Firestein to schedule an interview via zoom conference. If you choose to have a representative, please provide the representative’s name and contact information to Ms. Firestein and she will communicate directly with your representative regarding an investigative interview. Ms. Firestein has been recording the investigative interviews and will seek your cooperation in recording your interview should you decide to participate in an investigative interview.

In order to maintain the integrity of the investigation, it is recommended that you respond fully, truthfully and candidly to all questions Ms. Firestein poses. In order to ensure integrity of the investigation, please refrain from discussing this investigation or your interview with Ms. Firestein with any City employee, except myself.

The City has a policy prohibiting retaliation of any kind. Please be advised that retaliating against anyone in connection with this investigation is a violation of the law and City policy.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

1 Lisa Mabie
From: Lauren Firestein <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2025 5:39 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Nikki Hall
Subject: RE: City of Daly City Investigation Notice
(Moving Natalie to bcc)

Dear Ms. DiGiovanni:

As Natalie menƟoned in the below noƟce, my firm has been retained to conduct an invesƟgaƟon into complaints regarding unprofessional conduct. I would like to conduct an invesƟgaƟve interview to explain the allegaƟons and provide you with an opportunity to respond. Please reply with an available hour of Ɵme within one of the windows below.

If you do not have availability during the windows, please let me know and I can provide addiƟonal availability the following week. If you choose to have a representaƟve present, please reply with the representaƟve’s name and contact informaƟon. Once we confirm a Ɵme, I will send a video link for the interview.

 Thursday (5/1): 9am – 1pm; 2pm – 5pm
 Friday (5/2): 9am –5pm
 Monday (5/5): 9am –5pm
 Tuesday (5/6): 9am – 5pm
 Wednesday (5/7): 9am – 5pm
 Thursday (5/8): 9am – 4pm

Please let me know if you have any quesƟons.

Best,
Lauren

Lauren A. Firestein | AƩorney InvesƟgator
Office: 415-755-4850 | Cell: 415-377-0041 | [email protected] 899 Northgate Drive, Suite 403, San Rafael, CA 94903 | www.vmlawcorp.com This electronic message contains informaƟon from Van Dermyden Makus that is CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED. The informaƟon is intended to be sent to the individual or enƟty named above. If you are not the intended recipient, please be aware that any disclosure, copying, disseminaƟon or distribuƟon of this transmission is prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please noƟfy us by telephone at 916.779.2402. Thank you.

THINK RECYCLE.

From: Natalie Sakkal <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2025 5:07 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Lauren Firestein <[email protected]>

2 Subject: City of Daly City Investigation Notice
Importance: High

CAUTION: This email originated from outside Van Dermyden Makus Law Corp. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender's email address and know the content is safe.

Dear Ms. DiGiovanni:

Please see the attached notice in regard to an investigation interview.

Please acknowledge receipt of this email.

Sincerely,

Natalie Sakkal (she/her/hers)
Director of Human Resources
City of Daly City
295 89th Street, Suite 105, Daly City, CA 94015
650-991-8284
[email protected]
NOTICE REGARDING CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION: The information contained in this e-mail message may contain confidential and/or privileged information and is intended solely for the use of the intended recipient(s). Access for any review, re-transmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in regard and reliance upon this e-mail message by a person or entity(ies) other than the intended recipient(s) is unauthorized. If you are NOT the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail immediately and destroy all copies of the original message and any attachments

1 Lisa Mabie
From: Lauren Firestein <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, May 8, 2025 11:45 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Nikki Hall
Subject: RE: City of Daly City Investigation Notice
Dear Ms. DiGiovanni:

I am following up on my below invitaƟon to parƟcipate in an invesƟgaƟve interview related to the invesƟgaƟon described in the noƟce sent to you on April 29, 2025. As of today, you have not responded to my request. As I menƟoned below, an interview would allow me to explain the allegaƟons against you, including the allegaƟon of unprofessional conduct, and provide you an opportunity to respond to the allegaƟons.

I have included addiƟonal availability for the interview below. If you need availability past these dates, please let me know.

 Monday (5/12): 9am –5pm
 Tuesday (5/13): 11am – 5pm
 Wednesday (5/14): 9am – 5pm

If I do not hear from you by 5pm on May 12, 2025, I will assume you have elected not to parƟcipate in the invesƟgaƟon. As such, we will prepare a report of findings that will not include your response to the allegaƟons. Please let me know if you have any addiƟonal quesƟons about the process.

Regards,
Lauren

Lauren A. Firestein | AƩorney InvesƟgator
Office: 415-755-4850 | Cell: 415-377-0041 | [email protected] 899 Northgate Drive, Suite 403, San Rafael, CA 94903 | www.vmlawcorp.com This electronic message contains informaƟon from Van Dermyden Makus that is CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED. The informaƟon is intended to be sent to the individual or enƟty named above. If you are not the intended recipient, please be aware that any disclosure, copying, disseminaƟon or distribuƟon of this transmission is prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please noƟfy us by telephone at 916.779.2402. Thank you.

THINK RECYCLE.

From: Lauren Firestein
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2025 5:39 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Nikki Hall <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: City of Daly City Investigation Notice

(Moving Natalie to bcc)

Dear Ms. DiGiovanni:

2 As Natalie menƟoned in the below noƟce, my firm has been retained to conduct an invesƟgaƟon into complaints regarding unprofessional conduct. I would like to conduct an invesƟgaƟve interview to explain the allegaƟons and provide you with an opportunity to respond. Please reply with an available hour of Ɵme within one of the windows below.

If you do not have availability during the windows, please let me know and I can provide addiƟonal availability the following week. If you choose to have a representaƟve present, please reply with the representaƟve’s name and contact informaƟon. Once we confirm a Ɵme, I will send a video link for the interview.

 Thursday (5/1): 9am – 1pm; 2pm – 5pm
 Friday (5/2): 9am –5pm
 Monday (5/5): 9am –5pm
 Tuesday (5/6): 9am – 5pm
 Wednesday (5/7): 9am – 5pm
 Thursday (5/8): 9am – 4pm

Please let me know if you have any quesƟons.

Best,
Lauren

Lauren A. Firestein | AƩorney InvesƟgator
Office: 415-755-4850 | Cell: 415-377-0041 | [email protected] 899 Northgate Drive, Suite 403, San Rafael, CA 94903 | www.vmlawcorp.com This electronic message contains informaƟon from Van Dermyden Makus that is CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED. The informaƟon is intended to be sent to the individual or enƟty named above. If you are not the intended recipient, please be aware that any disclosure, copying, disseminaƟon or distribuƟon of this transmission is prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please noƟfy us by telephone at 916.779.2402. Thank you.

THINK RECYCLE.

From: Natalie Sakkal <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2025 5:07 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Lauren Firestein <[email protected]>
Subject: City of Daly City Investigation Notice
Importance: High

CAUTION: This email originated from outside Van Dermyden Makus Law Corp. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender's email address and know the content is safe.

Dear Ms. DiGiovanni:

Please see the attached notice in regard to an investigation interview.

Please acknowledge receipt of this email.

3 Sincerely,

Natalie Sakkal (she/her/hers)
Director of Human Resources
City of Daly City
295 89th Street, Suite 105, Daly City, CA 94015
650-991-8284
[email protected]
NOTICE REGARDING CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION: The information contained in this e-mail message may contain confidential and/or privileged information and is intended solely for the use of the intended recipient(s). Access for any review, re-transmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in regard and reliance upon this e-mail message by a person or entity(ies) other than the intended recipient(s) is unauthorized. If you are NOT the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail immediately and destroy all copies of the original message and any attachments

3. Incident Report dated July 14, 2025 (Chevron Station)

Incident Report: Interaction at Chevron Gas Station with Councilwoman Pam DiGiovanni
Date: July 14, 2025
Time: Approximately 4:45 PM
Location: Chevron Gas Station, John Daly Blvd, Westlake, Daly City Involved Parties:
• Residents of 291 Fairlawn (Destiny and her mother)
• Pam DiGiovanni (Councilwoman, Daly City)
• , Code Enforcement officer for
Daly City
Summary:

At approximately 4:45 PM, I stopped at the Chevron gas station on John Daly Blvd. The residents of ( ) were present in the parking
lot. was visibly upset and shouting that they had been evicted by the C ity of Daly City and were now living on the street. She expressed frustration about not being able to secure a referral for housing or services, while her elderly mother sat nearby.

As this was happening, Pam DiGiovanni, a Daly City Councilwoman, pulled into the gas station and approached the pump. On her way to pay for gas, she engaged with telling her she could help with a referral and that she was a councilmember. Pam mentioned calling the police to get her assistance. This caused to become increasingly agitated, fearing further police involvement instead of support. Pam again suggested she could get referral for them.

I attempted to signal to Pam by shaking my head no and not to engage further. I didn’t think Pam was able to handle the mental health anger was experiencing. When that didn’t work, I walked over to Pam’s car and identified myself: “Pam, Pam acknowledged me and I clarified that these individuals were from and advised her not to further engage with them. Pam looked at her phone and again state she could get them a referral but then seemed to realize the situation. She then suggested they leave the gas station due to the limited space and safety concerns for the individuals and their dogs.

Pam then turned to me and said, “Any way you can help? Maybe take them across the street. You have a big heart — you should be employee of the year. I agreed to help, and then walked across the street. I moved some of their belongings into my car and met them at the Lake Merced parking lot. I dropped off their items and left.

Impact:

This interaction was emotionally difficult, and being placed in the middle of this situation deeply affected me. It carried over into the next day and impacted my ability to perform duties as usual. I was on vacation to repair my heater. In 30 years of being a code officer I have never been left to feel this way. I ended up taking a stress day.

4. Internal Memoranda and Correspondence

5. City Council Resolution No. 24-21

RESOLUTION NO. 25-47

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DALY CITY

APPROVING THE CITY COUNCIL INTERNAL DISCIPLINE AND

CENSURESHIP PROCEDURE POLICY
WHEREAS, the City of Daly City currently lacks an internal discipline and censure policy for City Council members; and
WHEREAS, a policy will allow for discipline with violations and opportunities for the offender to correct the offending behavior; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Daly City desires to approve a discipline policy to establish procedures for discipline of members of the City Council.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Daly City does hereby RESOLVE as follows:

SECTION 1. Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct, and hereby made a part this Resolution by this reference.
of
SECTION 2. Discipline Policy. The Internal Discipline and Censure Policy, attached as Exhibit "A" to this Resolution and incorporated herein, is approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Daly City.

SECTION 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Resolution, or its application to any person or circumstance, is for any reason held to be invalid or unenforceable, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases of this Resolution, or its application to any other person or circumstance. The City Council of the City of Daly City hereby declares that it would have adopted each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases hereof is declared invalid or unenforceable.

SECTION 4. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect immediately. 1

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DALY CITY

APPROVING THE CITY COUNCIL INTERNAL DISCIPLINE AND

CENSURESHIP PROCEDURE POLICY
I hereby certify the foregoing to be a true copy of a Resolution adopted by the City Council of Daly City, California, at a regular meeting thereof held on the 24th day of March _, 2025, by the following vote ofthe members thereof:

AYES, and in favor thereof, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:

DiGiovanni, Manalo, Proaño,
Sylvester, Daus-Magbual
None
None
KAmetteAlpon

CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF DALY CITY
APPROVED:

RODERICK DAUS-MAGBUAL

MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DALY CITY
2

EXHIBIT A

CITY COUNCIL INTERNAL DISCIPLINE AND CENSURE POLICY
I. PREAMBLE.

It is the intent of the City Council of the City of Daly City in enacting this policy to achieve fair, ethical, and accountable local government for the City of Daly City; to assure that individuals and interest groups in our society have a fair and equal opportunity to participate in government; to embrace clear and unequivocal standards of disclosure and transparency in government; to help reinforce public trust in governmental institutions; and to assure that this policy is vigorously enforced to achieve fair, ethical, and accountable local government for the City of Daly City.

The people of the City of Daly City expect their public officials to comply with both the letter and the spirit of the laws of the United States of America, the State of California, the Daly City Municipal Code, policies of the City of Daly City and ethical conduct. affecting the operations of local government. All persons covered by this policy shall aspire to meet the highest ethical standards in the conduct of their responsibility as a public official of the City of Daly City.

II. APPLICABILITY AND PURPOSE.

This Discipline Policy applies to the City Council of Daly City ("City") and provides directives for efficient and consistent administration of complaints against individual City Councilmembers by or from members of the public, third-party consultants, City staff, appointed officials, and fellow Councilmembers (together, "Complainants"). a
The scope of disciplinary action is expanded beyond violations of federal, state, and local laws to include breaches of by-laws, standing orders, policies of the City Council, or any other unethical or improper, offense behavior, conduct. Additionally, any criminal activities committed by Councilmember may be subject to disciplinary action under this policy. This policy must be construed and executed in coordination, and not in conflict with, all applicable State and Federal laws, the Daly City Municipal Code, criminal matters, applicable City Department policies, including all whistleblower statutes, complainant and victim privacy and confidentiality statutes, administrative matters and the California Public Records Act.

Investigations conducted under this policy shall not commence before the completion of, or interfere with, any investigations related to or required for criminal prosecutions, administrative enforcement, or any Government Code claims, litigation, or other legal actions.

III. PROCEDURE.

Public's Right to Submit Complaint. Any member of the public who would likea. to submit facts or allegations pertaining to an alleged violation by a Councilmember of misconduct, violations of laws, City policies, or criminal activity involving a City Councilmember. Complaints may be submitted in writing with a return receipt to the City of Daly City.
b. Consultation with City Attorney. A Councilmember seeking to submit a request for discipline or to make a statement regarding specific complaints or allegations is advised to meet with the City Attorney's Office before doing so. 3

c.
d.

Request for Discipline. A request for discipline or censure may be submitted by any Councilmember in writing to the City Attorney or City Clerk. Any Councilmember's request for discipline is a matter of public record subject to the California Public Records Act's requirements, including all applicable exemptions. A Councilmember seeking to provide information to the Council concerning the specific conduct forwhich discipline is requested must submit written information to the City Manager for distribution to the whole Council. The request must contain the specific charges on which the proposed discipline or censure is based, and sufficiently specific facts and allegations as to the charges. The request may include or append a public complaint referenced or conducted.

Council Consideration of Discipline Short of Censure. The City Attorney may place the matter on a Council regular or special meeting agenda for the Council to determine whether further investigation is required, or whether discipline short of censure is warranted, or to move towards censure. Discipline short of censure may be one or a combination of the items in subsections (a) through (d) below. This discussion is matter of public record and must take place during an open, noticed, and public meeting of the City Council.
e. Consultation with Mayor. At the direction of the City Council, an informal consultation with the Mayor may be required of the member who is the subject of the request. If the subject of the request is the Mayor, the consultation shall be with the Vice-Mayor.
f. Letter of Reprimand from the City Council. At the direction of the City Council, the Mayor, or Vice-Mayor if the Mayor is the subject of the discipline, shall coordinate with the City Manager and/or City Attorney on issuing a letter of reprimand to the subject Councilmember. The reprimand shall be based on a particular action (or set of actions) that is determined to be in violation of law or City policy but is considered by the Council to be not sufficiently serious to require formal censure. The letter of reprimand may include recommendations for corrective actions or behaviors.
g. Statement of Disapproval. By a resolution of the City Council, the Council may adopt a statement expressing disapproval or displeasure with the conduct of a Council member including recommendations for corrective action or behavior. h. Admonition. By a resolution of the City Council, an admonition that a particular type of behavior or action may become or is a violation of law or City policy. i.
a
Proceedings. The City Attorney may place the matter on the agenda for a regular or special Council meeting to determine if further investigation is warranted, if discipline short of censure is appropriate, or if a censure hearing should be pursued. Disciplinary actions determined short of censure may include an informal consultation with the Mayor and the ad hoc Ethics Committee, a formal letter of reprimand, a statement of disapproval, or an admonition warning of potential violations of law or policy. These proceedings must be conducted in an open and public meeting.
4

IV. CENSURE PROCEDURE.

If the Council decides to set the matter for censure hearing, it shall schedule the hearing no sooner than two weeks after its determination to hear the matter. The Council shall not schedule the matter during any previously subject of an alleged violation shall be ineligible to vote on any matter related to a disciplinary action including, but not limited to, agendizing the hearing and adopting a resolution of censure. Censure hearings may take place at regular or special City Council meetings and are open to the public. a. Written Notice. Written notice of the hearing shall be delivered in person to the Councilmember subject to the censure hearing at least ten (10) days in advance of the scheduled hearing
b. Hearing procedures. At the censure hearing, the Councilmember who is the subject of the request for censure shall be given the opportunity to make an opening and a closing statement, to call witnesses on his or her behalf and to question his or her accusers. The subject Councilmember may be represented by a person or persons of his or her choice and may have that representative speak or question witnesses on his or her behalf. The questioning or cross- questioning of witnesses may be reasonably limited by the Mayor, or Vice Mayor if the Mayor is the subject of the censure. Testimony shall be taken only from witnesses having direct knowledge of facts or circumstances relevant to the specific charges under consideration. However, the rules of evidence and judicial procedure applicable in courts of law shall not apply to this hearing, and the procedures shall be generally informal.

V. CENSURE ACTION.

If, at the close of the censure hearing, a majority of the City Council finds that the subject member's conduct violates federal, state or local law, or any by-law, standing order, or policy of the City Council, the Council may take one or more of the following measures in addition to or in combination with the actions in subsections (a) through (d) of Section V.:
a. Direction to Correct. The direction shall be given to the subject Councilmember to correct the result of the behavior that violated law or City policy. b. Direction to Attend Training. Direction shall be given to the subject Councilmember to attend training related to the behavior that violated law or City policy. The Council could also find that Council privileges shall be withheld or unavailable until evidence or independent certification is provided by the subject Councilmember to the City Council that the training was completed.
c. Resolution of Censure. The City Council may adopt a resolution of censure based on clear and convincing facts supporting the allegations of misconduct giving rise to the censure. A resolution of censure may include the imposition of sanctions against the Councilmember as the City Council deems appropriate. Such sanctions may include removal from internal standing or ad hoc committees, removal from an external committee to which the member had been appointed restrictions on City-related travel privileges, and/or other appropriate penalties.
5

If violations involve criminal activities or serious breaches of conduct, the findings and any Resolution of Censure may be forwarded to the District Attorney's Office, the State Attorney General's Office, law enforcement agencies, or administrative bodies for further review and further action.

VI. Enforcement.

The enforcement of this policy shall be the responsibility of the City Council. The City Attorney shall oversee compliance and ensure that disciplinary actions are carried out consistently. Any Councilmember who fails to adhere to imposed disciplinary measures may face further sanctions or legal consequences as deemed necessary by the City Council. 6

RESOLUTION NO. 24-21

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DALY CITY

ADMONISHING COUNCILMEMBER PAMELA DIGIOVANNI
WHEREAS, on or about March 3, 2023, the City Manager sent a memo to the City Council describing recent and repeated acts of unprofessional conduct by Councilmember DiGiovanni experienced by the City Manager and City staff. A copy of the memo is available upon request from the City Clerk. In the memo, the City Manager alleged abuse, harassment and bullying by Councilmember DiGiovanni against him and City staff; and WHEREAS, the City Manager and City Council take all complaints of alleged illegal or inappropriate behavior against or among City staff and the City Council seriously. To that end, upon receipt of the complaint, the Human Resources Department retained an independent investigator, Ellis Investigations Corporation, to investigate the alleged acts of abuse, harassment and bullying by Councilmember DiGiovanni. The investigation commenced April 7, 2023. The investigator reported its findings to the City Council Ethics Committee, which were subsequently shared in redacted form to protect the confidentiality of witnesses most of whom were City staff, with the City Council and Councilmember DiGiovanni; and WHEREAS, the Investigation Report found that Councilmember DiGiovanni engaged in twenty-one (21) acts of abuse, harassment and bullying of City staff; and WHEREAS, the City Council identified five (5) major violations that created a hostile work environment by Councilmember DiGiovanni; and
WHEREAS, Councilmember DiGiovanni was provided the opportunity to respond to the allegations through a request from the investigator to meet with and interview Councilmember DiGiovanni, which Councilmember DiGiovanni refused; and WHEREAS, based on the thorough investigation of the allegations, including interviews of all witnesses the investigator deemed relevant, the investigator addressed each of the allegations and issues raised, and made findings.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Daly City that it does hereby rely upon and sustains the following findings of the independent investigator’s report, a redacted copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, that Councilmember DiGiovanni:

1. Kept City vehicles for extended periods in violation of the City policy on personal use of City vehicles;

2. Used City vehicles for personal purposes in violation of the City policy on personal use of City vehicles;

3. Used City vehicles for political campaigns purposes;

4. Improperly demanded police officers and staff to remove patrols from City events; and

5. Treated City staff unprofessionally and in a hostile manner.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Daly City that:

1. The City Council admonishes Councilmember DiGiovanni based on the findings above, and for her unprofessional and hostile behavior towards the City Manager and City staff; and

2. The City Council urges Councilmember DiGiovanni to apologize to the City Manager and City staff (as a whole) through virtual platforms, or at a City Council meeting, for treating City staff unprofessionally and in a hostile manner; and

3. The City Council urges Councilmember DiGiovanni to attend anger management in the workplace training and related behavior training in order to treat City staff professionally and

4. The City Council finds that should such behavior continue, the City Council will proceed to formal censorship of Councilmember DiGiovanni based upon the findings in the August 15, 2023, Investigation Report and

5. The City Council directs staff to refer this matter to the San Mateo County District Attorney’s Office and the California Fair Political Practices Commission.

