CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Community Outreach
65 ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 1:
PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS ON THE PASSIVE PLAY DESIGN (PARK CONCEPT #1).
E.G. LIKES, DISLIKES, POSITIVES, NEGATIVES, IDEAS, NEEDS BEING MET, MISSING ELEMENTS.
WRITE-IN RESPONSES [CONTINUED]
Community center and baseball field
a nice mix. i like the picnic areas near the tennis/pickleball courts. please be more clear on tennis/pickleball. dedicated courts to each sport is wildly preferred! your picture shows shared courts which require portable nets for pickleball. the rec center is a nice amemity. i think there are more basketball players out there and a basketball court would be a good add.
A bit concerned about the dog park being so close to the parking area. May be unsafe if a pooch gets off the leash and makes a dash for it.
Best location for dog park - big and small need separate play areas.
As an avid tennis player I strongly dislike the idea of multi use court design combining tennis and pickle ball.
Located too far from Fairfield/ Suisun city limits for families with children to travel for a playground. improve local neighborhood playgrounds first.
Pueden poner un plan para que adolescentes puedan ir a ayudar, pueden poner baños,máquinas de comida Me gustaría que uvieran una aria donde los adultos oh niños puedan hacer ejercicio. (Table A.38) Round 2 Survey Question 1 Responses (cont.)
66 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX B
ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 2:
WHAT ARE YOUR THREE FAVORITE ELEMENTS INCLUDED IN THE PASSIVE PLAY DESIGN (PARK CONCEPT #1)? PICK YOUR TOP THREE (3) CHOICES.
ANSWERED: 177 | SKIPPED: 15
ANSWER OPTIONS ENGLISH SPANISH TOTAL
Playgrounds 80 1 81
Picnic Areas 68 1 69
Soccer Fields 24 1 25
Tennis/Pickleball Courts 49 0 49
Parking 22 0 22
Splash Pad 79 1 80
Dog Park 60 1 61
Recreation Center 55 1 56
Open Space, Nature Trail Networks 80 0 80
Other (please specify) 8 0 8
TOTAL 525 6 531
WRITE-IN RESPONSES FOR ‘OTHER’
Love idea of dog park just not close to main road &
exits.
Just Tennis, no Pickle Ball
We need 5 tennis courts to play league games. It is
hard to tell how many courts will be there. I hope you
will put in five so tournaments and matches can be
held there. Fairfield has no place with enough courts to easily accommodate match play. Thank you.
Restrooms
I like it included the tennis courts.
Tennis courts
Baseball field
dedicated pickleball courts please!
(Table A.39) Round 2 Survey Question 2 Responses
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Community Outreach
67 (Figure A.35) Round 2 Survey Question 2 Responses
68 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX B
ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 3:
PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS ON THE GAME ON DESIGN (PARK CONCEPT #2).
E.G. LIKES, DISLIKES, POSITIVES, NEGATIVES, IDEAS, NEEDS BEING MET, MISSING ELEMENTS.
ANSWERED: 99 | SKIPPED: 93
WRITE-IN RESPONSES
I don't think you have enough parking for that many soccer fields. The Octo Inn Soccer area doesn't have this many playing fields and their large parking lot spills over into the surrounding neighborhoods. I feel certain that there would be no available parking for other users during soccer season with this concept. The picnic tables between the basketball and pickleball courts would get little use.
Love the spread out three play grounds and splash pad, no pickle ball counts in the area so that would be fun Like but too many game areas takes away from others
would be a park for athletes only not everyone; missing something for disabled; see "other" the splash pad next to the playground is a good idea , more tennis and pickleball courts would be nice Not enough trees. Dubious popularity on the Pickleball and Futsal courts. I've never even heard of either activity before reading this survey. Too many sports fields.
Love the Futsal courts addition! Futsal and Soccer is what the people of this community have been looking for! No trees is bad No baseball or basketball courts please Negative: Too many fields...cut in half. Need more picnic & seating areas like concept #1. Again play area & dog park too close to busy road & exit. Honestly we do not need this many fields, soccer? Really..basketball, sure.
Who's making these concepts...do you have kids, dogs or play sports in this area? We parents want to sit in the shade to watch our kids & dogs play as well as watch the sports, but FF does not have a big sports venue. I've been in FF over 50 years...
Again splash pad...drought!!! Even if recycled...
I like park concept 2 ✔️
Much needed! Love it!
i like the playground, picnic areas, open space, splash pad and dog park. I would like to see separate areas for small and large dogs. I think there are 2 many game areas. I would rather not have the pickle ball, futsal courts.
Standard park set up. Not crazy about a dog park...causes issues for those that don't follow the guidelines. not enough open space, nature networks
this is a great concept and targets most needs that people need/want. what would be great inside the recreation center is an area for yoga or other related zen type exercise Like the concept of having all types of fields available. but with this I believe you may need more Parking as you may have more people come for different events. not sure dog park falls into this layout could remove that and extend the parking to allow further spaces. Again, having tournaments and charging for parking is what every multi-sport complex does and that revenue goes back to the city and or what ever organization is running the tournament.