I hereby certify the foregoing to be a true copy of a Resolution adopted by the City Council of Daly City, California, at a regular meeting thereof held on the 22nd day of January , 2024, by the following vote of the members thereof:

AYES, and in favor thereof, Councilmembers: Buenaventura, Daus-Magbual, Manalo

NOES, Councilmembers: None

ABSENT, Councilmembers: Sylvester

CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF DALY CITY
APPROVED:

JUSLYN C. MANALO

MAYOR OF THE CITY OF DALY CITY

City Council Meeting Agenda Report Item # _____

Oc
Meeting Date: October 27, 2025

Subject: Use Permit UPR-01-23-016044 and Design Review DR-01-23-016046 – Service Station Reconstruction at 101 South Mayfair Avenue

Recommended Action

Approve the Use Permit and Design Review for a new service station, convenience store and carwash.

Planning Commission Discussion

On October 7, 2025, the Planning Commission voted 3-0 to recommend that the City Council approve the Use Permit and Design Review Permit for the proposed new service station, convenience store and carwash. Commissioners expressed support for the project and indicated it would benefit the city and community by providing a larger convenience store, more gas station aisles and a carwash. The Commissioners also expressed the positive fiscal impact that the project will have for the city. Staff confirmed that the new commercial uses will have a positive fiscal impact to the city, increasing the property value and generating additional tax revenue from retail sales tax. The applicant requested that use and design review permit entitlements approval be extended beyond the one year as required in the conditions of approval.

Staff indicated that the applicant should request the length of extension as needed at the City Council hearing.

Project Description

The applicant, Ed Hadad, is requesting approval of a Use Permit and Design Review for a new service station, convenience store and carwash. The 22,500 square foot (sf) project site is located on one primary parcel (#APN 002-072-030) located at 101 South Mayfair Avenue. In addition, the applicant has reached an agreement to include landscape and streetscape improvements to the sidewalk and driveways on the adjacent parcel to the south (#APN 002-072-250), owned by CP VIII WESTLAKE OWNER 4 LLC (Attachment A - Location Map). The existing property, located at 101 South Mayfair Avenue, is bordered by South Mayfair Avenue to the north and Poncetta Drive to the east. The surrounding development consists of predominantly single-family residences to the north, multi-family residences to the west and commercial (restaurant) and multi-family residences to the east, and multi-family residence to the south.

The project would demolish the existing service station with snack shop and construct a new service station, new convenience store and carwash at the project site (Attachment B – Project Description). The new buildings include a single-story, 2,304 sf convenience store, 971 sf carwash, 252 sf equipment room and 3,002 sf fueling canopy. The project also includes new driveways, sidewalk connections, medians and landscaping improvements along both the Poncetta Drive and South Mayfair Avenue frontages. The height of the single-story building will range from 17 feet to 23 feet - 6 inches in height to top of roof. The project includes the following components: new

City Council Staff Report
Use Permit UPR-1-23-016044 and Design Review DR-01-23-016046 Page 2 101 South Mayfair Avenue – Service Station Reconstruction October 27, 2025

buildings, fuel canopy, landscaping, signage, new paving, pedestrian improvements and vehicle access and circulation improvements at the project site. (Attachment C – Plans)

Business Operation

Items to be sold at the property include gas at the gas station and the convenience store will sell pre-packaged food items, sundry items, some automobile accessories (air fresheners, cell phone accessories, anti-freeze, motor oil, etc.), self-service beverages, fresh and or pre-packaged pastries and can and or bottles of soda, water and sports/energy drinks.

The proposed hours of operation of the gas station and convenience store will be 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days per year. The hours of operation of the carwash shall be 8:00 am to 9:00 p.m., seven days a week, 365 days per year. Fuel will be delivered seven times a week. There will be truck deliveries to the food store one time a week (Attachment B - Project Description)

Discussion

The proposed new service station, convenience store and carwash requires the approval of a use permit and design review. The use permit provides the City Council with an opportunity to evaluate the proposal in the context of the existing on-site and adjacent uses and evaluate if the proposed project merits approval. In so determining, the City Council should evaluate if the new service station would be compatible with existing uses, if infrastructure exists to serve the site, and if the provision of parking is adequate and, as designed, would not have a detrimental impact to the adjacent neighborhood.

Use Permit

The applicant has submitted an application requesting a use permit to allow the construction of a service station, car wash and convenience store. The proposed project is developed according to the C-1 Light Commercial standards and complies with Chapter 17.18 – C-1 Light Commercial District of Daly City Code, which allows a full-service gasoline station at this address.

The proposed use complies with the Findings of Chapter 17.44.050 and will not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood, or be injurious or detrimental to the property and improvements in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the city. Also, an additional finding can be made that the new construction or operation of the proposed gasoline service state, will not significantly adversely affect or limit the public health, safety or welfare in providing public availability for minor emergency help and safety services such as light mechanical repairs, open public restrooms; and the public availability of full-service gasoline service station to those individual needing refueling assistance.

Design Review

The new convenience store building exterior materials and colors will consist of a combination cement plaster with sand finish (“porpoise fin”), and tan fiber cement plank lap siding (“khaki brown”) and allura woodgrain (“cedar”) type lap siding on the west elevation. The cornice will be

City Council Staff Report
Use Permit UPR-1-23-016044 and Design Review DR-01-23-016046 Page 3 101 South Mayfair Avenue – Service Station Reconstruction October 27, 2025

cement plaster, finish painted white (“cloud white”). The coping will be painted to match the fiber cement lap siding and the front exterior fascia will be painted white (“bone white”). The exterior entry will be clear anodized aluminum. The west and north elevations shall include metal decorative trellises to add architectural detail to the blank wall.

The service station canopy shall consist of canopy columns with round cladding (“metallic silver”) with guard posts painted orange (“wave orange”). The canopy fascia will be silver (“metallic silver”) with internally illuminated orange wave and internally illuminated 76 fuel brand logo sign at the corners of canopy. (Attachment C - Plans)

The exterior wall signs shall be internally illuminated. A separate sign permit application for all project signs including wall signs, fuel canopy signs, monument signs and ground signs, shall be required at building permit submittal. All buildings, any applicable retaining walls, fences and trash enclosure materials and colors must match those as approved. High quality materials shall be utilized and final finishes shall be approved by the Director of Economic and Community Development.

All exterior site lighting levels will be illuminated to ensure the safety of the facility, but will not provide glare or excessive light spillage onto adjacent properties or the public right-of-way.

Exterior lighting will be LED fixture, down-lit and fully shielded to avoid potential glare towared the street and adjacent properties.

Staff has reviewed the architectural design of the buildings and site plan and determined that the project complies with applicable provisions of Design Review Section 17.45 of the Zoning Ordinance.

Parking and Circulation

A consultant, TJKM Consultants, was hired by the applicant to examine parking and traffic circulation for the proposed gas station, convenience store and carwash.

The existing service station canopy, service islands and snack shop would be demolished and a new modernized service station canopy constructed with a convenience store and car-wash. The service station canopy and service islands would be relocated from the northern side of the site to the east side of the site and would expand from four service aisles to eight service aisles. This will allow for greater capacity to service vehicles and a more efficient traffic circulation configuration and parking access for the new convenience store and entrance to the car-wash.

The applicant proposes to provide seventeen parking spaces for the convenience store service station and carwash uses. The proposed project parking layout is consistent with the DCMC

17.34.020 (O) of the Zoning ordinance in that a total of fifteen parking spaces are required for the service station, convenience store and carwash uses and seventeen spaces are provided. There will be eight parking spaces for the convenience store, including one accessible space. The applicant proposes to use the under canopy spaces at a ratio of .5 spaces per dispenser to meet the parking requirement. The five spaces for the car wash will be provided in the queuing lane.

City Council Staff Report
Use Permit UPR-1-23-016044 and Design Review DR-01-23-016046 Page 4 101 South Mayfair Avenue – Service Station Reconstruction October 27, 2025

Site Circulation

Access to the car wash and convenience store will be from either South Mayfair Avenue (two-way traffic), the Poncetta Drive north entrance driveway (enter-only) or the Poncetta south end driveway (two-way traffic). The car wash entrance will be located on the north west side of the site and exist on the south west side. The four, canopy covered, fuel pump islands will be configured in a west to east configuration allowing access from South Mayfair Avenue and Poncetta Drive (Attachment D – Traffic Circulation Memorandum).

Pedestrian Improvements

The proposed new gas station, convenience store and car wash include upgraded sidewalks and driveways that are designed to American Disability Act (ADA) accessible standards. The existing unconnected sidewalk located on the west side of Poncetta Drive will be upgraded to include a fully connected sidewalk, driveways and landscaping with ADA tactile domes at the entrances to the driveways. New medians, island and landscaping will be installed along the north, south and east sides of the property. The applicant will work with the adjacent property owner, Westlake LLC, to develop an easement agreement for the sidewalk improvements along the Poncetta Drive frontage and this will be a condition of approval, prior to building permit submittal.

Based on the traffic circulation study prepared for the applicant and reviewed by the City, the proposed site plan for the gas station, convenience store and car-wash provides a functional layout as well as an aesthetically pleasing design that retains space for landscaping, medians and islands for smooth traffic and pedestrian circulation at the service station, car wash and convenience store uses at the project site.

Landscaping

The project proposes approximately 462 square feet of new landscaping that would include a variety of trees, shrubs and groundcover plants on-site, exceeding the two percent parking lot landscape mandated by the Zoning Ordinance. The tree species selected are Muskogee Crape Myrtle and Sweet Bay trees (15 Gallon), shrubs Purple Hopseed Bush and Boston Ivey (5 Gallon) and groundcover Rosemary (1 Gallon), Myoporum (1 Gallon), Large Cape Rush (5 Gallon) and Moonstruck Marigold (4” pots) (Attachment C – Plans).

The proposed Conditions of Approval require a detailed landscape plan approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of any building permits. Since the project exceeds the 1,000 square feet of landscaped area, triggering specific requirements for outdoor water use efficiency and Tier 1 landscape requirements of the Daly City Landscaping Ordinance. The landscaping plan will be required to meet all applicable requirements including water efficient irrigation. The project is also subject to the San Mateo County Stormwater Water Pollution Prevention Program requiring submittal and approval of a stormwater management and inspection plan and maintenance agreement.

Noise

City Council Staff Report
Use Permit UPR-1-23-016044 and Design Review DR-01-23-016046 Page 5 101 South Mayfair Avenue – Service Station Reconstruction October 27, 2025

The City requested the applicant contract a consultant to prepare a noise study for the proposed project. A Noise and Vibration Assessment was prepared for the applicant in December 2023 by DUDEK consultants, that examined the existing noise at the site and with the proposed project (Attachment E – Noise and Vibration Assessment).

The General Plan Noise Element establishes objectives, policies, and actions to protect its inhabitants against exposure of noise-sensitive uses to loud noise and to prevent encroachment of noise-sensitive uses on existing noise producing facilities. The General Plan establishes an exterior noise level standard and maximum allowable noise exposure level for residential uses of no more than 70 dBA (Policy NE-2). The noise level guidelines were presented in terms of the 24- hour CNEL or DNL noise level in dBA. The intent of these guidelines is to protect noise-sensitive land uses from new project development, through the discretionary review process to reduce potential noise exposure and excessive noise within the community. Policy NE-3 of the General Plan limits noise generation for new non-residential land uses which are adjacent to residential land uses, to 70 dBA DNL at the residential property line. The assessment prepared by DUDEK evaluated construction noise and vibration, on-site operational noise, traffic noise and project operational vibration.

Construction Noise and Vibration: The analysis concluded that construction noise levels during construction would be a maximum of approximately 65 dBA, and would not interfere with conversation or other daytime activities indoors and even at the closest residences would not be considered significant temporary noise impact, especially with the prohibition against nighttime construction. Based on an assessment of vibration source level of construction equipment and distance to closes residence, project construction vibration would have no potential to cause structural damage to the closest residences, or result in annoyance for the occupants.

On-site Operational Noise: The assessment analyzed stationary producers of noise, including the gas station, convenience store, and car wash. The evaluation found that the carwash would produce noise exceeding 70 dBA, however, the assessment determined that with the installation of a 7-foot masonry wall noise barrier, located along the westside of the carwash exit, the operational noise impact from the stationary sources would be less than significant. The assessment found that under conservative sound modeling conditions (use of gas station pumps, occupied convenience store parking spaces and operation of the carwash), no exceedances with respect to the noise element limits are expected and with incorporation of the recommended noise barrier wall at the carwash exit , operation noise impact from stationary sources would be less than significant. The applicant has incorporated the masonry wall noise barrier in the plans as recommended by the consultant (Attachment C – Plans).

Litter Control and Site Maintenance

An approved litter control and site maintenance plan will be required prior to building permit issuance. The plan must include a schedule of maintenance for the site and adjacent sidewalks and a graffiti abatement program.

City Council Staff Report
Use Permit UPR-1-23-016044 and Design Review DR-01-23-016046 Page 6 101 South Mayfair Avenue – Service Station Reconstruction October 27, 2025

The proposed trash enclosure is accessed directly from the car wash exit lane. The litter control and maintenance plan shall also require that the bin, which must be pulled out along exit lane drive aisle, cannot be placed or stored in such a way as to block the on-site drive aisles or create a circulation hazard. Staff has added a condition of approval requiring that the trash enclosure receive design elements similar to those of the convenience store, including color, materials, and roof design.

Signs

The applicant proposes to install two corner monument signs, canopy station signage and car wash entrance signs. “Do No Enter” ground signs will be installed at the car wash exit driveway to alert drivers not to entry the car wash from the south end. The convenience store wall signs, monument signs and canopy signs shall be internally illuminated. The applicant shall submit a sign permit to the Building Division for proposed signage subject for review and approval by the City (Attachment C - Plans).

Fiscal Analysis & Impacts

The proposed project consists of a new service station configuration, commercial building, carwash and site improvements. The proposed project will increase the assessed value of the property, which will result in an additional property tax distribution to the City and increased retail sales tax, which would result in additional tax revenue to the City. In addition, prior to project completion, the project would be subject to the AB1600 Development Impact Fees for new developments which help finance facilities, infrastructure and services in Daly City Administration, Police, Fire, Library, Parks, Transportation, Water, Sewer, and Storm Drainage.

Environmental Assessment

Staff has reviewed the proposal under the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined the project is Categorically Exempt per Section 15302(b) Replacement or Reconstruction. The proposed project involves the replacement of a commercial structure with a new structure of substantially the same size, purpose, and capacity.

Findings

The Planning Commission found that, as conditioned, the proposed use permit is in compliance with Title 17 (Zoning) of the Daly City Municipal Code. Approval of the proposed project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity. Approval of the proposed Use Permit UPR-01-23-016044 and Design Review DR-01- 23-016046 are in accordance with Chapter 17.44 Use Permits and Chapter 17.45 Design Review, as conditioned herein, is in the best interest of the public health, safety, and general welfare of the community, and that the general site, architecture, and landscape considerations have been incorporated to ensure compatibility with adjacent buildings and to provide an attractive environment. Staff recommends the City Council make the following findings:

City Council Staff Report
Use Permit UPR-1-23-016044 and Design Review DR-01-23-016046 Page 7 101 South Mayfair Avenue – Service Station Reconstruction October 27, 2025

1. In accordance with Title 17 of the Daly City Municipal Code, as well as applicable State zoning enabling legislation, the City Council conducted a public hearing on October 27, 2025; notice of said hearing was by newspaper publication, and posting and first class mailing to property owners within 300 feet of the site, on October 16, 2025.

2. The City Council reviewed the proposal under the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined the project is Categorically Exempt per Section 15302(b) Replacement or Reconstruction.

3. The project will minimize the risk to existing public improvements and adjacent private property by providing controlled stormwater runoff from the site to City facilities in full compliance with Order R-2 NPDES Permit No. CAS612008 and Order No. 2010-0014- DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002, the statewide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit.

4. The subject property is zoned C-1 (Light Commercial) which requires a Use Permit for the service station with accessory uses;

5. The subject use is consistent with the General Plan and the C-1 standards and, together with the provisions for its design and operation, would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of the neighborhood.

6. The project complies with the applicable provisions of User Permit Section 17.44 of the Zoning Ordinance.

7. The project complies with applicable provisions of Design Review Section 17.45 of the Zoning Ordinance.

8. General architectural considerations have been incorporated in order to ensure the compatibility of this development with its design concept and the character of other adjacent buildings. These considerations include, but are not limited to, the character, scale and quality of the design, the architectural relationship with the site and other buildings, building materials, and colors.

9. The project, as conditions, will incorporate noise reduction measures to ensure noise generated is no greater than 65 dBs and compliant with the Daly City General Plan, maintaining ambient noise comparable to the existing neighborhood.

10. The proposed project parking layout is consistent with the DCMC 17.34.020 (O) of the Zoning ordinance in that a total of fifteen parking spaces are required for the service station, convenience store and carwash uses and seventeen spaces are provided. The applicant proposes to use the under canopy spaces at a ratio of .5 spaces per dispenser to meet the parking requirement. The five spaces for the car wash will be provided in the queuing lane.

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

City Council Staff Report
Use Permit UPR-1-23-016044 and Design Review DR-01-23-016046 Page 8 101 South Mayfair Avenue – Service Station Reconstruction October 27, 2025

The Planning Commission recommends approval of a Use Permit UP-01-23-016044 and Design Review DR-01-23-016046, based on the following conditions as specified by each Department and Division. The applicant shall comply with these conditions prior to or in conjunction with any building permit issuance for the proposed improvements. Minor deviations from the conditions of approval may be approved by the Planning Division. Significant deviations will require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council.

A. ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

General

1. The applicant shall file a declaration of acceptance of all conditions with the City Clerk within thirty (30) days of Council approval. Until said Declaration is filed, the permits shall not be valid for any purpose.

2. The use permit and design review approval shall be valid for a period of one year from the date of City Council approval. The approvals shall terminate if a building permit has not been obtained and construction commenced within one-year of City Council approval of the project or if the applicant fails to obtain a valid business license.

3. The use permit and design review shall be valid only in conjunction with detailed plans submitted with this project. Any significant modifications required, due to the Conditions of Approval and minor changes to the plan, must be approved by the Planning Division. Major site or architectural modifications shall be treated as an amendment and shall be subject to review by a Council Committee appointed by the Mayor.

4. The demolition, renovation or removal of asbestos-containing building materials is subject to the limitations of District Regulation 11, Rule 2: Hazardous Materials; Asbestos Demolition, Renovation and Manufacturing. The District’s Enforcement Division shall be consulted prior to commencing demolition of a building containing asbestos building materials. Any demolition activity subject to but not complying with the requirements of District Regulation 11, Rule 2 would be considered to have a significant impact.

5. An approved litter control and site maintenance plan is required prior to building permit issuance. The plan must include a schedule of maintenance for the site and adjacent sidewalks, a graffiti abatement program, and also require that the trash and/or recycling bins are stored in the trash enclosure, which must be pulled out of the drive aisle for servicing, cannot be placed or stored in such a way as to block the on-site drive aisles or create a circulation hazard.

6. All buildings, any applicable retaining walls, fences and trash enclosure materials and colors must match those as approved. High quality materials shall be utilized and final finishes shall be approved by the Director of Economic and Community Development.

7. Noise reduction shall be required to reduce the noise at the nearest residential receptor to the west of the project site. The applicant plans shall include a 7-ft. high, 34 ft. long masonry sound wall located along the westside exist lane of the carwash. Building permit plan

City Council Staff Report
Use Permit UPR-1-23-016044 and Design Review DR-01-23-016046 Page 9 101 South Mayfair Avenue – Service Station Reconstruction October 27, 2025

submittals shall include documentation from a qualified noise specialist that demonstrates the plans and equipment utilize noise attenuation equipment employed in other nearby projects.

8. A soil management plan shall be submitted and approved by the San Mateo County Groundwater Protection Program office prior to building permit submittal.

Building and Site Design

9. The proposed trash enclosure shall be constructed from concrete (CMU is acceptable) and shall receive design elements similar to those of the convenience store, including color, materials, and roof design. The enclosure’s doors shall receive a powder-coated metal door painted to match the enclosure’s wall color. The capacity, design, and location of the structure shall be approved by both the Planning Division and Allied Waste Services prior to incorporation in the project plans that are submitted to the Building Division for permit issuance.

10. The applicant shall supply a manufacturer cut-sheet of the veneer material proposed for the building prior to building permit application.

11. The applicant shall supply a manufacturer cut-sheet of all proposed lighting fixtures, including wall fixtures, to the Planning Division prior to building permit application. The fixtures shall match or closely reflect those fixtures identified in the illumination model submitted with the use permit application.

12. Any new rooftop mechanical equipment shall be completely screened from view in a manner acceptable to the Planning Division.

13. The applicant shall stripe the project parking lot in conformance with the approved parking lot layout. All parking spaces shall conform to the Daly City Zoning Ordinance parking dimensions. All parking spaces shall receive wheel stops.

14. The applicant shall consider the placement of photovoltaic equipment of the canopy roof, the design of which may be approved administratively by the Planning Division. The equipment shall be reviewed so as not to cause light and glare on adjacent residents.

Landscaping

15. The project landscaping exceeds the 1,000 square feet of landscaped area and is subject to the Daly City Landscaping Ordinance. The landscaping plans shall be required to meet all applicable requirements including water efficient irrigation and will incorporate Bay Area Friendly species that are drought tolerant. Irrigation systems will incorporate water efficiency measures and shall show the details on the building permit plans. No building permit may be issued until this condition is met.

16. All trees approved as a part of this project shall be retained in perpetuity and all diseased and/or dying trees shall be replaced immediately or upon notification by the Planning Division to do so.

City Council Staff Report
Use Permit UPR-1-23-016044 and Design Review DR-01-23-016046 Page 10 101 South Mayfair Avenue – Service Station Reconstruction October 27, 2025

17. The applicant shall provide establishment, and where necessary, long-term irrigation to all trees, shrubs, and groundcover.

18. The applicant shall triple-stake all trees and this staking shall be subject to initial inspection by the City. Trees shall remain triple-stake through the establishment period. The planted trees shall be 24-inch box.

Operational Requirements and Restrictions

19. The applicant shall provide free compressed air, water, and an air pressure gauge during operating hours, to customers purchasing fuel.

20. Truck and trailer rental operations shall be prohibited at the site. Rental vehicle drop-off shall be prohibited.

21. The use of exterior lighting shall not result in adverse glare to adjacent residential neighbors.

Should the Planning Division determine that exterior lighting is causing adverse glare, the applicant may be required to make adjustments to lighting, provide additional shielding to lights, or reduce or eliminate the use of certain lights to comply with this Condition.

22. The service station shall continually provide functioning bathroom facilities to customers.

23. The automated car wash hours of operation shall only be allowed from 8 A.M. to 9 P.M.

Stormwater Treatment

24. The applicant shall develop and submit a stormwater management plan that illustrates full compliance with Section C.3 of Order R-2-2009-0074 NPDES Permit No. CAS612008. The project must comply with Order No. 2010-0014-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002, the statewide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit.

25. Additional stormwater information and updated forms may be required during the building permit review stage when more details of the construction drawings are known. Information and/or designs that may be required if there are any changes that impact the forms submitted for the subdivision application. No building permit may be issued until acceptable storm water requirements are met.

26. The applicant shall receive approval of the stormwater management plan from a third-party reviewer appointed by the City prior to building permit submittal. The applicant shall pay the entire cost of the third-party reviewer.

27. All stormwater treatment facilities shall be inspected during construction to ensure eventual compliance with the stormwater management plan. The applicant shall pay the entire cost of these inspections.

City Council Staff Report
Use Permit UPR-1-23-016044 and Design Review DR-01-23-016046 Page 11 101 South Mayfair Avenue – Service Station Reconstruction October 27, 2025

28. The applicant shall enter into a Maintenance Agreement with the City to ensure long-term maintenance and servicing by the Property Owner of stormwater site design and treatment control measures according the approved Maintenance Plan.

29. The applicant shall arrange and pay for final inspection of installed treatment measure by municipality’s Special Inspector within 45 days of installation or project construction completion, whichever comes first.

Signs

30. All signs at the subject property shall receive sign permits and shall remain in conformance with the Daly City Municipal Code. Banners, streamers, balloons, and any other device intended to attract visual attention shall be prohibited. Box signs shall be prohibited, except where allowed on the monument and pole sign.

31. All signs shall be architecturally integrated to match the building on the site. For example, the monument sign at the corner of South Mayfair and Poncetta intersection shall receive a solid base, with veneer and decorative trim and cap to complement the design of the new convenience store.

32. Illuminated wall signs shall incorporate halo-illumination.

Site Maintenance

33. The site shall be maintained in a safe, sanitary and litter free condition at all times.

34. No outside storage shall be allowed, except in the approved trash enclosure area.

35. Doors to the trash enclosure area shall be kept closed except when necessary to dispose of trash or to store material to be recycled.

36. The buildings and appurtenances shall be painted as often as necessary to maintain a weatherproof coating.

37. A maintenance plan for on-site litter control acceptable to the Public Works Streets Supervisor shall be submitted by the applicant and will include: All sidewalks, walkways, driveways, parking lot facilities, and easements within and adjacent to the property, including weeds. The requirement shall not apply to adjacent State-owned highway.

38. All outdoor storage areas shall be screened from public view.

39. Garbage storage areas are to be kept sanitary and free of litter and debris.

40. During construction, litter and construction debris shall be put into closed containers at the end of each day. Subsequent to construction activity, all recyclable material shall be stored exclusively inside the recycling material enclosure area.

City Council Staff Report
Use Permit UPR-1-23-016044 and Design Review DR-01-23-016046 Page 12 101 South Mayfair Avenue – Service Station Reconstruction October 27, 2025

41. The accumulation of trash in the garbage dumpster or located anywhere on the premises shall be removed and disposed of in a proper manner. Motor oil that has accumulated in parking stalls and driveway areas shall be cleaned as soon as possible to prevent oil from entering the storm drain system.

42. The applicant shall submit a site maintenance program that includes maintaining the sidewalk area in front of the business prior to the issuance of any building permits.

B. DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND WASTEWATER RESOURCES

43. All water and sewer system work outside of the building foundation shall follow the Daly City Standard Specifications and Drawings.

44. All water and sewer system work outside of the building foundation require additional permitting through the Daly city Engineering Department.

45. Daly City Standard Specifications and Drawings shall prevail when a conflict arises with the plans and specifications.

46. Building water system chlorination and bacteriological testing is required to be approved by the DWWR prior to TCO.

47. All water services shall incorporate a reduced pressure principle back flow device in its design.

C. PUBLIC WORKS-ENGINEERING DIVISION

GENERAL

48. The applicant shall comply with the applicable requirements of the City of Daly City General Conditions of Approval: Use Permits, Variances, Design Reviews, Planned Developments, and Subdivisions, in effect at the time of subdivision and design review application submittal, final map submittal and/or at the time of building permit application.

49. Plans submitted for building or grading permit shall show all existing and proposed utilities, on-site and in the street, including water, sanitary sewer, and storm drain mains.

50. The applicant shall comply with the applicable requirements of the City of Daly City Standard Details and Specifications.

51. Applicant and/or contractor shall provide at least one large project sign that includes basic project information and a phone number where members of the public may report concerns such as off-site tracking, dust control, noise complaints, ground shaking and any related construction activities and obtain information or assistance as needed. The complaints and responses shall be logged, and copies provided to the City Engineer with action status on a weekly basis.

City Council Staff Report
Use Permit UPR-1-23-016044 and Design Review DR-01-23-016046 Page 13 101 South Mayfair Avenue – Service Station Reconstruction October 27, 2025

52. No permanent building encroachment including but not limited to: awnings, canopies, marquees, signs, windows, balconies, architectural features and mechanical equipment shall be allowed in the Right-of-Way without the written authorization of the City Engineer.

53. Prior to issuance of first permit (Grading, Site Improvement, and Building, etc.), existing structures on the property shall be demolished, and all existing utility service connections shall be abandoned per City standards.

54. Provide “will serve letters” from all applicable utility agencies.

55. Concurrent with each demolition, grading and drainage permit submittal or as a part of the Improvement Plan package, the Applicant shall prepare a dust control plan. The plan shall conform to the City Standards and comply with the requirements of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) Best Management Practices (BMP) for dust control. The Applicant shall post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact regarding dust complaints. The person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours when notified of dust complaints.

56. All improvements shall be completed and functioning, and as‐built record plans of all improvements submitted in a form acceptable to the City before any occupancy permit is issued or public service improvements are accepted by the City for maintenance.

57. All improvements, including on-site and off-site improvements, and all public service and utility facilities required to serve the project, shall be completed by the applicant prior to issuance of a Building Permit. The improvements shall be consistent with the plans approved by the City Engineer and the Conditions of Approval. All construction shall meet the latest California Building Code, California Fire Code, Daly City Municipal Code and the City Standard Specifications and Drawings. Securities for all required improvements, and applicable fees and charges, shall be submitted to the City for approval. The applicant shall obtain all required permits before commencing work. All required improvements shall be constructed at no cost to the City except where specifically agreed to by the City under the provisions of a written agreement.

58. Grading and improvement plan review and approval by the City Engineer are required before any City Permit is issued. The improvement plans shall include details for on‐site and off‐site improvements for vehicular and pedestrian access, parking, traffic signs and markings, utility service connections, modifications and extension of the City’s sewer, water, storm drain, safety lighting, landscaping, and other public service facilities. All utility services shall be underground. Said improvements shall conform to Daly City and affected Agency’s standards. Plans shall be accompanied by all required calculations and studies including geotechnical and impact studies to justify design. Submit photo‐mylar reproducible (24”x36”), electronic files (to City AutoCAD Standards) and blueprints as required for City’s inspection and filing before permits are issued for construction of improvements. All required improvements shall be constructed at no cost to the City except where specifically agreed to by the City under the provisions of a written agreement.

City Council Staff Report
Use Permit UPR-1-23-016044 and Design Review DR-01-23-016046 Page 14 101 South Mayfair Avenue – Service Station Reconstruction October 27, 2025

59. All site improvements shall be installed, inspected and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of occupancy permits. In addition, as-built record plans of all improvements shall be submitted in a form acceptable to the City Engineer prior to issuance of occupancy permits.

60. All utility services shall be provided through underground connections. There shall be no overhead drops.

61. All plans shall be accompanied by all required calculations and studies including geotechnical and impact studies to justify design signed and sealed by a licensed professional engineer.

62. Grading and improvement plan review and approval by the City Engineer are required before any City permit is issued. The improvement plans shall include details for on-site and off-site improvements for vehicular and pedestrian access, parking, traffic signs and markings, utility service connections, modifications and extensions of the City’s sewer, storm drain, safety lighting, landscaping, and other public service facilities.

63. Securities for all improvements (on-site and off-site), and applicable fees and charges, shall be submitted with any building permits. The applicant shall obtain all required permits before commencing work.

64. Comply with the applicable requirements of the City’s General Condition of Approval:

Variances, Design Reviews, Planned Developments and Subdivisions, dated December 8, 1999.

65. The applicant shall enter into a Maintenance Agreement in a form acceptable to the City Attorney to ensure the Property Owner will provide long-term maintenance of all street trees, landscaping, and irrigation installed in the public right-of-way. Design of planting and irrigation system shall minimize the extent of irrigation lines, controllers, and valves in the public right-of-way and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer.

66. A notarized letter shall be submitted by the owners of Parcel Number APN 002-072-190 and APN 002-072-250 acknowledging the proposed improvements on their property as part of the 101 S. Mayfair Avenue project.

67. Current title reports (within the last 6 months) for Parcel Number APN 002-072-190 and APN 002-072-250 shall be provided for confirmation of public rights of access through the property.

68. Separate Site Improvement Permits shall be required for each property impacted by the scope of work associated with the 101 S. Mayfair Avenue project.

SITE

City Council Staff Report
Use Permit UPR-1-23-016044 and Design Review DR-01-23-016046 Page 15 101 South Mayfair Avenue – Service Station Reconstruction October 27, 2025

69. All project improvements shall be ADA compliant. This includes the sidewalk and driveways within private property.

70. The applicant shall repair and/or replace additional areas of street pavement, sidewalk, curb, and gutter, streetlights, manhole, catch basins, or any other public infrastructure within the right-of-way damaged by construction activities associated with the project (utility installation, etc.) as required by the City.

71. All accessible parking spaces shall be located on the shortest accessible route of travel to an accessible pedestrian entrance of the building.

72. Provide documentation from adjacent property owners of APN 002-072-190 and APN 002- 072-250 approve the proposed improvements within their properties.

GRADING

73. Grading exceeding 50 cubic yards shall require approval of plans and a grading permit. A licensed Civil Engineer shall prepare the grading plans and erosion control plan in conformance with a soil report prepared by a licensed soil engineer or qualified civil engineer in compliance with the NPDES requirements prior to any development on the property.

74. Provide erosion and storm water pollution plan incorporating best management practices, including operation and maintenance provisions per the requirements applicable at the time of construction permit application. During the wet/rainy season (October 1 to April 30) the developer shall submit a revised erosion control plan as necessary (every five working days) or as required by the City Engineer and/or his representative.

75. The Engineer or Geologist, of record, shall be present on‐site during the excavation and grading phases of the project and shall submit a written certification that the project grading plans has been implemented as approved.

STORMWATER

76. The applicant shall be financially responsible for all project-related storm drainage improvements on- and off-site, as required and approved by the City Engineer in accordance with City and Caltrans Standards.

77. Storm drain laterals and mains shall be CCTV’ed at the end of construction. Owner is responsible for providing videos of laterals/mains prior to the City Engineer’s permit signoff/acceptance. If cleanouts are utilized instead of manholes or drainage inlets, it is up to the owner to make required changes to provide camera access if access is not available via cleanouts.

78. Full trash capture devices approved by the City Engineer shall be installed on the drainage system.

City Council Staff Report
Use Permit UPR-1-23-016044 and Design Review DR-01-23-016046 Page 16 101 South Mayfair Avenue – Service Station Reconstruction October 27, 2025

79. The applicant shall submit stormwater pollution prevention plans at the time of each building permit submittal.

80. Bio-retention constructed along South Mayfair Ave. shall be maintained by the owner of the 101 S. Mayfair Ave. property in perpetuity. An agreement acceptable to the City shall be recorded on the property.

UTILITY

81. Following new utility installation, the applicant shall replace areas of street pavement, sidewalk, curb and gutter damaged by construction. Such repair shall be per City standard specifications.

82. Disconnect all sewer laterals and water services at the main in the street prior to installation of new services. Inspections shall be required by the Department of Water and Wastewater Resources.

83. The project’s electrical transformer shall not be installed within the public right-of-way.

84. City standard utility separations shall be provided between existing and proposed utilities.

MAPPING

85. All easement language shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer.

PERMIT

86. Encroachment permits and/or a site improvement permit shall be required to be issued by the Public Works Department for all work proposed within the public right-of-way.

D. FIRE DEPARTMENT

87. Applicant shall comply with adopted Building & Fire Codes as well as, Daly City Municipal Code.

88. Fire sprinkler systems required. Applicant shall submit plans to NCFA under separate fire permit.

89. Applicant shall provide fire flow information per CFC, Appendix B.

90. Fire extinguishing/hood system may be required. Applicant shall submit plans to NCFA under separate fire permit.

91. Monitored fire alarm system is required. Applicant shall submit plans to NCFA under separate permit.

City Council Staff Report
Use Permit UPR-1-23-016044 and Design Review DR-01-23-016046 Page 17 101 South Mayfair Avenue – Service Station Reconstruction October 27, 2025

92. Knox Key Box will be required of not a 24hr/365day operation. Applicant shall apply for approved hardware at NCFA Administration.

93. Portable fire extinguishers(s) are required. Fire extinguishers shall be mounted 3-5 feet above floor.

94. Applicant shall provide illuminated address identification.

95. Utility identification is required.

96. Doors shall be easily openable in one motion without special knowledge, key or effort per CBC. Use of thumb operated deadbolts prohibited unless integrated with latch.

97. Illuminated exit signs and emergency egress illumination is required.

98. Flammable liquids storage tank installation permit required. Applicant shall submit plans to NCFA under separate permit.

99. Carbon Dioxide permit required if 100 or more pounds. Applicant shall submit to NCFA under separate permit.

E. BUILDING DIVISION

100. Hours of operation for all construction work associated with the subject project shall be 8:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. There will be no start-up of machines or equipment, no delivery of materials or equipment, and no cleaning or servicing of machines or equipment prior to 7:30 a.m. or after 6:00 p.m. Additionally, there will be no construction work, deliveries, and servicing of the machines and equipment between 6:00 p.m. and 7:30 a.m. and at any time during Saturdays, Sundays and Legal City Holidays. Exceptions to these time restrictions may be granted by the Building Official for one of the following reasons:
(1) inclement weather affecting work, (2) emergency work, or (3) other work, if work and equipment will not create noise or conditions that may be unreasonably offensive to neighbors as to constitute a nuisance. The Building Official must be notified and approval given, in writing, in advance of said work.

Recommendation

The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council take the following action:

1. Adopt the Findings as outlined herein;

2. Adopt the Categorical Exemption determination for the project;

3. Approve, Use Permit UPR-01-23-016044 and Design Review DR-01-23-016046, as conditioned herein.

Staff is available to provide any additional information desired by the City Council.