Looks like it will get hot and windy. A boring design to me unless you want to engage in a team sport activity . Not ideal for multiple interests.
No basketball courts they attract nuisance and just end up vandalized or trashed! No Dog Park, dog owners habitually fail to pick up after their animals and unleased/aggressive dogs just increase likelihood of a child or adult getting attacked and then a lawsuit (please avoid putting in a dog park!!!) Open Space/Nature Neworks are wonderful but again attract homeless so unless the no camping ordinance is enforced and regular police patrols or park rangers are deployed, then don't bother with this concept.
Could be one less baseball field (Lambrecht Sports complex and surrounding parks have multiple baseball fields), one less soccer field and expand the open/nature area. Like the parking design with this setup. (Table A.40) Round 2 Survey Question 3 Responses
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Community Outreach
69 ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 3:
PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS ON THE GAME ON DESIGN (PARK CONCEPT #2).
E.G. LIKES, DISLIKES, POSITIVES, NEGATIVES, IDEAS, NEEDS BEING MET, MISSING ELEMENTS.
WRITE-IN RESPONSES [CONTINUED]
Baseball fields might help alleviate high demand for places to play but otherwise it could be wasted space Heavy usage since recreation or sports facilities are in demand I like the addition of baseball and basketball.
I like that the splash pad and parks are closer together in this design. This makes sense.
It would be nice to have more picnic areas for this concept.
Too much sports stuff not enough open space. Still not as cool as option 3. Concept 2 is my least favorite.
Positives: includes baseball fields
Please include restrooms
This is the only feasible possibility for league or tournament use for tennis and separately pickle ball. The dual purpose approach in options 1 and 3 use obviate decent games in either sport. please do not make this critical mistake!!! Therefore, now that there are only 3 tennis Courts at Allen Witt CP, please have a minimum of 6 tennis courts with 16 to preferably 24 feet (regulation) between sidelines for competitive play. If you need more professional input, contact me at [email protected] former ExDir-National Tennis Ass’n, Grass Roots Hero-USTA- USOC Volunteer Coach of the Year-2003
Too much soccer space. Not enough open space. Lots of different athletic opportunities.
Lots of different athletic opportunities.
Wondering what the 3 separate playgrounds will entail? Will it be by age ? I like this concept as well.
I feel like this park gives more diversity as far as activities.
Again why so many soccer fields and is there a demand for more baseball fields? this looks like a ball park and not really a family with younger children fun park.
I like where the recreation center is located, it has easy access and parking. I dont like that the playgrounds are so far appart, I think they shoud be central. They are also separated by the parking lot which can cause kids to run across to get to another park. Dog park too close to the road (Vanden) as well as the slpash pad and one of the playgrounds. I dont like the segragation of the park, it make it harder to keep an eye on kids of different age groups. I think there should be picnic areas and restrooms in the open space area.
Not what I’m looking for in a park. Feels too developed. not enough playgrounds.
This does not look like a park I would want to visit, unless it was to watch my nephews play a sports event here or something. There are definitely strengths to this design, and it would meet some people’s needs, but I would rather go to a different park as I feel this would be too loud and crowded for me to be able to relax or go for a walk in nature
Not as much soccer fields and more tennis courts.
Seems good! I like that there is a variety of play areas.
Good variety of activities.
I dont like the idea of a baseball field right next to a play structure. Needs trees Same as above...too much soccer, not enough tennis and dog park needs to be split between small and large.
Like the first concept better
(Table A.41) Round 2 Survey Question 3 Responses (cont.)
70 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX B
ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 3:
PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS ON THE GAME ON DESIGN (PARK CONCEPT #2).
E.G. LIKES, DISLIKES, POSITIVES, NEGATIVES, IDEAS, NEEDS BEING MET, MISSING ELEMENTS.
WRITE-IN RESPONSES [CONTINUED]
It appears very crowded.
All the different sports areas are great! But there should be more tennis/pickleball space. No need for a lot of soccer space if there is a futsal space, and no need for futsal if there is such a huge soccer space. The recreation center is very exciting. Please put an adventure playground into concept #2 if chosen.
Dislike lack of open space, too many soccer fields
This is my least favorite design because the open space area seems to be minimal and there are too many sports fields/courts.
I'd prefer more open space.
I like having tennis courts.
Again nice layout with a little broader use. I do think futsal is not necessary as it is usually played in the winter and typically indoors.
This layout is much better with the pickle ball being separate from the tennis as well as lots of other activities available!