City Council Staff Report
Use Permit UPR-1-23-016044 and Design Review DR-01-23-016046 Page 18 101 South Mayfair Avenue – Service Station Reconstruction October 27, 2025

Respectfully submitted,

Sam Fielding Tatum Mothershead
Associate Planner Director of Economic and Community Development

Attachments
Attachment A – Location Map
Attachment B – Project Description
Attachment C – Plans
Attachment D – Traffic Circulation Memorandum
Attachment E – Noise and Vibration Assessment

Project Site

/i255
/i255
/i255
/i255/i255
/i255
/i255
/2/3/4/5/5/6/7/i255/9/3/10/11/6/12/5/i255/13/6/14/12/3/4/15/5/4/10/7/i255/16/10/3/17/i255 /i255
/18/19/i255/20/21/14/i255/22/5/21/5/4/10/7/23/i255/24/10/7/25/6/7/4/6/7/12/6/i255/22/5/10/3/6/i255/26/i255/24/21/3/27/21/14/28/i255 /29/30/29/i255/22/31/i255/32/21/33/16/21/4/3/i255/34/25/6/31/23/i255/13/21/35/33/i255/24/4/5/33/23/i255/24/34/i255/36/37/29/30/38/i255/i255 /i255/i255/i255/i255/i255/i255
/39/40/i255/41/42/43/44/45/46/i255/47/46/i255/47/48/49/i255/50/45/51 /42/40/52/53/i255/54/49/55/i255/56/57/i255/58/44/57/44/57/53/i255/59/42/i255/44/49/42/i255/60/48/41/61/51/52/52/51/40/62/i255/52/43/42/i255/63/45/44/40/40/51/40/62/i255/44/63/63/45/51/50/44/52/51/47/40/i255/46/47/49/i255/52/43/42/i255 /49/42/50/47/40/60/52/49/48/50/52/51/47/40/i255/47/46/i255/52/43/42/i255/62/44/60/i255/60/52/44/52/51/47/40/i255/45/47/50/44/52/42/57/i255/44/52/i255/52/43/42/i255/44/41/47/64/42/i255/49/42/46/42/49/42/40/50/42/57/i255/60/51/52/42/55/i255/65/43/42/i255/63/49/47/66/42/50/52/i255/60/50/47/63/42/i255/47/46/i255/52/43/42/i255 /59/47/49/67/i255/51/40/50/45/48/57/42/60/i255/49/42/61/47/64/51/40/62/i255/68/69/70/i255/71/53/72/73/73/i255/60/46/55/i255/60/40/44/50/67/i255/60/43/47/63/i255/59/51/52/43/i255/60/42/49/64/51/50/42/i255/41/44/74/i255/44/40/57/i255/68/69/70/i255/75/53/75/76/76/i255/60/46/55/i255/46/48/42/45/51/40/62/i255 /50/44/40/47/63/74/53/i255/50/47/64/42/49/51/40/62/i255/46/47/48/49/i255/77/78/79/i255/46/48/42/45/i255/57/51/60/63/42/40/60/42/49/60/53/i255/49/42/61/47/64/51/40/62/i255/52/43/42/i255/48/40/57/42/49/62/49/47/48/40/57/i255/60/52/47/49/44/62/42/i255/52/44/40/67/60/i255/80/i255 /44/60/60/47/50/51/44/52/42/57/i255/48/40/57/42/49/62/49/47/48/40/57/i255/63/51/63/51/40/62/53/i255/49/42/61/47/64/51/40/62/i255/47/40/42/i255/57/49/51/64/42/59/44/74/i255/47/40/i255/81/47/40/50/42/52/52/44/i255/82/49/51/64/42/i255/44/40/57/i255/52/59/47/i255/57/49/51/64/42/59/44/74/60/i255 /47/40/i255/83/47/48/52/43/i255/54/44/74/46/44/51/49/i255/84/64/42/40/48/42/55/i255/65/43/42/i255/40/47/49/52/43/42/44/60/52/i255/57/49/51/64/42/59/44/74/i255/47/40/i255/81/47/40/50/42/52/52/44/i255/82/49/51/64/42/i255/59/51/45/45/i255/41/42/i255/59/51/57/42/40/42/57/55/i255/65/43/42/i255/40/42/59/i255 /63/49/47/66/42/50/52/i255/50/47/40/60/51/60/52/60/i255/47/46/i255/44/63/63/49/47/85/51/61/44/52/42/45/74/i255/75/53/86/73/78/i255/60/46/55/i255/50/47/40/64/42/40/51/42/40/50/42/i255/60/52/47/49/42/53/i255/44/i255/87/88/71/i255/60/46/55/i255/49/47/45/45/70/47/64/42/49/i255/50/44/49/59/44/60/43/i255 /52/48/40/40/42/45/i255/59/51/52/43/i255/75/78/88/i255/60/46/55/i255/50/44/49/59/44/60/43/i255/42/89/48/51/63/61/42/40/52/i255/49/47/47/61/53/i255/44/40/57/i255/86/53/73/73/75/i255/60/46/55/i255/50/44/40/47/63/74/i255/50/47/64/42/49/51/40/62/i255/77/78/79/i255/46/48/42/45/i255 /57/51/60/63/42/40/60/42/49/60/53/i255/77/75/79/i255/75/73/90/i255/62/44/45/45/47/40/i255/48/40/57/42/49/62/49/47/48/40/57/i255/60/52/47/49/44/62/42/i255/52/44/40/67/60/i255/59/51/52/43/i255/40/42/59/i255/46/48/42/45/i255/60/74/60/52/42/61/55/i255/65/43/42/i255/60/51/52/42/i255 /51/61/63/49/47/64/42/61/42/40/52/60/i255/51/40/50/45/48/57/42/53/i255/47/40/60/51/52/42/i255/63/44/49/67/51/40/62/i255/60/52/44/45/45/60/53/i255/44/50/50/42/60/60/51/41/45/42/i255/63/44/52/43/i255/47/46/i255/52/49/44/64/42/45/i255/52/47/i255/52/43/42/i255/49/51/62/43/52/70/47/46/70/59/44/74/53/i255 /61/44/60/47/40/49/74/i255/52/49/44/60/43/i255/42/40/50/45/47/60/48/49/42/53/i255/60/51/52/42/i255/45/51/62/43/52/51/40/62/53/i255/45/44/40/57/60/50/44/63/51/40/62/53/i255/60/42/45/46/70/60/42/49/64/51/50/42/i255/44/51/49/i255/80/i255/59/44/52/42/49/i255/42/89/48/51/63/61/42/40/52/53/i255/64/44/50/48/48/61/i255 /48/40/51/52/i255/44/40/57/i255/44/i255/40/42/59/i255/61/47/40/48/61/42/40/52/i255/60/51/62/40/55/i255/i255/65/43/42/i255/46/47/45/45/47/59/51/40/62/i255/44/49/42/i255/51/52/42/61/60/i255/52/47/i255/41/42/i255/50/47/40/60/51/57/42/49/42/57/i255/51/40/i255/52/43/51/60/i255/63/49/47/66/42/50/52/91/i255 /92/i255/93/94/95/32/22/i255/94/96/i255/97/95/i255/22/96/98/13/i255/34/94/i255/94/99/93/22/i255/100/34/24/93/98/93/94/101/17/i255/65/43/42/i255/62/44/60/i255/60/52/44/52/51/47/40/i255/59/51/45/45/i255/60/42/45/45/i255/62/44/60/47/45/51/40/42/53/i255/52/43/42/i255/102/47/40/64/42/40/51/42/40/50/42/i255 /83/52/47/49/42/i255/59/51/45/45/i255/60/42/45/45/i255/63/49/42/70/63/44/50/67/44/62/42/57/i255/46/47/47/57/i255/51/52/42/61/60/53/i255/60/48/40/57/49/74/i255/51/52/42/61/60/53/i255/60/47/61/42/i255/44/48/52/47/61/47/41/51/45/42/i255/44/50/50/42/60/60/47/49/51/42/60/i255/77/51/55/42/55/70/i255/44/51/49/i255 /46/49/42/60/43/42/40/42/49/60/53/i255/50/42/45/45/i255/63/43/47/40/42/i255/44/50/50/42/60/60/47/49/51/42/60/53/i255/44/40/52/51/70/46/49/42/42/103/42/53/i255/61/47/52/47/49/i255/47/51/45/53/i255/42/52/50/55/79/i255/60/42/45/46/70/60/42/49/64/51/50/42/i255/41/42/64/42/49/44/62/42/60/53/i255/46/49/42/60/43/i255 /44/40/57/69/47/49/i255/63/49/42/70/63/44/50/67/44/62/42/57/i255/63/44/60/52/49/51/42/60/i255/80/i255/50/44/40/i255/44/40/57/69/47/49/i255/41/47/52/52/45/42/60/i255/47/46/i255/60/47/57/44/53/i255/59/44/52/42/49/i255/80/i255/60/63/47/49/52/60/69/42/40/42/49/62/74/i255/57/49/51/40/67/60/55/i255/i255/i255 /92/i255/95/32/9/98/96/101/95/95/22/17/i255/65/43/42/i255/63/49/47/63/47/60/42/57/i255/62/44/60/i255/60/52/44/52/51/47/40/i255/80/i255/50/47/40/64/42/40/51/42/40/50/42/i255/60/52/47/49/42/i255/59/51/45/45/i255/43/44/64/42/i255/52/43/42/i255/46/47/45/45/47/59/51/40/62/i255 /42/61/63/45/47/74/42/42/60/91/i255/77/75/79/i255/42/61/63/45/47/74/42/42/60/i255/63/42/49/i255/60/43/51/46/52/i255/46/47/49/i255/77/86/79/i255/60/43/51/46/52/60/i255/63/42/49/i255/57/44/74/53/i255/104/i255/57/44/74/60/i255/63/42/49/i255/59/42/42/67/55/i255/i255/77/75/79/i255/42/61/63/45/47/74/42/42/60/i255 /63/42/49/i255/60/43/51/46/52/i255/46/47/49/i255/77/86/79/i255/60/43/51/46/52/60/i255/63/42/49/i255/57/44/74/53/i255/75/i255/57/44/74/60/i255/63/42/49/i255/59/42/42/67/55/i255/i255/84/i255/52/47/52/44/45/i255/47/46/i255/77/72/79/i255/46/48/45/45/70/52/51/61/42/i255/42/61/63/45/47/74/42/42/60/i255/46/47/49/i255/77/104/79/i255/57/44/74/60/53/i255 /44/40/57/i255/77/72/79/i255/63/44/49/52/70/52/51/61/42/i255/42/61/63/45/47/74/42/42/60/i255/46/47/49/i255/77/75/79/i255/57/44/74/60/i255 /92/i255/99/96/105/106/22/i255/96/100/i255/96/9/95/106/34/94/93/96/107/17/i255/65/43/42/i255/63/49/47/63/47/60/42/57/i255/43/47/48/49/60/i255/47/46/i255/47/63/42/49/44/52/51/47/40/i255/47/46/i255/52/43/42/i255/62/44/60/i255/60/52/44/52/51/47/40/i255/44/40/57/i255 /50/47/40/64/42/40/51/42/40/50/42/i255/60/52/47/49/42/i255/44/49/42/91/i255/75/78/i255/43/49/60/55/i255/69/57/44/74/53/i255/88/57/44/74/60/i255/44/i255/59/42/42/67/53/i255/86/72/104/i255/57/44/74/60/i255/63/42/49/i255/74/42/44/49/55/i255/i255/65/43/42/i255/43/47/48/49/60/i255/47/46/i255 /47/63/42/49/44/52/51/47/40/i255/47/46/i255/52/43/42/i255/50/44/49/59/44/60/43/i255/44/49/42/i255/76/91/73/73/44/61/i255/52/47/i255/87/91/73/73/63/61/53/i255/88/57/44/74/60/i255/44/i255/59/42/42/67/53/i255/86/72/104/i255/57/44/74/60/i255/63/42/49/i255/74/42/44/49/i255 /92/i255/100/105/95/98/i255/13/95/98/95/93/108/34/106/101/17/i255/65/43/42/i255/46/48/42/45/i255/57/42/45/51/64/42/49/74/i255/52/49/48/50/67/i255/59/51/45/45/i255/61/44/67/42/i255/57/42/45/51/64/42/49/51/42/60/i255/88/i255/52/51/61/42/60/i255/69/i255/59/42/42/67/55/i255/65/43/42/49/42/i255/59/51/45/45/i255/41/42/i255 /52/49/48/50/67/i255/57/42/45/51/64/42/49/51/42/60/i255/52/47/i255/52/43/42/i255/46/47/47/57/i255/61/44/49/52/i255/71/i255/52/51/61/42/i255/69/i255/59/42/42/67/55/i255 /92/i255/22/93/94/95/i255/98/93/20/99/94/93/107/20/17/i255/i255/65/43/42/i255/42/85/52/42/49/51/47/49/i255/45/51/62/43/52/51/40/62/i255/45/42/64/42/45/60/i255/59/51/45/45/i255/41/42/i255/42/40/47/48/62/43/i255/52/47/i255/42/40/60/48/49/42/i255/52/43/42/i255/60/44/46/42/52/74/i255/47/46/i255/52/43/42/i255 /46/44/50/51/45/51/52/74/53/i255/41/48/52/i255/52/47/i255/40/47/52/i255/63/49/47/64/51/57/42/i255/62/45/44/49/42/i255/47/49/i255/42/85/50/42/60/60/51/64/42/i255/45/51/62/43/52/i255/60/63/51/45/45/44/62/42/i255/47/40/52/47/i255/44/57/66/44/50/42/40/52/i255/63/49/47/63/42/49/52/51/42/60/i255/47/49/i255/52/43/42/i255 /63/48/41/45/51/50/i255/49/51/62/43/52/70/47/46/70/59/44/74/55/i255/i255/56/85/52/42/49/51/47/49/i255/45/51/62/43/52/51/40/62/i255/51/60/i255/109/56/82/i255/46/51/85/52/48/49/42/53/i255/57/47/59/40/70/45/51/52/i255/44/40/57/i255/46/48/45/45/74/i255/60/43/51/42/45/57/42/57/i255/52/47/i255/44/64/47/51/57/i255 /63/47/52/42/40/52/51/44/45/i255/62/45/44/49/42/i255/52/47/59/44/49/57/i255/52/43/42/i255/60/52/49/42/42/52/i255/44/40/57/i255/44/57/66/44/50/42/40/52/i255/63/49/47/63/42/49/52/51/42/60/55/i255 /92/i255/106/95/24/101/24/98/95/13/i255/24/34/106/2/34/22/99/i255/2/34/94/95/106/17/i255/i255/81/49/51/47/49/i255/52/47/i255/57/51/60/50/43/44/49/62/42/i255/52/47/i255/52/43/42/i255/63/48/41/45/51/50/i255/60/42/59/42/49/i255/60/74/60/52/42/61/53/i255/52/43/42/i255/48/60/42/57/i255 /50/44/49/59/44/60/43/i255/59/44/52/42/49/i255/49/48/40/60/i255/52/43/49/47/48/62/43/i255/77/75/79/i255/52/74/63/42/60/i255/47/46/i255/52/49/42/44/52/61/42/40/52/i255/52/44/40/67/60/i255/52/43/42/i255/46/51/49/60/52/i255/52/44/40/67/i255/51/60/i255/52/43/42/i255/60/44/40/57/69/47/51/45/i255 /60/42/63/44/49/44/52/47/49/55/i255/i255/65/43/51/60/i255/52/44/40/67/i255/51/40/50/45/48/57/42/60/i255/77/75/79/i255/50/47/61/63/44/49/52/61/42/40/52/60/55/i255/i255/65/43/42/i255/60/44/40/57/i255/47/51/45/i255/60/42/63/44/49/44/52/47/49/i255/51/40/52/42/49/50/42/63/52/60/i255/52/43/42/i255/60/44/40/57/i255 /51/40/i255/52/43/42/i255/46/51/49/60/52/i255/50/47/61/63/44/49/52/61/42/40/52/i255/44/40/57/i255/52/43/42/i255/47/51/45/i255/51/40/i255/52/43/42/i255/60/42/50/47/40/57/i255/50/47/61/63/44/49/52/61/42/40/52/55/i255/i255/65/43/42/i255/44/50/50/42/60/60/i255/59/44/52/42/49/i255/52/43/42/40/i255 /45/42/44/64/42/60/i255/52/43/42/i255/60/44/40/57/i255/69/47/51/45/i255/60/42/63/44/49/44/52/47/49/i255/52/44/40/67/i255/52/47/i255/52/43/42/i255/50/45/44/49/51/46/51/42/49/i255/52/44/40/67/55/i255/i255/65/43/42/i255/50/45/44/49/51/46/51/42/49/i255/52/44/40/67/i255/50/47/40/60/51/60/52/60/i255/47/46/i255/77/86/79/i255 /50/47/61/63/44/49/52/61/42/40/52/60/i255/52/47/i255/50/45/42/44/49/i255/52/43/42/i255/59/44/52/42/49/i255/46/47/49/i255/52/43/42/i255/49/42/48/60/42/i255/41/74/i255/52/43/42/i255/50/44/49/59/44/60/43/i255/42/89/48/51/63/61/42/40/52/55/i255/65/43/42/i255/63/42/49/50/42/40/52/44/62/42/i255/47/46/i255 /52/43/42/i255/49/42/50/74/50/45/42/57/i255/59/44/52/42/49/i255/52/47/i255/41/42/i255/49/42/70/48/60/42/57/i255/51/40/i255/52/43/42/i255/50/44/49/59/44/60/43/i255/59/51/45/45/i255/41/42/i255/50/47/40/52/49/47/45/45/42/57/i255/41/74/i255/52/43/42/i255/49/42/50/45/44/51/61/i255/60/74/60/52/42/61/55/i255 /i255
/81/45/42/44/60/42/i255/57/47/40/110/52/i255/43/42/60/51/52/44/52/42/i255/52/47/i255/50/44/45/45/53/i255/51/46/i255/74/47/48/i255/43/44/64/42/i255/44/40/74/i255/89/48/42/60/52/51/47/40/60/55/i255/i255/111/i255/50/44/40/i255/41/42/i255/49/42/44/50/43/42/57/i255/44/52/i255/77/87/75/104/79/i255/75/76/88/70/71/71/88/78/i255/85/71/55/i255 /i255
/83/51/40/50/42/49/42/45/74/53/i255
/i255
/112/113/114/115/116/117/116/i255/119/120/121/116/115/122/123/i255 /i255
/84/49/50/43/51/52/42/50/52/53/i255/81/49/42/60/51/57/42/40/52/i255 /32/i255/93/i255/34/3/12/28/4/5/6/12/5/14/23/i255/93/7/12/31/i255 /i255
/i255
/83/91/124/71/70/81/49/47/66/42/50/52/60/124/75/73/70/71/71/86/73/78/i255/71/73/71/i255/83/i255/54/44/74/46/44/51/49/i255/84/64/42/i255/82/44/45/74/i255/102/51/52/74/124/82/47/50/125/60/124/126/49/51/52/52/42/40/i255/83/52/44/52/42/61/42/40/52/70/127/42/64/i255/73/104/70/71/75/70/75/75/55/57/47/50/i255 /128/129/130/131/132/133/132/i255/135/136/137/132/131/138/139/i255/i255 /140/137/141/131/138/130/142/141/130/i255
/143/137/142/144/138/145/142/133/130/i255
/i255
/146/142/147/142/148/131/149/133/142/i255/150/i255
/151/152/153/154/155/i255/153/156/157/158/159/159/157/160/i255 /i255
/161/132/141/144/138/139/138/147/142/150/i255
/151/152/153/154/155/i255/152/160/162/158/159/154/156/159/i255 /i255
/163/142/147/147/150/i255
/151/152/153/154/155/i255/156/157/156/158/152/156/157/154/i255 /i255
/164/139/132/138/147/150/i255
/139/129/130/131/132/133/132/165/139 /138/132/137/141/131/138/130/142/141/130/166/141/149/139/i255 /i255
/168/142/136/144/138/130/142/150/i255
/169/169/169/166/139/138/132/137/141/131/138/130/142/141/130/166/141/149/139/i255 /170/i255/i255/172/i255/i255/i255/173/i255/174/i255/175/i255/176/i255/177/i255/178/i255/179/i255/175/i255/178/i255/180/181/i255/i255/172/i255/182/i255/175/183/i255/i255/i255/173/i255/i255/i255/i255/184/i255/185/i255/186/i255/177/i255/187/i255/188/i255/174/i255/182/i255/177/i255/185/i255/i255/i255/i255/184/i255/188/i255/174/i255/189/i255/188/i255/174/i255/185/i255/178/i255/177/i255/188/i255/182/i255/i255 /173/i255/i255/190/i255/i255/184/i255/i255/191/i255/i255/172/i255/i255/192/i255/i255/193/i255/i255/184/i255/i255/192/i255/i255/194/i255/i255/190/i255/i255/193/i255/i255/i255/i255/195/i255/i255/196/i255/i255/173/i255/i255/197/i255/i255/197/i255/i255/172/i255/i255/197/i255/i255/198/i255/i255/i255/i255/170/i255/i255/173/i255/i255/197/i255/i255/173/i255/i255/198/i255/i255/193/i255/i255/170/i255/i255/193/i255/i255/197/i255/i255/192/i255/i255/i255/i255/199/i255/i255/193/i255/i255/200/i255/i255/172/i255/i255/198/i255/i255/197/i255 /201/i255/201/i255/201/i255/202/i255/i255/i255/203/i255/196/i255/204/i255/170/i255/195/i255/172/i255/184/i255/i255/i255/205/i255/196/i255/206/i255/199/183/i255/181/i255/i255/200/i255/194/i255/172/i255/192/i255/193/i255/i255/202/207/207/181/i255/i255/i255/208/i255/173/i255/196/i255/197/i255/194/i255/192/i255/i255/i255/184/i255/190/i255/193/i255/193/i255/209/i255/181/i255/i255/184/i255/173/i255/196/i255/172/i255/210/i255/203/i255/190/i255/197/i255/172/i255/173/i255/i255/i255/i255/211/i255/212/i255/213/i255/211/i255/213/i255/i255/i255/i255/i255/i255/i255

PARKINGNO
MM

SOUTH MAYFAIR AVENUE

PONCETTA DRIVE
1TRUCK PATH SITE PLANSD-TP
M I Architects, Inc.76 GAS STATION, CARWASH& CONVENIENCE STORE101 SOUTH MAYFAIR AVE.DALY CITY, CA 94O15NOT FORCONSTRUCTION

VICINITY MAP

PROJECT SITE

SOUTH MAYFAIR AVENUE

PONCETTA DRIVE
1DEMOLITION SITE PLANSD0
M I Architects, Inc.76 GAS STATION, CARWASH& CONVENIENCE STORE101 SOUTH MAYFAIR AVE.DALY CITY, CA 94O15NOT FORCONSTRUCTION

SD1-L

PLAN

A - EAST ELEVATION

C -SOUTH ELEVATION
M I Architects, Inc.76 GAS STATION, CARWASH& CONVENIENCE STORE101 SOUTH MAYFAIR AVE.DALY CITY, CA 94O15NOT FORCONSTRUCTION SD2
15NOT USED-
20NOT USED-
14NOT USED-
8CONVENIENCE STORE TRASH ENCLOSURE PLAN & ELEVATIONS1/4" = 1'-0" 10NOT USED- 5NOT USED-
9NOT USED-
16AREA LIGHT3/8" = 1'-0"
12BIKE RACK3/4"=1'-0"
19NOT USED-
13NOT USED-
4DOWNSPOUT TO SPLASH BLOCK1 1/2"=1'-0"
17WALL MTD. TRELLIS3/8"=1'-0" 18NOT USED-

PARKINGNO
MM

SOUTH MAYFAIR AVENUE

PONCETTA DRIVE
1 NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXTSD3
M I Architects, Inc.76 GAS STATION, CARWASH& CONVENIENCE STORE101 SOUTH MAYFAIR AVE.DALY CITY, CA 94O15NOT FORCONSTRUCTION

5' WATER ESMTPER 6902 OR 36 5' WATER ESMTPER 6902 OR 51 5' WATER ESMTPER 4654 OR 248 20' NON-EXCLUSIVE UTILITY PER 5777 OR 696AND ACCESS ESMT 4' ESMT FOR OVERHEADPER 5777 OR 696ENCROACHMENT
101 SOUTH MAYFAIR AVENUE
BENCH MARK:

SURVEY NOTES:

LEGEND

4' ESMT FOR OVERHEADENCROACHMENT PER5777 OR 696
20' NON-EXCLUSIVE UTILITYAND ACCESS ESMT PER5777 OR 696 5' GAS ESMT PER4654 OR 2485' WATER ESMTPER 6902 OR 515' WATER ESMTPER 6902 OR 36

PARKINGNO
FF=158.15
FF=158.15FF=155.15
FG=153.25FG=154.00
FG=154.00
FG=151.25
FG=150.25 MM
FG=148.75FG=150.25
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT NOTES:

Preliminary Not ForConstruction
SHEET
JOB NUMBER:Of SHEETS
SI
142021-004 DEVELOPER
3CURB OPENING
2FLOW-THROUGH PLANTER
1CHECK DAM
T:\2021\2021-004 101 S Mayfair Daly City\Dwg\Preliminary\2021-004 Preliminary Improvement Plans.dwg, 6/23/2025 4:30:11 PM

4' ESMT FOR OVERHEADENCROACHMENT PER5777 OR 696
20' NON-EXCLUSIVE UTILITYAND ACCESS ESMT PER5777 OR 696 5' GAS ESMT PER4654 OR 2485' WATER ESMTPER 6902 OR 515' WATER ESMTPER 6902 OR 36

PARKINGNO
FF=158.15
FF=158.15FF=155.15
FG=153.25FG=154.00
FG=154.00
FG=151.25
FG=150.25 MM
FG=148.75FG=150.25
Preliminary Not ForConstruction
SHEET
JOB NUMBER:Of SHEETS
SI
242021-004
WATER NOTES:

SEWER NOTES:

STORM DRAIN NOTES:

DEVELOPER
4SELF-RETAINING AREAT:\2021\2021-004 101 S Mayfair Daly City\Dwg\Preliminary\2021-004 Preliminary Improvement Plans.dwg, 6/23/2025 4:30:13 PM

4' ESMT FOR OVERHEADENCROACHMENT PER5777 OR 696
20' NON-EXCLUSIVE UTILITYAND ACCESS ESMT PER5777 OR 696 5' GAS ESMT PER4654 OR 2485' WATER ESMTPER 6902 OR 515' WATER ESMTPER 6902 OR 36

PARKINGNO
SCM 1
DMA 5A
DMA 5BDMA 4
DMA 3DMA 2
SCM 2SCM 3
SCM 4SCM 5
DMA 1
DMA 7ASCM 6SRA A
SRA B
SRA C
DMA 7B
DMA 7CDMA 8A
DMA 6ADMA 6BDMA 8B
SHEET
JOB NUMBER:Of SHEETS
SI
342021-004
IMP NAME: SCM-1IMP TYPE: FLOW-THROUGH PLANTERDMANAMEDMAAREA(SQ. FT.)1.00POST PROJECTSURFACE TYPEDMARUNOFFFACTORDMAAREA XRUNOFFFACTORTOTAL:

IMP SIZINGIMPSIZINGFACTORRAINADJUST-MENTFACTORMINIMUMAREAPROPOSEDAREA

DEVELOPER
Preliminary Not ForConstruction
DMA 12916 2916ROOF & PAVING0.041.00117118IMP NAME: SCM-2IMP TYPE: FLOW-THROUGH PLANTERSOIL TYPE:C DMA 2 1.007776DMANAMEDMAAREA(SQ. FT.)POST PROJECTSURFACE TYPEDMARUNOFFFACTORDMAAREA XRUNOFFFACTORTOTAL:

IMP SIZINGIMPSIZINGFACTORRAINADJUST-MENTFACTORMINIMUMAREAPROPOSEDAREA0.041.00311314IMP NAME: SCM-3IMP TYPE: FLOW-THROUGH PLANTERSOIL TYPE:C DMA 3 1.005625DMANAMEDMAAREA(SQ. FT.)POST PROJECTSURFACE TYPEDMARUNOFFFACTORDMAAREA XRUNOFFFACTORTOTAL:

IMP SIZINGIMPSIZINGFACTORRAINADJUST-MENTFACTORMINIMUMAREAPROPOSEDAREA0.041.00225242 2916
IMP NAME: SCM-5IMP TYPE: FLOW-THROUGH PLANTERSOIL TYPE:C DMA 5B 1.001960
DMANAMEDMAAREA(SQ. FT.)POST PROJECTSURFACE TYPEDMARUNOFFFACTORDMAAREA XRUNOFFFACTORTOTAL:

IMP SIZINGIMPSIZINGFACTORRAINADJUST-MENTFACTORMINIMUMAREAPROPOSEDAREAAC PAVING0.041.00108114 IMP NAME: SCM-4IMP TYPE: FLOW-THROUGH PLANTERSOIL TYPE:C DMA 4 1.002500DMANAMEDMAAREA(SQ. FT.)POST PROJECTSURFACE TYPEDMARUNOFFFACTORDMAAREA XRUNOFFFACTORTOTAL:

IMP SIZINGIMPSIZINGFACTORRAINADJUST-MENTFACTORMINIMUMAREAPROPOSEDAREA0.041.00100103 7776
5625
1960
2500
7776
5625
2710
2500
SOIL TYPE:C
DMA 5A 1.00750STANDARD ROOF750

ROOF & PAVING

ROOF & PAVING

ROOF & PAVING
IMP NAME: SRA A,B & CIMP TYPE: SELF-RETAINING AREASOIL TYPE:C DMA 7A 1.00272DMANAMEDMAAREA(SQ. FT.)POST PROJECTSURFACE TYPEDMARUNOFFFACTORDMAAREA XRUNOFFFACTOR TOTAL:

IMP SIZINGIMPSIZINGFACTORRAINADJUST-MENTFACTORMINIMUMAREAPROPOSEDAREA0.51.00258304516PCC WALKDMA 7BDMA 7C58PCC WALK186PCC WALK272581861.001.00 IMP NAME: SCM-6IMP TYPE: FLOW-THROUGH PLANTERSOIL TYPE:C DMA 6B 1.001817
DMANAMEDMAAREA(SQ. FT.)POST PROJECTSURFACE TYPEDMARUNOFFFACTORDMAAREA XRUNOFFFACTORTOTAL:

IMP SIZINGIMPSIZINGFACTORRAINADJUST-MENTFACTORMINIMUMAREAPROPOSEDAREAEX AC PAVING0.041.0012216518173053DMA 6A 1.001236PCC WALK & GUTTER1236 NOTE: DMA 8A & 8B's COMBINED 1707 SQ. FT. OFIMPERVIOUS AREA IS TREATED IN-LIEU BY DMA 6B.

SCM 2 DETAIL
SCM 3 DETAIL
SCM 5 DETAIL
SCM 1 DETAIL
SCM 4 DETAIL
SCM 6 DETAIL
Δ
Δ
ΔΔΔ
Δ Δ
Δ ΔΔ
Δ
FLAT ROOF:DRAINS TO SCM 5
FLAT ROOF:DRAINS TO SCM 2
FLAT ROOF:DRAINS TO SCM 3
FLAT ROOF:DRAINS TO SCM 4
FLAT ROOF:DRAINS TO SCM 1
T:\2021\2021-004 101 S Mayfair Daly City\Dwg\Preliminary\2021-004 Preliminary Improvement Plans.dwg, 6/23/2025 4:30:14 PM

4' ESMT FOR OVERHEADENCROACHMENT PER5777 OR 696
20' NON-EXCLUSIVE UTILITYAND ACCESS ESMT PER5777 OR 696 5' GAS ESMT PER4654 OR 2485' WATER ESMTPER 6902 OR 515' WATER ESMTPER 6902 OR 36

PARKINGNO
SHEET
JOB NUMBER:Of SHEETS
SI
442021-004 DEVELOPER
Preliminary Not ForConstruction

EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL LEGEND

BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES TABLE

ACTIVE TREATEMENT SYSTEMSRUN-ON AND RUN-OFF CONTROLNON-STORMWATER MANAGEMENTGOOD SITE MANAGEMENTSEDIMENT CONTROLEROSION CONTROLBMP CATEGORY T:\2021\2021-004 101 S Mayfair Daly City\Dwg\Preliminary\2021-004 Preliminary Improvement Plans.dwg, 6/23/2025 4:30:15 PM

PARKINGNO
MM
LA1
M I Architects, Inc.76 GAS STATION, CARWASH& CONVENIENCE STORE101 SOUTH MAYFAIR AVE.DALY CITY, CA 94O15

PROJECT SITE

VICINITY MAP

PLANTING LEGEND
Landscape ArchitectureUrban Design
200 Clock Tower Place
Tel 650 326 6100a s s o c i a t e [email protected] CiardellaSuite D100-ACarmel, CA 93921Tel 831 624 6100

PLANTING NOTES
1 LANDSCAPE PLAN

PARKINGNO
MM
M I Architects, Inc.76 GAS STATION, CARWASH& CONVENIENCE STORE101 SOUTH MAYFAIR AVE.DALY CITY, CA 94O15NOT FORCONSTRUCTION A1.1 1 CONVENIENCE STORE & CARWASH FLOOR PLAN

FOOD MART
M I Architects, Inc.76 GAS STATION, CARWASH& CONVENIENCE STORE101 SOUTH MAYFAIR AVE.DALY CITY, CA 94O15NOT FORCONSTRUCTION A2.1

A EAST ELEVATION (PONCETTA DRIVE)

COLOR & MATERIAL NOTES

B SOUTH ELEVATION

M I Architects, Inc.76 GAS STATION, CARWASH& CONVENIENCE STORE101 SOUTH MAYFAIR AVE.DALY CITY, CA 94O15NOT FORCONSTRUCTION A2.2

A WEST ELEVATION
B NORTH ELEVATION (S. MAYFAIR AVENUE)

12345678
M I Architects, Inc.76 GAS STATION, CARWASH& CONVENIENCE STORE101 SOUTH MAYFAIR AVE.DALY CITY, CA 94O15NOT FORCONSTRUCTION CA1

A EAST ELEVATION (PONCETTA DRIVE)

B NORTH ELEVATION

CALIFORNIA | FLORIDA | TEXAS
Corporate Office 4305 Hacienda Drive, Suite 550, Pleasanton, CA 94588 925.463.0611 www.TJKM.com

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Date: April 11, 2024
To: Ed Hadad Hadad, Inc.

CC: Muthana Ibrahim M I Architects, Inc.

From: Steven Matthew Dauterman, P.E., T.E., PTOE, RSP1 TJKM Subject: 101 S. Mayfair Avenue Redevelopment – Site Circulation Review (Daly City, California)

This memorandum presents the findings of a site circulation review conducted for a proposed redevelopment project at 101 South Mayfair Avenue in Daly City (“City”), California. This assessment was conducted to address a comment that was received from City staff on the site plan as part of the application’s initial review. The comment pertained to the circulation conditions surrounding the exit to a proposed carwash facility and two existing garage entrances to an apartment complex , located on the site’s southern property line (the apartment complex has an established non-exclusive utility and access easement agreement that extends 20 feet inside the project’s property).

The property can be identified with the following assessor’s parcel number (APN): 002-072-030. The property is currently zoned Light Commercial (C-1) and is approximately 0.51 acres. The project would involve the renovation of an existing gas station facility with a convenience store/smog check station and eight pumping positions and would clear the site to construct a new approximately 2,300 square- foot (SF) convenience store building, a new fueling canopy (maintaining eight pumping positions, similar to existing conditions), and the aforementioned roll-over carwash. Access to the site is currently provided via two driveways along Poncetta Drive and two driveways along S. Mayfair Avenue; with the redevelopment, the driveways along S. Mayfair Avenue will be consolidated. The current site plan is illustrated in Figure 1.

Site Circulation Review
The proposed carwash facility will be located on the west side of the property, behind the convenience store. Vehicles would enter the carwash near South Mayfair Avenue and would exit towards the existing apartment complex and within the existing easement. Vehicles exiting the carwash would have to turn left towards Poncetta Drive (thereby crossing the two apartment garage entrances) to exit the property.

Based on the site’s current circulation, TJKM expects that the conditions surrounding the carwash exit would not create a substantial conflict for the following reasons:

1. Vehicles exiting the carwash are expected to operate at low speeds as the car would not be in motion during the drying cycle.

101 S. Mayfair Avenue Redevelopment – Site Circulation Review (Daly City, CA) April 11, 2024
2 2. It is expected that there is adequate sight distance available between the carwash exit and the garage entrances. Based on the site plan, there are no obstructions anticipated to block the view of drivers along the access easement.

3. Once the carwash is in operation, vehicles exiting the carwash would be within other drivers’ expectations (i.e., it wou ld not be an unexpected event). This is relatively similar to existing conditions as there is a garbage bin located currently where the carwash exit will be and there is a smog check station across from the garage (meaning that safe vehicle -to-vehicle navigation/interaction already occurs within the easement).

4. The frequency of the carwash’s utilization is not expected to create a substantial amount of traffic. Based on two months’ worth of data (January and February 2024) collected by TJKM for another existing gas station with an automated carwash in San Lorenzo , California , t he proposed carwash will likely experience approximately 110 and 150 vehicles per day. a. Average hourly utilization was observed at 11-12 vehicles per hour (vph), or one vehicle every five minutes.
b. Maximum hourly utilization was observed at 19 -20 vehicles per hour (vph), or one vehicle every three minutes. It should be noted that the proposed carwash facility is expected to take approximately 4.5 minutes between a vehicle entering and exiting the carwash; the observed location used a conveyor system which allowed for a slightly faster processing time so the expected maximum hourly utilization noted above should be considered conservative.

5. The distance between the carwash and the western garage entrance would allow the queuing of one vehicle exiting the carwash to stop in the event that one or more cars are exiting the garage.

Based on the above, TJKM expects that the current circulation conditions surrounding the car wash exit on the site plan would be adequate; however, should the City require additional measures, the following may be considered:
• Install pavement markings (e.g., sharks teeth, demarcation bar, “Car Wash Exit Only”, “Exit”, or “Do Not Enter”). Please note that the feasibility of providing restrictive pavement markings may not be fully feasible due to the conditions surrounding the access easement agreement. • Install signage (“One-way”, “Do Not Enter”, “Two Way Traffic”, “STOP” or “YIELD”) near the car wash exit.

See Figure 2 as an example.

101 S. Mayfair Avenue Redevelopment – Site Circulation Review (Daly City, CA) April 11, 2024
3 Figure 1: Site Plan

Source: M I Architects, Dated April 26, 2022

101 S. Mayfair Avenue Redevelopment – Site Circulation Review (Daly City, CA) April 11, 2024
4 Figure 2: Potential Circulation Enhancements (Example)

Please note that the feasibility of providing restrictive pavement markings (illustrated above with the “DO NOT ENTER”) may not be fully feasible due to the conditions surrounding the access easement agreement.

DRAFT

Environmental Noise and Vibration Assessment
101 South Mayfair Gas Station
Car Wash Project Daly City
DECEMBER 2023

Prepared for:

HADAD ENTERPRISES INC.
700 Bernardo Avenue
Sunnyvale, California 94087
Contact: Ed Hadad

Prepared by:

1904 Franklin Street, Ste 600
Oakland, CA 94612
Contacts: Carson Wong, Jonathan Leech
_____________________________
Jonathan V. Leech, INCE.

Senior Acoustician

Printed on 30% post-consumer recycled material.