I like the parking surround the park
Large dog park with separation for large and small dogs. Also, water spigots and shaded areas for dog owners to sit. Plant drought resistant trees with irrigation to keep them alive during the summer heat. 3 playgrounds aren’t needed b/c overtime the playgrounds get old & there is no area to maintain the playgrounds. An example is Allen Witt Park. They use to have 3 playgrounds now they only have 1 playground. A splash pad isn’t needed b/c there is one downtown & Fairfield gets cold in the fall & winter.
I like it separate the tennis courts and pickleball courts. I like the parking lot designs which can easy to reach all area. And, 4-5 soccer courts are good enough in a park, please release one soccer field to build more tennis courts and pickleball courts , it is two sports ,please separate to two area, not share the same court. thanks.
This concept seems fun and inviting to more varieties of people.
The sport courts/fields are also a need. However, this component emphasizes the need for programming, which has cost considerations long-term.
I don't like the idea of separating the kids area from the other activities. Doesn't seem safe to keep an eye o the kids on the other side of a parking lot. kids area should be next to the rest of the areas.
I like this design. It includes more community sports. I like the separation of pickleball and tennis courts, but I am hoping that there are at least two - three tennis courts? It would be nice if the community can sponsor some USTA tennis leagues for the area. You could blend the pickleball lines and the tennis court lines to provide more multiuse of this area.
NOT ENOUGH PICNIC AREAS! Too many sport fields. Remove pickle ball & baseball. We have enough baseball fields in the area.
Is there a need for more baseball fields in this part of town? It's not far from a large baseball field complex in Vacaville. This design has my favorite parking layout. I feel 3 playgrounds are excessive. I don't even know what fustal is.
I think having multi-use fields suitable for a variety of sports is preferable to having so many dedicated sports fields as they take away from other recreation opportunities that have broader appeal to a greater variety of ages/genders/etc.
Nice size dog park and baseball fields, but too much emphasis on soccer. Balance with more tennis and pickleball courts.
(Table A.42) Round 2 Survey Question 3 Responses (cont.)
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Community Outreach
71 ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 3:
PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS ON THE GAME ON DESIGN (PARK CONCEPT #2).
E.G. LIKES, DISLIKES, POSITIVES, NEGATIVES, IDEAS, NEEDS BEING MET, MISSING ELEMENTS.
WRITE-IN RESPONSES [CONTINUED]
Put playgrounds closer together for families with multiple age kids, or families would have to walk from one playground to the other for their kids to each play.
Playgrounds are far apart. If you have multiple children varying in age, they wont want to play at the same playground. If they are closer together it is easier to migrate to the next one versus walking across the entire park. I like that the splash pad is next to one of the playgrounds.
Love that the restrooms are right next to one of the playgrounds. Love that there are multiple playgrounds and a splash pad
Love this concept and expands to more sports options.
Coming from someone who uses parks more for picnicking/ relaxing rather than sports, this concept lacks the abundance of large areas of open space. While I do think this plan would serve the community that is heavily involved in sports, it may not serve other park goers as well. Unless this park had regular programs that introduced people to different sports, that would be cool! I like the design but it would be nice to have more than one tennis court.
Don't know what a Futsal Court is.
This has great variety but feels cold. There are no groves of trees, no nature to enjoy even though it is in the middle of a natural area. Wind seems like it will be an issue making sports balls get blown around and affect play/ game results. I like the variety of playing fields and play structures spread across the length of the park, not just confined to one area.
I like the fact the playgrounds are near the picnic sites so parents can keep an eye on their kids.
Love the inclusion of multiple sports. Concern would be parking availability if multiple sports had games simultaneously.
Don’t want baseball fields or basketball courts
Dislike: Looks like smaller space for Tennis/pickleball, aka less courts. Nott sure if tennis and pickeball are sharing same courts? If sharing same court please make sure pickleball lines are not overly bright. Makes it very difficult to call lines effectively when playing tennis. Blue court/white lines for tennis with pickleball lines black are ideal.
Also dislike a lot less nature space.
Take away two soccer fields and build more tennis courts! I love the dog park
Likes: Variety or activities
Too much focus on sports fields. If none of it is being used it's just there empty. And if it's there being empty and not used it should be a bigger open space nature/trials.
Concept #2 has a good balance of court sports. I don't like the location of the picnic area sandwiched between basketball and tennis/pickleball. If there is a way to squeeze in a pump track it would bring in the adolescents that don't participate in popular team sports.
Looks good! Like it but maybe needs a couple small shade areas it's missing the natural peaceful feel, its too busy, makes me feel hot looking at it, like there will be no shade or trees.
I like the expanded areas
Need to separate the tennis and pickellball courts
My least favorite of the three. I do like the addition of Pickleball/Futsal courts, at least that something a little different. Still, this would not be my first choice by far. (Table A.43) Round 2 Survey Question 3 Responses (cont.)
72 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX B
ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 3:
PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS ON THE GAME ON DESIGN (PARK CONCEPT #2).
E.G. LIKES, DISLIKES, POSITIVES, NEGATIVES, IDEAS, NEEDS BEING MET, MISSING ELEMENTS.
WRITE-IN RESPONSES [CONTINUED]
I like this concept the best but again, now dog park is close to playfields and with careless owners, they might let them run loose in the playfield and tearing up the lawn or using the playfield as a restroom Like i
Love the soccer fields, tennis court, splash pad, and rec center with open space. Do not like dog park I like it
Like that there's a lot of fields to meet demand, don't like that parking separates portions of the park, don't know if splash pad is necessary due to drought and climate change Baseball or softball field
I think its too big on the sports areas
fewer soccer, substitute the futsal for a soccer field or two. more room for pickleball. like the picnic area near pickleball but it looks like too few pickleball courts. like that they are dedicated to pickleball and tennis and not combined.
I would prefer the playgrounds to be further from sports areas....some people get really competitive and language can be colorful.
Dog park is to close to the sports fields. It should be by itself as much as possible or closer to open space/ nature networks.
Not enough picnic areas
Like stand alone tennis courts. Would be nice to have four courts allowing USTA league play.
Baseball and soccer fields will need to much maintenance.
Me gustaría que tuviera un poco más de espacio en los juegos de agua Aspecto positivo
(Table A.44) Round 2 Survey Question 3 Responses (cont.)
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Community Outreach
73 ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 4:
WHAT ARE YOUR THREE FAVORITE ELEMENTS INCLUDED IN THE GAME ON DESIGN (PARK CONCEPT #2)? PICK YOUR TOP THREE (3) CHOICES.
ANSWERED: 175 | SKIPPED: 17
ANSWER OPTIONS ENGLISH SPANISH TOTAL
Playgrounds 63 2 65
Picnic Areas 48 1 49
Soccer Fields 28 1 29
Tennis Courts 42 0 42
Pickleball Courts 16 0 16
Futsal Court 16 1 17
Basketball Courts 33 0 33
Baseball Fields 26 0 26
Parking 17 0 17
Splash Pad 69 1 70
Dog Park 50 0 50
Recreation Center 46 0 46
Open Space, Nature Trail Networks 52 0 52
Other (please specify) 8 0 8
TOTAL 514 6 520
WRITE-IN RESPONSES FOR ‘OTHER’
disabled, developmentally disabled specific game-on
courts / spaces and organized teams, and time slots
love idea of dog park & play area just not close to main road & exits
Important!!! Comment above. Please don’t ignore this
info!!!!
Restrooms
separated the tennis courts and pickleball courts.
Incorporate skate park and then pump park if room.
Restrooms
None
(Table A.45) Round 2 Survey Question 4 Responses
74 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX B
(Figure A.36) Round 2 Survey Question 4 Responses
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Community Outreach
75 ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 5
PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS ON THE ORGANIC PLAY DESIGN (PARK CONCEPT #3). E.G. LIKES, DISLIKES, POSITIVES, NEGATIVES, IDEAS, NEEDS BEING MET, MISSING ELEMENTS.
ANSWERED: 101 | SKIPPED: 91
WRITE-IN RESPONSES
I like most of the features in this concept, except the amphitheater. I strongly believe that it would get little (if any) actual use. It sounds great in concept, but I have seen no demand for an amphitheater. I think the skate park should be an above-ground type like the one at Cordelia Community Park and definitely not like the one at Allan Witt. If it turns into a vandalism magnet it could be converted to another use more easily if it wasn't dug out into bowls. I think there could be a better location for the basketball courts, such as the northwest corner just above the soccer & pickleball courts. The picnic tables sandwiched between the basketball courts and the amphitheater/skate park will be unused by families. If they were adjacent to the playground they would be used by families watching their children at play. I don't see a restroom building on the plan (unless that's part of the recreation center). With so many recreation options there needs to be adequate restroom facilities.
My absolute favorite selection, the closest pump track is napa do this would be a great addition to solano county, also a skate park and adventure playground are so needed here! Best Of the three has enough of each needs.
needs a community garden maybe?
10/10 for the adventure playground, amphitheater and skate park. Again, would be nice to have more of a mix of sport courts
Lots of trees, very good. Look to "City Park" in Winters for a well-executed "adventure playground". It draws all sorts of visitors from out of town. Needs a baseball field or 2.
Missing the Futsal.
No basketball courts or skate park or pump track
Having open space for outdoor activities id healthy for families there is a need to provide an alternative to video gaming and lap top time
Forget the amphitheater..not used enough ever when I have seen them. Skate park & pump track is is cool BUT dangerous...ready to 911 calls & motorized vehicles to try & drive on these places?? NO soccer field, swap with baseball & or basketball or tennis. Splash pad no again. More shade & seating for spectating.