15766 i DECEMBER 2023

Table of Contents
SECTION PAGE NO.
1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Noise Analysis Study Area ...................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Project Description ................................................................................................................................. 1 2 Existing Noise Environment ................................................................................................................................. 1

2.1 Existing Ambient Noise Survey .............................................................................................................. 2

2.2 Existing Traffic Noise .............................................................................................................................. 3

2.3 Existing Aircraft Operations .................................................................................................................... 3

2.4 Existing Vibration .................................................................................................................................... 4 3 Regulatory Criteria ............................................................................................................................................... 4

3.1 Daly City General Plan ............................................................................................................................ 4

3.2 Federal Transit Authority ........................................................................................................................ 4 4 Methodology ......................................................................................................................................................... 4

4.1 Construction Noise ................................................................................................................................. 5

4.1.1 Construction Equipment Inventory .......................................................................................... 6

4.2 Construction Vibration ............................................................................................................................ 6

4.3 On-Site Operational Noise ...................................................................................................................... 7

4.4 Traffic Noise ............................................................................................................................................ 8

4.5 Project Operational Vibration ................................................................................................................. 8 5 Project Analysis .................................................................................................................................................... 8

5.1 Construction Noise Assessment ............................................................................................................ 8

5.2 Construction Vibration Assessment ...................................................................................................... 9

5.3 Long-Term Operational Noise Sources ............................................................................................... 10

5.3.1 Off-Site Roadway Traffic Noise .............................................................................................. 10

5.3.2 Gas Station, Convenience Store, and Car Wash .................................................................. 10

5.4 Long-term Operational Groundborne Noise and Vibration ............................................................... 12 6 References ........................................................................................................................................................ 12

APPENDICES
A Acoustic Fundamentals
B Noise Measurement Data
C Construction Noise Model Input and Output Data
D Manufacturer Reference Noise Level Data
E Operational Noise Model Input and Output Data

101 SOUTH MAYFAIR GAS STATION CAR WASH / ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE AND VIBRATION ASSESSMENT

15766 ii DECEMBER 2023

FIGURE(S)
Figure 1 Project Location ................................................................................................................................... 13 Figure 2 Proposed Site Plan .............................................................................................................................. 14 Figure 3 Baseline Noise Measurement Locations ........................................................................................... 15 Figure 4 Noise Prediction Receiver Locations .................................................................................................. 16 Figure 5 Recommended Masonry Wall Segment Heights and Lengths ......................................................... 17 Figure 6 Predicted Onsite Operations Noise Contours .................................................................................... 18

TABLE(S)
Table 1. Summary of Long-Term Ambient Noise Measurements ................................................................................... 2 Table 2. Summary of Short-Term Ambient Noise Measurements .................................................................................. 3 Table 3. Selected Powered Equipment Noise Emission Levels from RCNM .................................................................. 5 Table 4. Construction Equipment Per Phase ................................................................................................................... 6 Table 5: Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment ...................................................................................... 7 Table 7: Construction Vibration Levels at Closest Residence ..................................................................................... 10 Table 8. Predicted Project Stationary Operations Noise at Nearest Sensitive Receptors ......................................... 11

15766 iii DECEMBER 2023

Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronym/Abbreviation Definition
A Agriculture Zoning District
ADT Average Daily Traffic
ANSI American National Standards Institute
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
City The City of San Jose
CN Commercial Neighborhood Zoning District
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
CP Commercial Pedestrian Zoning District
dB decibel
dBA A-weighted decibel
DNL Day night noise level
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FTA Federal Transit Administration
HVAC heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
In./sec. inches per second
ISO International Organization of Standardization
Ldn day-night sound level
Leq equivalent sound level
NSLU Noise-sensitive land use
PPV peak particle velocity
PQP Public/Quasi-Public Zoning Districts
Project Tully Road 76 Station Car Wash Project
R-1-8 Residential Zoning District
SJC San Jose International Airport
TNM Traffic Noise Model

101 SOUTH MAYFAIR GAS STATION CAR WASH / ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE AND VIBRATION ASSESSMENT

15766 1 DECEMBER 2023

1 Introduction
This report reviews applicable noise standards and criteria, evaluates the existing noise environment, and describes modeling assumptions and methodologies used to predict noise impacts and effects associated with the proposed 101 South Mayfair Gas Station and Car Wash project (project). The report assesses the potential for project - generated noise levels (including construction, on -site operations, and off -site roadway traffic contributions) to result in noise impacts on nearby noise -sensitive receptors an d the compatibility of the proposed project with existing and future noise levels in the area. This report also assesses project-generated vibration levels, both from construction and operation. Appendix A provides a glossary of terminology and acoustical concepts used in this memorandum. Appendix B contains data from the ambient noise survey. Appendix C contains construction noise modeling inputs and results. Appendix D presents manufacturer reference noise level data for mechanical equipment to be employe d with the project . Appendix E presents details on the studied onsite operational noise sources considered in this assessment.

1.1 Noise Analysis Study Area
The project applicant proposes to reconstruct an existing fuel station and convenience store at the southwestern corner of Poncetta Drive and South Mayfair Avenue in Daly City, California (City). The proposed reconstruction effort includes the demolition of the existing convenience store, underground storage tanks, fuel dispensers and fueling canopy. The new facility would include a new fueling canopy, new underground storage tanks, a 2,304 square foot square foot convenience store, and a car wash with a drive-through. The site is bounded by South Mayfair Avenue to the north, Poncetta Drive to the east, and multi-family residential structures to the south and west. The project location is shown on Figure 1.

1.2 Project Description
The proposed project would serve the neighborhood by providing a convenience store, gas station with covered fueling, a car wash with a drive-through, an air/water dispenser, and a self-service vacuum station. The automated car wash structure, a feature adjoining the planned convenience store building, would be located on the western portion of the project site , encompassing approximately 971 square feet of space . The car wash tunnel and convenience store building adjoin an included indoor equipment room to house the mechanical equipment for the car wash and storage. The car wash would have a queueing capacity for approximately five (5) vehicles along the northern/eastern façade of the building, with the entrance to the car wash on the northern façade and the exit on the southern façade facing adjacent multi-family residences. The proposed project site plan is shown in Figure 2. 2 Existing Noise Environment
The proposed project is located in Daly City, California. The project site is zoned as C1 (General Commercial Zoning District) while neighboring parcels are zoned R -3 (Medium Density Residential). The dominant noise source affecting the overall area is transportation noise, primarily generated from vehicular traffic on the local roadway network. The existing ambient noise environment in the project area was quantified through noise measurement surveys of the existing area.

101 SOUTH MAYFAIR GAS STATION CAR WASH / ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE AND VIBRATION ASSESSMENT

15766 2 DECEMBER 2023

2.1 Existing Ambient Noise Survey
An ambient noise survey was performed by Dudek from December 12 to13, 2023, to document the existing noise environment in the project area. Specific consideration was given to documenting noise levels in the vicinity of nearby noise-sensitive receptors and existing transportation noise levels in the project area. Noise measurements were performed in accordance with American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and American Standards for Testing and Measurement guidelines at three (3) locations in the Project vicinity, shown on Figure 3. Long -term monitoring was performed at one location, along the South Mayfair frontage of the project site, presented as LT1; this location also had unobstructed exposure to traffic along John Daly Blvd., the primary traffic noi se contributor to ambient noise levels at the project site and adjacent properties. The long -term noise level data provides information on the daily ambient sound levels, hourly average sound levels and the diurnal patterns of sound in the project vicinity. Long -term noise monitoring results are presented in Table 1. Short-term noise monitoring was conducted at two (2) locations to provide insight into the existing ambient noise environment in the proposed project vicinity. Ambient noise level data cataloged at the short-term monitoring locations is summarized in Table 2.

Detailed monitoring data is provided in Appendix B.

The short-term measurements were conducted by an attending Dudek investigator with a SoftdB “Piccolo” model sound level meter equipped with a windscreen -protected, 0.5-inch diameter pre-polarized condenser microphone with pre-amplifier. The sound level meter meets the current ANSI standard for a Type 2 (General Use) sound level meter.

The unattended long -term SPL monitor deployed and retrieved by the Dudek investigator was also a SoftdB “Piccolo” model sound level meter equipped with a windscreen -protected, 0.5 -inch diameter pre -polarized condenser microphone with pre-amplifier.

The accuracy of each sound level meter was verified using a field calibrator before and after the measurement s, and the measurements were conducted with the microphone positioned approximately five feet above the ground.

Meteorological conditions during the monitoring periods were stable with temperature of 62 degrees ; winds were measured at 7 mph representing a moderate speed breeze . The sky was partly cloudy with no precipitation occurring during the monitoring period. The primary noise source affecting the noise monitoring locations was vehicular traffic on the local roadway network.

Table 1. Summary of Long-Term Ambient Noise Measurements Site Location Date Time

Ldn
(dBA)
Daytime Nighttime
Leq Range (dBA) Leq Range (dBA)
LT1
Attached to the hedge at
the northwest corner of
the Project site
12/12/23
to
12/13/23
4:00 PM to
4:00 PM 71 64 - 78 60 - 66
Source: Dudek performed this analysis.

Notes: dBA = A-weighted decibels; Ldn = Day Night noise level; Leq = average equivalent noise level.

Locations of noise monitoring sites are shown on Figure 3. 1- Ldn (24-hour) noise levels calculated based on the recorded hourly noise levels at measurement location LT1.

101 SOUTH MAYFAIR GAS STATION CAR WASH / ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE AND VIBRATION ASSESSMENT

15766 3 DECEMBER 2023

Table 2. Summary of Short-Term Ambient Noise Measurements Site Location Date Time

Leq Lmin Lmax L90 L50 L10

ST1
On the eastern side of
Poncetta Drive across from
the Project site
12/13/23 4:56 PM to
5:06 PM 62 54 76 56 60 65
ST2
Immediately west of the
project frontage along
South Mayfair Street.
12/13/23 5:10 PM to
5:15 PM 65 56 78 59 - -
Source: Dudek performed this analysis.

Notes: dBA = A-weighted decibels; Leq = average equivalent noise level; Lmin = minimum noise level; Lmax = maximum noise level; L90/L50/L10 = sound level exceeded 90/50/10 percent of the period.

Locations of noise monitoring sites are shown on Figure 3.

2.2 Existing Traffic Noise
Observations and cataloged noise level data collected during the ambient noise survey indicate that the noise level exposure at receptors in the area surrounding the project site is primarily attributable to vehicular traffic. The magnitude of the noise level exposure at each receptor location would be dependent on the relative distance from nearby roadways to noise measurement locations, the volume of vehicles on the roadway, and shielding provided by nearby structures.

Daily City traffic counts performed for the General Plan Update (Daly City 2020) indicate that the segments of John Daly Blvd. immediately adjacent to the project site carry approximately 1,419 vehicles during the peak hour. The long-term measurement conducted along the south edge of South Mayfair Avenue (LT1) documents an ambient noise level of 71 dBA CNEL, which is slightly above the maximum recommended limit of 70 dBA CNEL in the General Plan Noise Element. However, over the depth of the project site, tr affic noise levels should attenuate to approximately 68 dBA CNEL at the northern façade of the multi -family residential structure immediately south of the project site. This attenuation is based upon an outdoor attenuation rate of 3 dBA each time the distance from a line source (such as a roadway) to a receiver is doubled.

2.3 Existing Aircraft Operations
The project site is approximately 6.5 miles northwest of the San Francisco International Airport (SFO). The proposed project is not located within any currently adopted 60-, 65- or 70-dBA community noise equivalent level (CNEL)\Ldn airport noise contours. As such, noise associated with existing and future aircraft operations in the area is not a substantial contributor to the ambient noise environment.

101 SOUTH MAYFAIR GAS STATION CAR WASH / ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE AND VIBRATION ASSESSMENT

15766 4 DECEMBER 2023

2.4 Existing Vibration
There are no major sources of groundborne vibration in the project area. Transportation -related vibration from roadways in the vicinity of the project site is the primary source of groundborne vibration. Heavy truck traffic can generate groundborne vibrati on, which varies considerably depending on vehicle type, weight, and pavement conditions. However, groundborne vibration levels generated from vehicular traffic are not typically perceptible outside of the roadway right-of-way (Caltrans 2013).
3 Regulatory Criteria
The City has developed and adopted goals and policies with the intent of controlling and diminishing environmental noise and to protect its inhabitants from exposure to excessive noise levels. Local noise standards applicable to the proposed project are contained in the City’s General Plan Noise Element and are summarized in the following sections.

3.1 Daly City General Plan
The General Plan Noise Element establishes objectives, policies, and actions to protect its inhabitants against exposure of noise-sensitive uses to loud noise and to prevent encroachment of noise -sensitive uses on existing noise producing facilities.

The General Plan establishes an exterior noise level standard and maximum allowable noise exposure level for residential uses of no more than 70 dBA (Policy NE-2). The noise level guidelines are presented in terms of the 24- hour CNEL or DNL noise level in dBA. The intent of these guidelines is to protect noise-sensitive land uses from new project development, through the discretionary review process to reduce potential noise exposure and excessive noise within the community.

Policy NE-3 of the General Plan limits noise generation for new non -residential land uses which are adjacent to residential land uses, to 70 dBA DNL at the residential property line.

3.2 Federal Transit Authority
In its Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment guidance manual, the FTA recommends a daytime construction noise level threshold of 80 dBA L eq over an eight -hour period when detailed construction noise assessments are performed to evaluate potential impacts to community residences surrounding a project (FTA 2018). Although this FTA guidance is not a regulation, it can serve as a quantified standard in the absence of such limits at the state and local jurisdictional levels.
4 Methodology
Potential noise impacts associated with the project were calculated and analyzed based on project information presented in the project description, information contained in the project site plan provided by the applicant, information gathered from other similar projects , presentations/papers, and data obtained during on -site noise

101 SOUTH MAYFAIR GAS STATION CAR WASH / ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE AND VIBRATION ASSESSMENT

15766 5 DECEMBER 2023

monitoring. Observations made during the site survey, along with land-use information and aerial photography, was used to determine potential locations of noise-sensitive receptors in the project vicinity.

4.1 Construction Noise
One of the most extensive and widely used databases for sound levels from motorized or powered equipment is the FHWA RCNM. While the focus of data compilation was for equipment that would typically be employed for the construction of transportation facilities, the list is comprehensive enough to be useful in assessing sound levels for nearly every activity for which powered equipment is used. Table 3 provides an excerpt from RCNM of the sound levels generated by various powered equipment that could be associated with construction of the project. Note that the equipment noise levels presented in Table 3 are maximum noise levels. Usually, construction equipment operates in alternating cycles of full power and low power, producing average noise levels over time that are less than the maximum noise level. The average sound level of construction activity also depends on the amount of time that the equipment operates and the intensity of construction activities during that time.

Table 3. Selected Powered Equipment Noise Emission Levels from RCNM Equipment
Maximum Sound Level (dB A L max ) – 50 feet
from Source
Air Compressor 81
Backhoe 80
Compactor 82
Concrete Mixer 85
Crane, Mobile 83
Dozer 85
Generator 81
Grader 85
Loader 85
Paver 89
Pneumatic Tool 85
Pump 76
Roller 74
Saw 76
Scraper 89
Truck 88
Source: FHWA 2006a, 2006b.

Notes: dBA = decibel (A-weighted).

Noise emissions from the construction phase of the Project were estimated based upon default construction scenario information provided by CalEEMod for the type and size of proposed development, and included phasing, equipment mix, and vehicle trips. The construction equipment mixes used for estimating the Project-generated construction noise emissions are included in Appendix C.

A Microsoft Excel–based noise prediction model emulating and using reference data from the FHWA RCNM was used to estimate construction noise levels at the nearest and second -nearest noise -sensitive land uses (i.e., residences), based upon the distance betw een the closest project construction boundary and these residences.

101 SOUTH MAYFAIR GAS STATION CAR WASH / ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE AND VIBRATION ASSESSMENT

15766 6 DECEMBER 2023

Aggregate noise emission from project construction activities, broken down by sequential phase of construction, was predicted for the worst-case construction activity occurring along the closest construction boundary to the off- site closest residences. Dudek compared predicted construction noise levels to the recommended FTA construction noise exposure standard and to measured ambient noise levels.

4.1.1 Construction Equipment Inventory
The California Air Resources Board CalEEMod (California Emissions Evaluation Model) was used to identify the construction equipment anticipated for development of the Project, including earthwork, building construction, and paving activities. The equipment list is based upon the Project description CalEEMod (Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.1) identified the following anticipated equipment for each phase of the project construction.

Table 4. Construction Equipment Per Phase
Construction Activity Demolition
Equipment Needed Dozer Backhoe Concrete Saw Construction Activity Site Preparation
Equipment Needed Dozer Backhoe Grader Construction Activity Grading
Equipment Needed Dozer Front End Loader Grader Construction Activity Building Construction
Equipment Needed Forklift Crane Welder Backhoe Generator
Construction Activity Paving
Equipment Needed Paver Dump Truck Backhoe Roller Concrete Mixer Truck Construction Activity Architectural Coating
Equipment Needed Air Compressor

4.2 Construction Vibration
Construction activity can result in varying degrees of ground vibration at local receptors , depending on the equipment and methods used, distance to the affected structures , and soil type. Ground -borne vibration levels resulting from typical construction activities occurring within the project site were estimated by data and methods published by Caltrans (2020). Ground vibration levels associated with various types of construction equipment are summarized in Table 5 (Caltrans 2020).

101 SOUTH MAYFAIR GAS STATION CAR WASH / ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE AND VIBRATION ASSESSMENT

15766 7 DECEMBER 2023

Table 5: Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment Equipment PPV (in/sec)
at 25 feet
Small bulldozer 0.003
Loaded Trucks 0.076
Large bulldozer 0.089
Source: Caltrans 2020

Groundborne vibration attenuates rapidly, even over short distances. The attenuation of groundborne vibration as it propagates from source to receptor through intervening soils and rock strata can be estimated with expressions found in Caltrans guidance (Caltrans 2020). The following equation is used to calculate Peak Particle Velocity (PPV) at any distance of interest from the operating construction equipment.

PPVrcvr = PPVref * (25/D)^1.5
In the above equation, PPVrcvr is the predicted vibration velocity at the receiver position, PPVref is the reference value at 25 feet from the vibration source (as listed in Table 7), and D is the actual horizontal distance to the receiver.

4.3 On-Site Operational Noise
The aggregate noise emission from outdoor-exposed sound sources has been predicted with the Datakustik CadnaA sound propagation program. CadnaA is a commercially available software program for the calculation, presentation, assessment, and prediction of environmental noise based on algorithms and reference data per International Organization of Standardization (ISO) Standard 9613-2, “Attenuation of Sound During Propagation Outdoors, Part 2: General Method of Calculation” (ISO 1996). The CadnaA computer software allows one to position sources of sound emission in a simulated three-dimensional (3-D) space having heights and footprints consistent with project architectural plans and elevations. In addition to the above -mentioned sound source inputs and building -block structures that define the three -dimensional sound propagation model space, the following assumptions and parameters are included in this CadnaA-supported stationary noise source assessment:

• Ground effect acoustical absorption coefficient equal to 0.5, which intends to represent an average or blending of ground covers that are characterized largely by hard reflective pavements and existing building surfaces across the project site and the surroundings; • Reflection order of 1, which allows for a single reflection of sound paths on encountered structural surfaces such as the modeled building masses;
• Off-site residential structures and buildings have not been rendered in the model; • Calm meteorological conditions (i.e., no wind) with 68 degrees Fahrenheit and 50% relative humidity; and • All of the modeled noise sources are operating concurrently and continuously for a minimum period of 1 hour.

Noise prediction receivers were placed within the noise model, representing noise -sensitive receptors (i.e., multi- family residences), locations of key interest, and the locations of the noise monitoring sites used during the field survey. Noise prediction receivers are shown on Figure 4. Noise levels at the specified noise prediction receivers

101 SOUTH MAYFAIR GAS STATION CAR WASH / ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE AND VIBRATION ASSESSMENT

15766 8 DECEMBER 2023

are calculated as discussed above, based on the assessment methodologies and algorithms applicable to various noise sources discussed below (i.e., stationary/operational sources). In addition to computing sound levels at specific receiver locations, CadnaA was used to develop noise contours showing areas of equal and similar sound level (aka, isopleths). Noise contours generated by CadnaA are displayed in Figure 6.

4.4 Traffic Noise
Based upon the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual (2021) a carwash facility generates approximately 78 peak hour trips (39 arriving and 39 departing) . Applying this rate to the proposed project would result in an extremely conservative analysis, because most of the car wash customers are likely to have traveled to the site for gas, and then decide to remain for a carwash. Even using the conservative num ber of 78 peak hour trips, this contribution would represent less than a 5% increase in the traffic volumes on Jonh Daly Blvd. adjacent to the project site. Because a doubling of traffic would result in no more than a 3 dBA CNEL increase (which is a barely noticeable change in the ambient noise environment), a 5% increase in traffic levels would have no discernible increase in traffic noise. The project would therefore not result in discernible traffic noise increases at residential properties in the project vicinity.

4.5 Project Operational Vibration
Groundborne vibration impacts were qualitatively assessed based on existing reference documentation , through the application of Caltrans methodology outlined within the Transportation - and Construction- Induced Vibration Guidance Manual, and the relative distance to potentially sensitive receptors from a given vibration source. 5 Project Analysis

5.1 Construction Noise Assessment
With the noise sources identified in Section 4.1.1, a noise analysis was performed with a M icrosoft Excel–based noise prediction model emulating and using reference data from the FHWA RCNM. Input variables consist of the receiver / land use types, the equipment type (i.e., backhoe, crane, truck, etc.), the number of equipment pieces, the duty cycle for each piece of equipment (i.e., percentage of each hour the equipment typically works), an d the distance from the sensitive noise. Refer to Appendix C for the inputs used in the RCNM -based model, as well as results.