I like concept 2✔️
i like this concept most of all. 'm not a fan of the pump track, but the rest is really good Love love love the Skate park idea! Also like the pump track! Love this plan. Minus a dog park as they are not so safe for dogs at times. Skate park, pump track and adventure playground...yes!!
The amphitheater is a great idea. What would be amazing is to utilize this area like Creekwalk in Vacaville. We do not have anything like this in Fairfield. The one concern I have that is a big issue for our city, is areas getting tagged by various gangs. whatever surface types are used, it would be beneficial to have a coating that makes it easy for spray paint to be removed.
I see this layout of Adventure playground and Pump Track might be all fun at first as it is new but in time things will get old and the up keep for these areas will be more of a cost to the city and use will end up declining. going with a route of useful layouts would be more efficient.
Fresh ideas- this park has many things that Fairfield is lacking- it would interest multiple age groups and past times.
(Table A.46) Round 2 Survey Question 5 Responses
76 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX B
ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 5:
PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS ON THE ORGANIC PLAY DESIGN (PARK CONCEPT #3). E.G. LIKES, DISLIKES, POSITIVES, NEGATIVES, IDEAS, NEEDS BEING MET, MISSING ELEMENTS.
WRITE-IN RESPONSES [CONTINUED]
No basketball courts and no skate park they attract nuisance and just end up vandalized or trashed! No Dog Park, dog owners habitually fail to pick up after their animals and unleased/aggressive dogs just increase likelihood of a child or adult getting attacked and then a lawsuit (please avoid putting in a dog park!!!) Open Space/Nature Neworks are wonderful but again attract homeless so unless the no camping ordinance is enforced and regular police patrols or park rangers are deployed, then don't bother with this concept.
Like how user-friendly this is, and plenty of parking
Alternative sports are represented--a good thing
More of a mixed use space, not just a park but it actually has activities and challenges. Will there be any inclusive play equipment?
This is an amazing park! With the adventure playground, pump track, skate park and the usual sports, this is your best option.
Rec Center, Adventure Playground & Amphitheater are options not found in other Fairfield parks & would attract visitors from Fairfield as well as Travis AFB. Anyway to incorporate a walking track around the perimeter? Also, a LOT of active play will happen here, so can there be plenty of shaded seating areas & a water bottle filling station for rest breaks? A theme like California wilderness similar to the aspects included in the California Experience at the Oakland Zoo would be amazing for small children to become more familiar with the animals & habitats of native California through educational points along with addicting a swinging “bridge”, oversized flowers/leaf structures, something that produces animal/bird sounds really brings the adventure to life. At the Rex center, offering classes like rock climbing, indoor skydiving, or BMX (mountain biking) aid the adventure theme to make this park a novelty in the area of California.
Positives: adventure playground, amphitheater, skate park, pump track Love that this is something new for Fairfield with the amphitheater and another skate park. My favorite design so far. Great idea for the adventure playground
Like it
love the adventure playground I think kids need more organic places to play and learn This one is more modern it’s I like it
I love the idea of the adventure playground and amphitheater. Just not sure about the pump track and skate park. Not sure what kinds of crowds it will attract
This park is the most unique and provides lots of opportunities for kids to play, move and exercise. It also supports the arts. My concern is attracting people who just want to hang out and trash the park. This is however my favorite choice. Another concern is anything available for disabled individuals.
I like how this concept includes new and unique things that aren't already in the city and has a heavier focus on nature.
I really appreciate the addition of so many trees and nature. The parking looks well situated to everything the park has offered
I really like the layout of this park. The one thing i would change is the location of the receation center and the dog park. I think the recreation center should be closer to the main road and entrance and i think the dog park should be closer to the playground so that people can watch their children in the park while they have their dog in the dog park. I like that everything is more central than the other park concepts, it makes it easier for families with differ age children to be able to let them play freely in their desired area of the park and still be able to keep an eye on them all from one location. I like that there are options for all age groups to enjoy. I think there should at least me a restroom closer to the the pump track and open space area. I like that the parking lot doesnt cut through the park and goes around it. I like the multiple park entries to cut down on drive through traffic. (Table A.47) Round 2 Survey Question 5 Responses (cont.)
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Community Outreach
77 ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 5:
PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS ON THE ORGANIC PLAY DESIGN (PARK CONCEPT #3). E.G. LIKES, DISLIKES, POSITIVES, NEGATIVES, IDEAS, NEEDS BEING MET, MISSING ELEMENTS.
WRITE-IN RESPONSES [CONTINUED]
Yesssssss! This one for the win. Please include shade near/over the playground! i
I like this idea. It meets a lot of needs for both kids and adults. Having an amphitheater seems like a good investment in building a space for local events like concerts, movies in the park, etc. I like the idea of an “adventure playground,” although I’m not quite sure what it would entail. It seems like something my nephews would enjoy. I think there’s a good balance between sports areas for adults, sports areas for kids/teens, and open spaces or picnic areas. The distribution feels more organic, and I like how the parking lot in the middle provides easy access to multiple activity areas. I wish I could tell on these diagrams where bathrooms are, because I think that’s a really important part of making parks accessible for everyone (and the inclusion of gender inclusive and family bathrooms is also important). I like the splash pad again. I think this is my favorite design.