Noise-sensitive land uses in the vicinity of the Project include residences on properties to the southeast, south, and west of Project site. The closest off-site residences are located approximately 15 feet from the closest boundary of the proposed Project site (to the south and west); the second closest residence is located approximately 250 feet to the southeast. Therefore, the construction noise assessment is focused on noise levels that would occur at the distance of the closest off -site residence s (i.e., at 15 feet and 250 feet), construction noise levels at greater distances from the site would be less. Using the provided construction information and the distance identified for the closest receivers , the RCNM -based construction noise model was used to predict noise from on -site construction activities. The results are summarized in Table 6 (see Appendix C for complete results).

101 SOUTH MAYFAIR GAS STATION CAR WASH / ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE AND VIBRATION ASSESSMENT

15766 9 DECEMBER 2023

Table 6. Construction Noise Levels Per Phase at Closest Residences Task/Activity
Nearest Residence
(15 Feet)
Second Nearest
Residence ( 250 Feet)
L max Leq 8 -hr L max Leq 8 -hr
Demolition 94.7 90.1 77.3 71.3
Site Preparation 93.9 89.8 73.3 69.3
Grading 93.7 89.7 74.0 70.1
Building Erection 92.7 86.1 72.7 68.0
Architectural Coating 88.5 84.5 64.0 60.0
Paving 89.8 85.8 71.2 66.7
Highest Noise Level All Phases 94.7 90.1 77.3 71.3

Daly City Noise Element , program NE -2 prohibits construction that creates excess noise disturbance across a residential property line from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Given that construction noise levels at the closest residence would be up to 25 dBA greater than measured daytime noise levels at the closest residence, construction at night would be anticipated to result in a noise disturbance at this and other vicinity residences. The project would therefore be required to adhere to a daily constr uction schedule of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., in accordance with program NE-2.

With respect to the FTA recommended daytime 8-hour average of 80 dBA at vicinity residences, construction noise levels at the closest residences are predicted to reach an 8-hour average of approximately 90 dBA Leq (also referred to as 90 dBA Leq 8hr.) and would therefore exceed the FTA recommended limit. These noise levels are considered to be a peak exposure, applicable not more than 10-15% of the total construction period, only while the construction activity is taking place along the western or southern construction site boundary (i.e., closest to the nearest off-site receivers). The more typical construction noise levels experienced at the closest receivers (represented by the acoustic center for construction noise, or the distance from the center of the construction zone to the closest off - site receiver), would range from 68 to 80 dBA Leq 8hr.and would therefore remain within the FTA recommended limits (refer to Appendix C). The construction noise levels at the next nearest residential receivers (southeast of the project across Poncetta Drive), would range from 60 to 71 dBA Leq 8hr and would therefore remain comfortably below the recommended FTA limit.

With respect to 8-hour average construction noise levels at the closets residences while equipment is working along the common property boundary, noise levels could reach up to 90 dBA Leq 8hr . With typical outdoor to indoor attenuation of 25 dBA for standard construction residential structures, interior noise levels at the closest residence during construction would be a maximum of approximately 65 dBA Leq, which should not interfere with conversation or other daytime activities indoors. Therefore, construction noise levels even at the closest residences would not be considered significant temporary noise impact, especially with the prohibition against nighttime construction.

5.2 Construction Vibration Assessment
Using the vibration source level of construction equipment provided in Table 5, the distance to the closest sensitive receiver (i.e., residence), and the equation supplied in the Caltrans (2020) construction vibration assessment methodology (above), Dudek estimated the Project construction-related vibration impacts at the closest residence.

The closest residence is at a distance of approximately 15 feet north from the Project site property line and future

101 SOUTH MAYFAIR GAS STATION CAR WASH / ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE AND VIBRATION ASSESSMENT

15766 10 DECEMBER 2023

construction zone boundary. Table 7 presents the results of the construction vibration assessment for the closest residence.

Table 7: Construction Vibration Levels at Closest Residence Equipment
PPV (in/sec)
at Nearest Residence
(200 Feet)
Significance
Threhold PPV
(in/sec)
Significant ?
Small bulldozer 0.006

0.24 No
Loaded Trucks 0.16 No
Large bulldozer 0.19 No

As illustrated in Table 7, project construction-related vibration levels at the residence closest to the project would in all cases remain below significance threshold for human annoyance (0.24 PPV in/sec). The threshold for structural damage to typical residential structures is even higher (0.5 PPV in/sec). As such, project construction would have no potential to cause structural damage to the closest residences, or to result in annoyance for the occupants of such residences.

5.3 Long-Term Operational Noise Sources

5.3.1 Off-Site Roadway Traffic Noise
As discussed above under methodology, the project trip generation would represent less than a 5% increase in the traffic volumes on Jonh Daly Blvd. adjacent to the project site. Because a doubling of traffic would result in no more than a 3 dBA CNEL increase (which is a barely noticeable change in the ambient noise environment), a 5% increase in traffic levels would have no discernible increase in traffic noise. The project would therefore not result in discernible traffic noise increases at residential properties in the project vicinity.

5.3.2 Gas Station, Convenience Store, and Car Wash
The proposed project is expected to feature “stationary” producers of noise associated with onsite operations that are distinct from the transportation noise studied in the preceding section. The assumed major onsite operating noise sources are as follows:
• The 2,304 square foot convenience store would likely feature a set of packaged air -conditioners or refrigeration units on its roof, which one could assume might feature five 5-ton air-cooled condensing units that each resemble a Bryant BH16-060 (Bryant 2017) or comparable model and thus having a reference sound power level of 79.3 dBA. These rooftop HVAC units would also operate during some or all nighttime hours.
• An approximately 911 square-foot car wash. Sound sources include:
• The three car wash tunnel exit air dryers (blowers) exhibit a total of approximately 97.3 dBA sound power level.

101 SOUTH MAYFAIR GAS STATION CAR WASH / ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE AND VIBRATION ASSESSMENT

15766 11 DECEMBER 2023

• Five (5) idling vehicles queued up for the car -wash and one (1) idling vehicle at the car -wash exit.

Conservatively, a vehicle is considered idling with an overall sound power level of 85 dBA . Four (4) additional vehicles are idling in parking stalls near the proposed convenience store, with a 3 dB attenuation to account for half of the vehicles being off and empty. • Up to four (4) fuel pumps operate during the day for no more than 20 minutes in any hour (33% of the time), and each generates no more than 80 dBA sound power level. • A self-service vacuum unit, exhibiting 77 dBA sound power level.

A masonry wall segment located adjacent to the car wash tunnel structure exit and situated on the southwestern property boundary was also included in the model to assist in achieving applicable Daly City noise element limits.

The wall was modeled to have 7 feet height. Figure 5 provides a visual representation of the masonry wall location.

Table 8 compares the predicted aggregate proposed project operation noise emission levels (i.e., at the modeled receptor locations appearing in Figure 4) with the applicable Daly City noise element thresholds. It should be noted that the sound model predicts noise levels from simultaneous operation of all mechanical equipment on the site, for a continuous period over a complete hour of operation. Reported sound levels are therefore in units of hourly average Leq .The hours of operation for the carwash are proposed to be from 7 AM to 9 PM daily.

Figure 6 displays predicted hourly Leq levels from project stationary sources out to a modeled calculation boundary.

Appendix E, Operational Noise Model Input and Output Data, provides details of the calculated values appearing in Table 8.

Table 8. Predicted Project Stationary Operations Noise at Nearest Sensitive Receptors Evaluated Quantity
Modeled Nearest Noise-Sensitive Receptors
M1 M2 M3 M4
M4 W/ 7 ft
Barrier
Predicted Stationary Ops Noise Level (hourly Leq) 43 34 45 80 67.4 Predicted Stationary Ops Noise Level (CNEL) 42.5 33.5 44.5 78.5 66.9 Exceedance? No No No yes No
1 Calculated using data results in appendix D and Appendix E

In accordance with Policy NE -5 outlined in the Daly City Noise Element, the CNEL limit for residential zones must consistently remain below 70 CNEL. The CNEL value at M4 with no included walls or noise barriers would be 78.5 dBA, exceeding the established noise element limit. Nevertheless, the installation of a 7 -foot barrier along the southwest corner of the property would result in sound levels at M4 decreasing to 66.9 CNEL dBA, thereby falling below the noise element limit.

Under these conservative sound modeling conditions (such as all gas station pumps in use, four [4] convenience store parking spaces occupied by idling vehicles, the self-service vacuum and air compressor in operation, and a full queue of cars waiting to use the car -wash), no exceedances with respect to the noise element limits (i.e., no predicted noise level greater than the threshold for the analyzed land use as shown in Table 8) are expected; thus,

101 SOUTH MAYFAIR GAS STATION CAR WASH / ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE AND VIBRATION ASSESSMENT

15766 12 DECEMBER 2023

with incorporation of the recommended noise barrier wall at the carwash exit, operational noise impact from stationary sources would be less than significant.

5.4 Long-term Operational Groundborne Noise and
Vibration
The proposed project does not incorporate any project elements that would generate substantial groundborne noise and vibration levels during its long-term operation. Therefore, this potential environmental impact would be less than significant.
6 References
Caltrans (California Department of Transportation). 2013. Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. Prepared by R. Hendriks, B. Rymer, D. Buehler, and J. Andrews. Sacramento: Caltrans.

April 2020.

Caltrans. 2020a. Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, for New Highway Construction, Reconstruction Projects, and Retrofit Barrier Projects. Sacramento: Caltrans. April 2020.

Caltrans. 2020b. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. Prepared by J. Andrews, D.

Buehler, H. Gill, and W.L. Bender. Sacramento: Caltrans. April 2020.

Guyer, Paul J. An Introduction to Sound Level Data for Mechanical and Electrical Equipment. 2013. https://www.cedengineering.com/userfiles/An%20Introduction%20to%20Sound%20Level%20Data%20f or%20Mech%20&%20Elec%20Equip%20R1.pdf
DOT (U.S. Department of Transportation). 2006. FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model: User’s Guide. Final Report. FHWA -HEP-06-015. DOT -VNTSC-FHWA-06-02. Cambridge, Massachusetts: DOT, Research and Innovative Technology Administration. August 2006.

FHWA. 2008. Roadway Construction Noise Model, Software Version 1.1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Environmental Measurement and Modeling Division. December 8, 2008.

FTA (Federal Transit Administration). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. Prepared by John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center. Washington, DC: FTA. September 2018. https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/research-innovation/118131/transit-noise-and- vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no-0123_0.pdf.

Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). 2017. Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition. September 2017.

International Organization of Standardization (ISO). 1996. Standard 9613-2 (Acoustics – Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors – Part 2: General method of calculation). Geneva.

0#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF! 1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
61 62
63 64
65 66
67 68
69 70
71 72
73 74
75 76
77 78
79 80
81 82
83 84
85 86
87 88
89 90
91 92
93 94
95 96
97 98
99 100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
SOURCE:Google 2023; Dudek 2023
101 South Mayfair Gas Station Car Wash Project
FIGURE 1
0 59.5 119 Feet Project Location

0#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF! 1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
61 62
63 64
65 66
67 68
69 70
71 72
73 74
75 76
77 78
79 80
81 82
83 84
85 86
87 88
89 90
91 92
93 94
95 96
97 98
99 100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
SOURCE:MI Architects, Inc. 2023
101 South Mayfair Gas Station Car Wash Project
FIGURE 2
Site Plan

0#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF! 1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
61 62
63 64
65 66
67 68
69 70
71 72
73 74
75 76
77 78
79 80
81 82
83 84
85 86
87 88
89 90
91 92
93 94
95 96
97 98
99 100
SOURCE:Google 2023; Dudek 2023
101 South Mayfair Gas Station Car Wash Project
FIGURE 3
0 44.5 89 Feet Noise Measurement Locations
Project Site

0#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF! 1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
61 62
63 64
65 66
67 68
69 70
71 72
73 74
75 76
77 78
79 80
81 82
83 84
85 86
87 88
89 90
91 92
93 94
95 96
97 98
99 100
SOURCE:Google 2023; Dudek 2023
101 South Mayfair Gas Station Car Wash Project
FIGURE 4
0 39.5 79 Feet Noise Prediction Receiver Locations
Project SiteM1M2
M3
M4Project Site

0#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF!#REF! 1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
61 62
63 64
65 66
67 68
69 70
71 72
73 74
75 76
77 78
79 80
81 82
83 84
85 86
87 88
89 90
91 92
93 94
SOURCE: Google 2023; Dudek 2023 FIGURE 5
101 South Mayfair Gas Station Car Wash Project
0 21 42 Feet Recommended Masonry Wall Segment Heights and Lengths Convenience Store BuildingFuel Pump Canopy Structure
Car Wash Tunnel Structure7ft Masonry Wall Segment

01442884325767208641008115212961440158417281872201621602304244825922736288030243168331234563600374438884032417643204464460847524896504051845328547256165760590460486192633664806624676869127056720073447488763277767920806482088352849686408784892890729216936095049648979299361008010224103681051210656108001094411088112321137611520116641180811952120961224012384125281267212816129601310413248133921353613680138241396814112142561440014544146881483214976151201526415408155521569615840159841612816272164161656016704168481699217136172801742417568177121785618000181441828818432185761872018864190081915219296194401958419728198722001620160203042044820592207362088021024211682131221456216002174421888220322217622320224642260822752228962304023184233282347223616237602390424048241922433624480246242476824912250562520025344254882563225776259202606426208263522649626640267842692827072272162736027504 1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
61 62
63 64
65 66
67 68
69 70
71 72
73 74
75 76
77 78
79 80
81 82
83 84
85 86
87 88
89 90
91 92
93 94
95 96
97 98
99 100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
142
143
144
SOURCE:Dudek 2022 FIGURE 6
101 South Mayfair Gas Station Car Wash Project
Predicted Onsite Operations Noise Contours0 59.5 119 Feet Sound pressure level (dBA) countours
Idle CarGas Pump CanopyVaccumParked CarMulti-FamilyResidentialMulti-FamilyResidentialM1M2M3M4Food Mart BuildingCar Wash

Appendix A
Acoustic Fundamentals

ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE AND VIBRATION ASSESSMENT

Appendix A – Acoustic Fundamentals

FUNDAMENTALS OF SOUND
Vibrations, traveling as waves through air from a source, exert a force perceived by the human ear as sound. Sound pressure level (SPL, referred to as sound level) is measured on a logarithmic scale in decibels (dB) that represent the fluctuation of air pressure above and below atmospheric pressure. Frequency, or pitch, is a physical characteristic of sound and is expressed in units of cycles per second or hertz (Hz). The normal frequency range of hearing for most people extends from about 20 to 20,000 Hz. The human ear is more sensitive to middle and high frequencies, especially when the noise levels are quieter. As noise levels get louder, the human ear starts to hear the frequency spectrum more evenly. To accommodate for this phenomenon, a weighting system to evaluate how loud a noise level is to a human was developed. The frequency weighting called “A” weighting is typically used for quieter noise levels which de-emphasizes the low frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the response of a human ear. This A-weighted sound level is called the “noise level” and is referenced in units of dBA.

Since sound is measured on a logarithmic scale, a doubling of sound energy results in a 3 dBA increase in the noise level. Changes in a community noise level of less than 3 dBA are not typically noticed by the human ear. Changes from 3 to 5 dBA may be noticed by some individuals who are extremely sensitive to changes in noise. A 5 dBA increase is readily noticeable . The human ear perceives a 10 dBA increase in sound level as a doubling of the sound level (e.g., 65 dBA sounds twice as loud as 55 dBA to a human ear).

An individual’s noise exposure occurs over a period of time; however, noise level is a measure of noise at a given instant in time. Community noise sources vary continuously, being the product of many noise sources at various distances, all of which constitute a relatively stable background or ambient noise environment. The background, or ambient, noise level gradually changes throughout a typical day, corresponding to distant noise sources, such as traffic volume, as well as changes in atmospheric conditions Noise levels are generally higher during the daytime and early evening hours when traffic (including airplanes), commercial, and industrial activity is the greatest. However, noise sources experienced during nighttime hours when background levels are generally lower can be potentially more conspicuous and irritating to the receiver. In order to evaluate noise in a way that considers periodic fluctuations experienced throughout the day and night, a concept termed “community noise equivalent level” (CNEL) was developed, wherein noise measurements are weighted, added, and averaged over a 24-hour period to reflect magnitude, duration, frequency, and time of occurrence. A complete definition of CNEL and other terminology used to describe noise is provided in the following list.

Ambient Noise Level The composite of noise from all sources near and far. The normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location.

A-Weighted Sound Level (dBA) The sound pressure level (SPL) in decibels as measured on a sound level meter (SLM) using the A -weighted filter network, which de - emphasizes the very low and very high frequency components of the measured sound in a manner similar to the frequency response of the average healthy human ear.

Background Sound Level The amalgam of sounds from indistinct and/or distant sources (e.g., roadway traffic, residential HVAC systems, etc.) that are not nearby or are otherwise the focus of study.

Decibel (dB) The unit for expressing SPL and is equal to 10 times the logarithm (to the base 10) of the ratio of the measured sound pressure squared to a reference pressure, which is 20 micropascals.

Equivalent Sound Level (Leq[xh]) The value corresponding to a steady-state sound level containing the same total energy as a time -varying signal over a given sample period. The L eq may feature notation in its subscript indicating the 101 SOUTH MAYFAIR CAR WASH
15766
DECEMBER 2023

ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE AND VIBRATION ASSESSMENT

time period (e.g., eight hours as “8h” to populat e “[Xh]”) of energy averaging.

Octave Band Center Frequency (OBCF) Commonly discussed octave frequency bands are: 31.5 Hz, 63 Hz, 125 Hz, 250 Hz, 500 Hz, 1 kHz, 2 kHz, 4 kHz, 8 kHz and 16 kHz.

Each of these “center frequencies” represents an octave band defined by a lower band limit equal to 0.707 times the center frequency, and an upper band limit equal to 1.414 times the center frequency.

Sound Transmission Loss (TL) The amount of sound, in decibels (dB), that is isolated by a material or partition in a particular OBCF or 1/3-OBCF. Example: 1/2″ drywall has a TL at 125 Hz of 15 dB.

Sound Transmission Class (STC) A single-number rating that can be used to conveniently compare, acoustical isolation properties of different materials or assemblies.

Generally, higher numbers indicate a material will provide more sound insulation when used as a barrier. Plotted against standardized STC curves, with established curve -fit tolerances, the TL of a material (in dB) at 500 Hz serves as the STC rating.

Statistical Sound Level (LXX) A sound level exceed for a cumulative XX percentage of time within a defined measurement period. The L50 (“L-fifty”) value is thus often called the “median” sound level; and the L90 (“L -ninety”) value is a dB level exceed 90% of the measurement period and hence typically used to evaluate specific continuous or steady-state sound sources, or describe the background sound level (see above definition).

EXTERIOR NOISE DISTANCE ATTENUATION
Noise sources are typically classified in two forms: (1) point sources, such as stationary equipment or a group of construction vehicles and equipment working within a spatially limited area at a given time, and (2) line sources, such as a roadway with a large number of pass-by sources (motor vehicles). Sound generated by a point source typically diminishes (attenuates) at a rate of 6.0 dBA for each doubling of distance from the source to the receptor at acoustically “hard” sites and at a rate of 7.5 dBA for each doubling of distance from source to receptor at acoustically “soft” sites. Sound generated by a line source (i.e., a roadway) typically attenuates at a rate of 3 dBA and

4.5 dBA per doubling distance, for hard and soft sites, respectively. Sound levels can also be attenuated by man- made or natural barriers. For the purpose of sound attenuation discussion, a “hard” or reflective site does not provide any excess ground-effect attenuation and is characteristic of asphalt or concrete ground surfaces, as well as very hard-packed soils. An acoustically “soft” or absorptive site is characteristic of unpaved loose soil or vegetated ground.