This my favorite. It has more variety compared to the other 2.
Not as much soccer fields and more tennis courts.
This one is the best! I love the adventure playground! My kids will love this.
Why so many soccer fields? Bike rack? Pump track is fabulous! Like the adventure park and skate park.
Ampitheater looks like it could be a great draw.
Organic play looks great if the play structure has areas where children of all abilities can play. I also think the splash pad could be bigger as most splash areas are pretty small at parks that include them. The one thing I don’t like is the skate park.
Like this the best! But still, too many soccer fields and not enough tennis. Split dog park into small and large.
Like the skate, bike and amphitheater additions
I like how activities are separated. Noise and disruption is a factor if some activities are next to each other (i.e. dog park and tennis, picnic and soccer, etc.)
There is not enough pickleball/tennis space. The most exciting aspects are the adventure playground (nothing like that here in Fairfield) and the recreation center. The pump track, the dog park, and most especially the amphitheater are unnecessary. Not very many people will be able to enjoy the pump park compared to the skate park. The amphitheater most certainly will hardly ever be put to good use, and it's a waste of space.
Like parking goes into the park. More accessible to different areas of the park.
Like the open space, amphitheater. Love the adventure playground and bike pump track.
This is my favorite design because there is lots of open space and a wide variety of activities. I think this design will attract the most people with varying interests. The amphitheater and pump track are great additions.
I like the adventure playground. Would prefer more tennis.
I like having tennis courts.
Splash pad is probably not a good idea as we try to conserve water. I also think the skate park and pump track should be reduced to one or the other.
I like this design as well, but preferred to have the tennis court separate from pickleball I like where the open space are scattered
Plant a lot of trees, water them, maintain them.
(Table A.48) Round 2 Survey Question 5 Responses (cont.)
78 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX B
ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 5:
PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS ON THE ORGANIC PLAY DESIGN (PARK CONCEPT #3). E.G. LIKES, DISLIKES, POSITIVES, NEGATIVES, IDEAS, NEEDS BEING MET, MISSING ELEMENTS.
WRITE-IN RESPONSES [CONTINUED]
The amphitheater looks out of place. I don’t understand the purpose of the amphitheater b/c I don’t know if it will be reserved or just place to sit & talk. A running track could be in place there of the amphitheater even if it’s sand like the wood creek park. I like the bike track b/c it provides a safe place for ppl to ride bicycles safely. Make the bicycle pump track bigger. Not sure what the blue line by the open space is. Is the blue line a river. Maybe like one lake you could add paddle boarding or find a way to keep it clean weekly & surround it with plants. dislike it just have few tennis courts and pickleball courts need to share the area, it is not enough to serve the Fairfield residents needed. please convert one soccer field to build/ make the more tennis courts & pickleball courts and separate it to have their own area.
Not sure why the basketball courts are separated from the rest of the athletic fields; could be moved over to near the tennis court?
Im loving the more organic theme, but does seem like there is more maintenance involved in this concept especially with the pump track, which is pretty neat!
Again, a large, best in class playground component is a huge positive. The amphitheater would be a nice addition as well for community events.
I like this layout the best. Seems safest, you can play tennis while kids are on the playground and you are able to safely keep an eye on them from a small distance.
I like the addition of the skate park and the pump track. Could these be incorporated into the #2 design in lieu of some of the soccer fields?
Too many soccer fields. Not enough basketball areas. Redo the design on the playground-it is ugly. Make sure there is plenty of seating.
Loving the extra open space, nature network. Adventure Playground is the best playground. A second skate park would be great, if it's more like the one at Allan Witt and less like the one at Gary Falati park. This emulated the open space from Concept 1 that I liked. A pump track in town is AWESOME, especially across town from Rockville. The amphitheater and parking look like it's better for concerts and food truck festivals, both of which I enjoy.
I love the organic nature of the overall concept - it's my favorite of the three concepts. This concept feels the most unique and seems like it would be a recreation destination, particularly the pump track, skate park, and adventure playground. However, I think there are too few tennis/pickleball courts relative to the number of soccer fields.
This is by far my favorite design option. I think Matt Garcia's park should be an example of innovation. With the adventure park and pump track I think this design has that. However as I said before indoor basketball facilities should be included in the rec center.
Nice playground and open spaces, but too much emphasis on soccer. There are no baseball fields and only a very small area for tennis and pickleball courts.
This one is my favorite. My only dislike is the proximity of the splash pad to the park. Kids play on both. When they get cold they go to the playground, when they get hot they go back to splash pad. They need to be next to each other.
I like having the amphitheatre
Like the idea of an adventure playground but wish there could also be a traditional plus structure for the smaller children who can’t yet manage the adventure course. I like the bathrooms right next to the adventure course and like the splash pad
I love the amphitheater and adventure Playground. The amphitheater can host a bevy of community events that include festivals where food trucks and small businesses can participate more. (Table A.49) Round 2 Survey Question 5 Responses (cont.)
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Community Outreach
79 ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 5:
PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS ON THE ORGANIC PLAY DESIGN (PARK CONCEPT #3). E.G. LIKES, DISLIKES, POSITIVES, NEGATIVES, IDEAS, NEEDS BEING MET, MISSING ELEMENTS.
WRITE-IN RESPONSES [CONTINUED]
This one is great!! I love the variety of use without taking away from the sports fields-- especially the skate park, adventure playground, and amphitheater! I think this plan provides a wide variety of amenities for most populations. I love that there are sports fields and skate parks, etc while also having open space for those who want a slower paced park experience. I would love to see this one more fleshed out. Definitely my favorite! Please do not design pickle ball courts on same courts as tennis. (Is don’t draw pickle ball courts on the tennis courts. They are 2 separate sports and need separate areas.
I think that the skate park and amphitheater are an invitation for them to get tagged.
I love this one the most! I really like the mix of hard and play surfaces mixed with natural sections that could act as wind breaks and meditative areas to join nature. There are fun elements (adventure park, pump track, skate park) that most other parks and neighborhoods don't have. This would be a park I would drive the 20 minutes from my house to. We could spend the day working our way playing at the different elements. We are not active participants in organized sports so we would not visit the fields and so this park still provides us fun and excitement. Parents who have a child playing on a field will have great nearby options to keep their other children occupied and playing. So many people already have bicycles so the pump track would be accessible for most. There are no adventure playgrounds in the area we know of, my son would be over the moon to see it here. He could play on it all day. So much more fun that all the same feeling park play grounds we have at each regular neighborhood park. This is a special place and providing a fun and special experience with all these wonderful play areas would be awesome!!
Again, I like the fact the playgrounds are near the picnic sites so parents can keep an eye on their kids. I've never heard of a Pump Track.
Love the adventure park and amphitheater.
Live that tennis and pickball have separate courts, however not sure how many courts will fit into allotted space.
Kids will love the adventure playground and I love the open space/nature trail section.
More tennis courts please!!
I love the adventure playground and dog park
This sounds like wonderful plan for this neighborhood. There is nothing remotely close to it and the kids could really use something like this. My favorite plan.
Likes: Unique activities
It feels too busy, trying to do it all. In trying to do it all it might make all of the amenities feel small and cramped.
There can't be enough parking for all of these activities.
I like the pump track but you might want to separate the dog park and the track. Many dogs are reactive to quick moving objects and/or loud noises and the placement could contribute to chaos at the dog park. Add more restrooms to the “corners” of the park. Move the splash pad closer to the play areas.
Lose the amphitheater and skate park. Skate parks attract vandalism and amphitheater will get little use. Move the basketball courts away from the playground/picnic area, maybe to the current skate park area and push the picnic area to the current basketball court area so families can keep an eye on their children. Basketball courts attract young adults and teens, rather than small children. Add an additional tennis/pickleball court. The pump track is a great idea that should appeal to adolescents and teens.
I think young kids prefer a more structured playground area I really like the adventure playground concept. However, I would move the skate park to where the pump track is, get rid of the pump track, and put a regular playground with more picnic benches and trees where the skate park is now.
(Table A.50) Round 2 Survey Question 5 Responses (cont.)
80 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX B
ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 5:
PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS ON THE ORGANIC PLAY DESIGN (PARK CONCEPT #3). E.G. LIKES, DISLIKES, POSITIVES, NEGATIVES, IDEAS, NEEDS BEING MET, MISSING ELEMENTS.
WRITE-IN RESPONSES [CONTINUED]
Separate tennis and pickellball courts
I LOVE that this design includes a skate park and pump track. There are parks all over the city that offer the "normal" sports fields, but not many (or none at all in the case of a pump track) that have these options. The addition of the Adventure Playground and Amphitheater also rank high with me. Overall, I feel this design offers something for everyone vs the others that cater to the field/court sports crowd.
Dislike this concept
Like it
Like the soccer fields, splash pad, rec center, and open space. Do not like dog park, amphitheater Looks good
Love the adventure playground and pump track ideas (we don't have this in other parks in Fairfield), don't like that parking is in the middle of the park as it should be out of the way, don't know if splash pad is necessary due to drought and climate change
Dislike the amphitheater
i think i like this one the best but again too much soccer. subsitute pickleball and tennis dedicated courts instead of one of the soccer fields. that is a ton of real estate dedicated to just one sport. i like the skate park and pump track as long as the emt's are close by to tend to all the broken body parts.