FUNDAMENTALS OF VIBRATION
Vibration is an oscillatory motion that can be described in terms of displacement, velocity, or acceleration. The response of humans to vibration is very complex. However, it is generally accepted that human response is best approximated by the vibration velocity level associated with the vibration occurrence.

When evaluating human response, ground-borne vibration is usually expressed in terms of root mean square (RMS) vibration velocity. RMS is defined as the average of the squared amplitude of the vibration signal. As for sound, it is common to express vibration amplitudes in terms of decibels defined as: Lv = 20*LOG(vrms/vref) where vrms is the RMS vibration velocity amplitude in inches/second and vref is the decibel reference of 1x10-6 inches/second (0.000001 ips).
15766
101 SOUTH MAYFAIR CAR WASH DECEMBER 2023

Appendix B
Noise Measurement Data

Ambient Noise Survey Short-Term Measurement Logs
Number Start Date Start Time End Time
SPL Time
Weight
Freq
Weight Leq Lmax Lmin L10 L50 L90 L95
Location ST1
29 12/13/2023 4:56:00 PM5:06:00 PMSlow dBA 62.1 76.0 53.9 65.1 60.0 56.3 55.4 Number Start Date Start Time End Time
SPL Time
Weight
Freq
Weight LAeq LAmax LAmin LApk L50 L90 L95
Location ST2
30 10/5/2022 5:10:00 PM5:15:00 PMSlow dBA 64.9 78.1 56.0 67.2 64.2 59.0 58.1

DUDEK 101 South Mayfair Street Noise Assessment

24 Hour Ambient Noise Measurement Data Location LT1
Start Date Start Time End Time
SPL Time
Weight
Freq
Weight Leq Lmax Lmin L10 L50 L90 L95
12/12/20234:00:02 PM 5:00:00 PMSlow dBA 67.3 89.8 53.5 67.9 64.1 58.2 57.3 12/12/20235:00:02 PM 6:00:00 PMSlow dBA 64.5 83.5 53.0 66.8 63.2 57.6 56.6 12/12/20236:00:02 PM 7:00:00 PMSlow dBA 64.7 81.9 53.3 67.1 63.4 57.9 56.8 12/12/20237:00:02 PM 8:00:00 PMSlow dBA 63.8 76.6 52.1 66.6 62.4 56.6 55.5 12/12/20238:00:02 PM 9:00:00 PMSlow dBA 64.1 86.5 52.0 66.3 62.6 57.0 55.9 12/12/20239:00:02 PM 10:00:00 PMSlow dBA 64.2 82.7 51.1 66.3 61.5 56.3 55.2 12/12/202310:00:02 PM11:00:00 PMSlow dBA 62.8 86.3 49.7 65.3 60.2 54.7 53.4 12/12/202311:00:02 PM12:00:00 AMSlow dBA 61.7 81.5 48.4 64.4 58.7 52.6 51.3 12/13/202312:00:02 AM1:00:00 AMSlow dBA 59.4 73.4 44.2 63.0 56.4 49.0 47.7 12/13/20231:00:02 AM2:00:00 AMSlow dBA 57.5 75.2 42.8 61.3 53.2 46.5 45.3 12/13/20232:00:02 AM3:00:00 AMSlow dBA 56.3 70.7 41.8 60.4 52.3 44.0 43.0 12/13/20233:00:02 AM4:00:00 AMSlow dBA 57.0 75.9 41.7 60.5 51.3 44.7 43.9 12/13/20234:00:02 AM5:00:00 AMSlow dBA 59.8 75.8 47.1 63.4 56.2 50.1 49.0 12/13/20235:00:02 AM6:00:00 AMSlow dBA 63.3 82.4 51.5 66.2 60.4 55.4 54.2 12/13/20236:00:02 AM7:00:00 AMSlow dBA 65.9 83.9 56.2 68.3 64.1 61.1 60.1 12/13/20237:00:02 AM8:00:00 AMSlow dBA 66.6 81.9 56.1 69.2 64.9 60.8 59.8 12/13/20238:00:02 AM9:00:00 AMSlow dBA 68.7 94.5 57.2 69.7 65.4 60.7 60.0 12/13/20239:00:02 AM10:00:00 AMSlow dBA 66.0 84.5 55.7 68.4 64.0 58.9 58.1 12/13/202310:00:02 AM11:00:00 AMSlow dBA 64.5 81.6 54.6 67.4 62.9 58.1 57.4 12/13/202311:00:02 AM12:00:00 PMSlow dBA 66.5 88.2 54.3 68.4 63.9 58.6 57.6 12/13/202312:00:02 PM1:00:00 PMSlow dBA 66.9 92.2 54.5 67.4 63.4 58.2 57.4 12/13/20231:00:02 PM 2:00:00 PMSlow dBA 66.0 90.1 54.5 67.5 63.5 58.9 58.2 12/13/20232:00:02 PM 3:00:00 PMSlow dBA 65.7 87.9 52.6 67.2 63.7 57.8 56.7 12/13/20233:00:02 PM 4:00:00 PMSlow dBA 66.5 92.3 52.9 67.4 63.6 57.4 56.5 Daytime Hourly Leq Range (7 AM - 10 PM): 64 - 78 dBA
Nighttime Hourly Leq Range (10 PM - 7 AM): 60 - 66 dBA
Ldn 71 dBA
DUDEK 101 South Mayfair Street Noise Assessment

Appendix C
Construction Noise Model Input and Output Data

101 South Mayfair 76 Noise Study Appendix C -- Construction Noise Prediciton Model Worksheets 80 Averaging Period (in hours): 8
Construction Activity Equipment Total
Equipment Qty
AUF % (from

FHWA RCNM)
Reference Lmax
@ 50 ft. from

FHWA RCNM
Lmax @ 50 ft. for quantify of equipmentSource to NSR
Distance (ft.)
Distance-
Adjusted Lmax
Allowable
Operation Time
(hours)
Allowable
Operation Time
(minutes)
Predicted 8-
hour Leq
Demolition dozer 1 40 82 82.0 15 92.5 8 480 88
backhoe 3 40 78 82.8 35 85.9 8 480 82
concrete saw 1 20 90 90.0 55 89.2 8 480 82
Total Lmax for phase: 94.7 Total Leq 8hr for phase: 90.1 Site Preparation dozer 1 40 82 82.0 15 92.5 8 480 88
grader 1 40 85 85.0 35 88.1 8 480 84
backhoe 1 40 78 78.0 55 77.2 8 480 73
Total Lmax for phase: 93.9 Total Leq 8hr for phase: 89.9 Grading dozer 1 40 82 82.0 15 92.5 8 480 88
front end loader 2 40 79 82.0 35 85.1 8 480 81
grader 1 40 85 85.0 55 84.2 8 480 80
Total Lmax for phase: 93.7 Total Leq 8hr for phase: 89.7 Building Erection crane 1 16 81 81.0 15 91.5 8 480 83
gradall 1 40 83 83.0 35 86.1 8 480 82
generator 1 50 72 72.0 55 71.2 8 480 68
backhoe 1 40 78 78.0 75 74.5 8 480 70
welder / torch 3 40 73 77.8 95 72.2 8 480 68
Total Lmax for phase: 92.7 Total Leq 8hr for phase: 86.1 Architectural Coating compressor (air) 1 40 78 78.0 15 88.5 8 480 84 Total Lmax for phase: 88.5 84.5
Paving backhoe 1 40 78 78.0 15 88.5 8 480 84
concrete mixer truck 1 40 79 79.0 35 82.1 8 480 78
Paver 1 50 77 77.0 55 76.2 8 480 73
Roller 1 20 80 80.0 75 76.5 8 480 69
Dump Truck 1 40 76 76.0 95 70.4 8 480 66
Total Lmax for phase: 89.8 Total Leq 8hr for phase: 85.8 Noise level limit for construction phase at residential land use, per FTA guidance = RCNM-emulator-with-barrier_gas_station_with_carwash Dudek Project No. 15766 M1 to nearest

101 South Mayfair 76 Noise Study Appendix C -- Construction Noise Prediciton Model Worksheets 80 Averaging Period (in hours): 8
Construction Activity Equipment Total
Equipment Qty
AUF % (from

FHWA RCNM)
Reference Lmax
@ 50 ft. from

FHWA RCNM
Lmax @ 50 ft. for quantify of equipmentSource to NSR
Distance (ft.)
Distance-
Adjusted Lmax
Allowable
Operation Time
(hours)
Allowable
Operation Time
(minutes)
Predicted 8-
hour Leq
Demolition dozer 1 40 82 82.0 95 76.4 1 480 72
backhoe 3 40 78 82.8 95 77.2 1 480 73
concrete saw 1 20 90 90.0 95 84.4 1 480 77
Total Lmax for phase: 85.7 Total Leq 8hr for phase: 79.7 Site Preparation dozer 1 40 82 82.0 95 76.4 1 480 72
grader 1 40 85 85.0 95 79.4 1 480 75
backhoe 1 40 78 78.0 95 72.4 1 480 68
Total Lmax for phase: 81.7 Total Leq 8hr for phase: 77.8 Grading dozer 1 40 82 82.0 95 76.4 1 480 72
front end loader 2 40 79 82.0 95 76.4 1 480 72
grader 1 40 85 85.0 95 79.4 1 480 75
Total Lmax for phase: 82.4 Total Leq 8hr for phase: 78.5 Building Erection crane 1 16 81 81.0 95 75.4 1 480 67
gradall 1 40 83 83.0 95 77.4 1 480 73
generator 1 50 72 72.0 95 66.4 1 480 63
backhoe 1 40 78 78.0 95 72.4 1 480 68
welder / torch 3 40 73 77.8 95 72.2 1 480 68
Total Lmax for phase: 81.1 Total Leq 8hr for phase: 76.4 Architectural Coating compressor (air) 1 40 78 78.0 95 72.4 1 480 68 Total Lmax for phase: 72.4 68.4
Paving backhoe 1 40 78 78.0 95 72.4 1 480 68
concrete mixer truck 1 40 79 79.0 95 73.4 1 480 69
Paver 1 50 77 77.0 95 71.4 1 480 68
Roller 1 20 80 80.0 95 74.4 1 480 67
Dump Truck 1 40 76 76.0 95 70.4 1 480 66
Total Lmax for phase: 79.6 Total Leq 8hr for phase: 75.1 Noise level limit for construction phase at residential land use, per FTA guidance = RCNM-emulator-with-barrier_gas_station_with_carwash Dudek Project No. 15766 M1 to typical

101 South Mayfair 76 Noise Study Appendix C -- Construction Noise Prediciton Model Worksheets 80 Averaging Period (in hours): 8
Construction Activity Equipment Total
Equipment Qty
AUF % (from

FHWA RCNM)
Reference Lmax
@ 50 ft. from

FHWA RCNM
Lmax @ 50 ft. for quantify of equipmentSource to NSR
Distance (ft.)
Distance-
Adjusted Lmax
Allowable
Operation Time
(hours)
Allowable
Operation Time
(minutes)
Predicted 8-
hour Leq
Demolition dozer 1 40 82 82.0 300 66.4 1 480 62
backhoe 3 40 78 82.8 300 67.2 1 480 63
concrete saw 1 20 90 90.0 300 74.4 1 480 67
Total Lmax for phase: 75.7 Total Leq 8hr for phase: 69.7 Site Preparation dozer 1 40 82 82.0 300 66.4 1 480 62
grader 1 40 85 85.0 300 69.4 1 480 65
backhoe 1 40 78 78.0 300 62.4 1 480 58
Total Lmax for phase: 71.7 Total Leq 8hr for phase: 67.8 Grading dozer 1 40 82 82.0 300 66.4 1 480 62
front end loader 2 40 79 82.0 300 66.4 1 480 62
grader 1 40 85 85.0 300 69.4 1 480 65
Total Lmax for phase: 72.5 Total Leq 8hr for phase: 68.5 Building Erection crane 1 16 81 81.0 300 65.4 1 480 57
gradall 1 40 83 83.0 300 67.4 1 480 63
generator 1 50 72 72.0 300 56.4 1 480 53
backhoe 1 40 78 78.0 300 62.4 1 480 58
welder / torch 3 40 73 77.8 300 62.2 1 480 58
Total Lmax for phase: 71.1 Total Leq 8hr for phase: 66.4 Architectural Coating compressor (air) 1 40 78 78.0 300 62.4 1 480 58 Total Lmax for phase: 62.4 58.5
Paving backhoe 1 40 78 78.0 300 62.4 1 480 58
concrete mixer truck 1 40 79 79.0 300 63.4 1 480 59
Paver 1 50 77 77.0 300 61.4 1 480 58
Roller 1 20 80 80.0 300 64.4 1 480 57
Dump Truck 1 40 76 76.0 300 60.4 1 480 56
Total Lmax for phase: 69.7 Total Leq 8hr for phase: 65.2 Noise level limit for construction phase at residential land use, per FTA guidance = RCNM-emulator-with-barrier_gas_station_with_carwash Dudek Project No. 15766 M2 to typical

101 South Mayfair 76 Noise Study Appendix C -- Construction Noise Prediciton Model Worksheets 80 Averaging Period (in hours): 8
Construction Activity Equipment Total
Equipment Qty
AUF % (from

FHWA RCNM)
Reference Lmax
@ 50 ft. from

FHWA RCNM
Lmax @ 50 ft. for quantify of equipmentSource to NSR
Distance (ft.)
Distance-
Adjusted Lmax
Allowable
Operation Time
(hours)
Allowable
Operation Time
(minutes)
Predicted 8-
hour Leq
Demolition dozer 1 40 82 82.0 250 68.0 1 480 64
backhoe 3 40 78 82.8 250 68.8 1 480 65
concrete saw 1 20 90 90.0 250 76.0 1 480 69
Total Lmax for phase: 77.3 Total Leq 8hr for phase: 71.3 Site Preparation dozer 1 40 82 82.0 250 68.0 1 480 64
grader 1 40 85 85.0 250 71.0 1 480 67
backhoe 1 40 78 78.0 250 64.0 1 480 60
Total Lmax for phase: 73.3 Total Leq 8hr for phase: 69.3 Grading dozer 1 40 82 82.0 250 68.0 1 480 64
front end loader 2 40 79 82.0 250 68.0 1 480 64
grader 1 40 85 85.0 250 71.0 1 480 67
Total Lmax for phase: 74.0 Total Leq 8hr for phase: 70.1 Building Erection crane 1 16 81 81.0 250 67.0 1 480 59
gradall 1 40 83 83.0 250 69.0 1 480 65
generator 1 50 72 72.0 250 58.0 1 480 55
backhoe 1 40 78 78.0 250 64.0 1 480 60
welder / torch 3 40 73 77.8 250 63.8 1 480 60
Total Lmax for phase: 72.7 Total Leq 8hr for phase: 68.0 Architectural Coating compressor (air) 1 40 78 78.0 250 64.0 1 480 60 Total Lmax for phase: 64.0 60.0
Paving backhoe 1 40 78 78.0 250 64.0 1 480 60
concrete mixer truck 1 40 79 79.0 250 65.0 1 480 61
Paver 1 50 77 77.0 250 63.0 1 480 60
Roller 1 20 80 80.0 250 66.0 1 480 59
Dump Truck 1 40 76 76.0 250 62.0 1 480 58
Total Lmax for phase: 71.2 Total Leq 8hr for phase: 66.7 Noise level limit for construction phase at residential land use, per FTA guidance = RCNM-emulator-with-barrier_gas_station_with_carwash Dudek Project No. 15766 M2 to nearest

Appendix D
Manufacturer Reference Noise Level Data

*

Appendix F
JE Adams Vacuum Reference Noise Level Data
2 Motor Vac - Small Dome
Wide Open With
Attachment
Distance From Vac in Feet
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
Sound Level (dB) 76.4 70.4 66.9 64.4 62.4 60.9 59.5 58.4 57.3 56.4 55.6 54.8 54 1 53.5 52.9 Sealed
Attachment
Distance From Vac in Feet
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
Sound Level (dB) 80.5 74.5 71.0 68.5 66.5 64.9 63.6 62.4 61 4 60.5 59 7 58.9 58.2 57.6 57.0 Attachment
Removed
Distance From Vac in Feet
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
Sound Level (dB) 74.5 68.5 65.0 62.5 60.6 59.0 57.6 56.5 55.4 54.5 53.7 52.9 52.3 51.6 51.0 «1#B O L L A R D
Acoustical Consultants

Appendix E
Operational Noise Model Input and Output Data

Appendix E - CadnaA Sound Propagation Model Input Worksheets 31 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000
PWL
(dBA) Notes & Data Source
-39 -26 -16 -9 -3 0 1 1 -1 A-weighting adjustments (dB) Carwash Tunnel Interior Sources
Dryer blower assembly (3 blowers on one "arch") 57 76 81 84 99 90 90 85 78 100 Sonny's Enterprises (Blower Assembly, One Arch, 45 HP) 10 MD Acoustics - McHolland Retail Noise Impact Study - City of Hemet 10/27/2017 10 Total dryer blower noise level 57 76 81 84 99 90 90 85 78 100 ft3
room volume, without absorption 14256 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 Table 6.2, EEI EPPENG lb/ft2 Table 6.3, EEI EPPENG
5 8 14 18 22 27 30 33 35 38 Table 6.3, EEI EPPENG
10 14 18 22 26 30 33 36 40 45 Table 6.3, EEI EPPENG
20 20 24 28 30 33 36 39 43 48 Table 6.3, EEI EPPENG
35 24 28 31 33 36 39 42 47 52 Table 6.3, EEI EPPENG
50 28 32 34 36 39 42 45 51 56 Table 6.3, EEI EPPENG
80 31 35 37 39 42 45 48 54 59 Table 6.3, EEI EPPENG
building wall transmission loss (TL) 50 28 32 34 36 39 42 45 51 56 Table 6.3, EEI EPPENG building roof transmission loss (TL) 20 20 24 28 30 33 36 39 43 48 Table 6.3, EEI EPPENG additional data: paint on 8" concrete block (51 lb/ft2) TL 37 46 46 54 59 60 Harris (Noise Control in Buildings, Appx 5.2c) building long wall TL (greater of Harris sample or EPPENG) 28 32 37 46 46 54 59 60 56 building short wall TL (opening, no TL) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Façade Sound Emission Levels ft2
Car Wash Tunnel
long wall area 792 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 Table 6.4, EEI EPPENG long wall sound power (dBA) 35 50 50 44 59 42 37 31 28 Eq. 6.1, EEI EPPENG exit open end area (from W and H of port, not wall) 100 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Table 6.4, EEI EPPENG "L" is distance from blower to exit port exit port sound power (dBA) 54 73 78 81 96 87 87 82 75 Eq. 6.1, EEI EPPENG roof area 1188 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 Table 6.4, EEI EPPENG roof sound power (dBA) 45 60 61 62 74 62 59 50 38 Eq. 6.1, EEI EPPENG 12 transmission loss (TL) of structural element (w/out penetrations) 1866
HWL
HWL
10103.28
A-weighted Octave Band Center Frequencies (OBCF, Hz)
building dimensions (ft)
L W H
carwash-facade-sourcesDudek Project No. 15766Appendix_E_Cadna_model_inputs 101 S Mayfair carwash Noise Study

Sum 63Hz 125Hz 250Hz 500Hz 1kHz 2kHz 4kHz 8kHz
dB 94.57587 92.74756 86.65056 83.18156 80.78355 80.55055 77.35056 72.57956 69.65855 dB(A) 85.01097 66.54756 70.55056 74.58156 77.58356 80.55055 78.55055 73.57956 68.55856 idling_carDudek Project No. 15766Appendix_E_Cadna_model_inputs Car, no-load/ ground run
Original title:"Pkw, Standlauf"
A-weighted sound power level, related to a continuous work Source type: point
Height of emission: 0,5 m
Reference spectrum: traffic noise
Particularly it is pointed out that the emission data do not include adjustment values for special noise characteristics in accordance with OENORM S 5004 like impulsiveness and tonality.
*************************
Source:
forum SCHALL, Emissionsdatenkatalog, August 2016
Last updated 23-10-2017
101 S Mayfair Carwash Noise Study Appendix E - CadnaA Sound Propagation Model Input Worksheets