So many options. This is pretty cool.
Too much going on here. Doesn't sound peaceful at all.
I like the idea of the adventure playground. I think the pump track is unnecessary. This layout could use more picnic area.
As an avid tennis players strongly dislike the idea of multi use design for tennis and pickle ball courts.
Best Concept! Diverse park features. Great attractions for all ages. Vanden road would need to be improved with bicycle lanes.
El parque de patinaje estaría un poco más grande
Sastisfacen
(Table A.51) Round 2 Survey Question 5 Responses (cont.)
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Community Outreach
81 ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 6:
WHAT ARE YOUR THREE FAVORITE ELEMENTS INCLUDED IN THE ORGANIC PLAY DESIGN (PARK CONCEPT #3)? PICK YOUR TOP THREE (3) CHOICES.
ANSWERED: 183 | SKIPPED: 9
ANSWER OPTIONS ENGLISH SPANISH TOTAL
Adventure Playground 120 1 121
Amphitheater 70 1 71
Skate Park 31 1 32
Pump Track 72 1 73
Picnic Areas 26 1 27
Soccer Fields 14 1 15
Tennis/Pickleball Courts 35 0 35
Basketball Courts 11 0 11
Parking 15 0 15
Splash Pad 46 0 46
Dog Park 35 0 35
Recreation Center 36 0 36
Open Space, Nature Trail Networks 53 0 53
Other (please specify) 9 0 9
TOTAL 573 6 579
WRITE-IN RESPONSES FOR ‘OTHER’
Community gardens
“Play”/Fitness areas for ages 12-17 that are too old for playground equipment but still need a place to burn
energy without intimidating younger children on the
playground
Restrooms
I love the soccer field, splash pad area as well.
I don't care for this concept at all.
it have tennis courts and pickleball courts on the
design.
OUTDOOR ALL PURPOSE ROLLERSKATE/HOCKEY
TRACK
Baseball field
walking / cycling lane around perimeter
(Table A.52) Round 2 Survey Question 6 Responses
82 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX B
(Figure A.37) Round 2 Survey Question 6 Responses
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Community Outreach
83 ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 7:
BASED ON THE THREE CONCEPTS PRESENTED, WHICH IS YOUR PREFERRED PARK CONCEPT FOR THE FUTURE MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK? CLICK AN IMAGE BELOW TO SELECT YOUR CHOICE. RESPONSE REQUIRED.
ANSWERED: 192 | SKIPPED: 0
ANSWER OPTIONS ENGLISH SPANISH TOTAL
Passive Play (Park Concept #1) 27 0 27
Game On (Park Concept #2) 36 0 36
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) 127 2 129
TOTAL 190 2 192
(Table A.53) Round 2 Survey Question 7 Responses
(Figure A.38) Round 2 Survey Question 7 Responses
84 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX B
ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 8:
PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS ABOUT WHY YOU CHOSE YOUR PREFERRED PARK CONCEPT. E.G. LIKES, DISLIKES, POSITIVES, NEGATIVES, IDEAS, NEEDS BEING MET, MISSING ELEMENTS.
ANSWERED: 183 | SKIPPED: 9
PREFERRED CONCEPT REASON FOR CHOICE, WRITE-IN RESPONSE
Passive Play (Park Concept #1) Enough picnic areas and a centrally located dig park. Not too many sports fields.
Passive Play (Park Concept #1) Please keep it simple. Too much going on with the other concepts.
Keep dog park away from other busy activities.
Passive Play (Park Concept #1) I just want a park that is kid friendly and a place families can go and have fun
Passive Play (Park Concept #1)
6 soccer fields are nice and if we need the dog park, it is nice to have the dog park surrounded by parking lot and road. Worried about injuries and influx of rowdy teenagers with skatepark and pump track. Don't think the amphitheater would be utilized much.
Passive Play (Park Concept #1)
Passive play concept from only the pictures of the layout feels like each activity is alloted a balanced amount of space for each other. The other 2 concept either heavily focuses on one activity or is trying to do all activities where I feel like there isn't enough space for all of that.
Passive Play (Park Concept #1)
More family friendly Have concerns about the other designs basketball courts and baseball fields not being the best use of space. No skate or bike parks as they present safety hazards and may promote loitering Passive Play (Park Concept #1) Although this is a bit heavy on the soccer fields, I think this is the most versatile of the three plans.
Passive Play (Park Concept #1)
Fairfield has too many unused baseball/softball fields, for that reason #2 should be eliminated. #3 is a little too busy trying to fit too much in, I like Concept # 1 for the simplicity and the open area to be whatever. (Perhaps Frisbee golf?)
Passive Play (Park Concept #1) I like the open space and the variety of activites.
Passive Play (Park Concept #1)
Some sports should be kept separately. Basketball and tennis are polar opposite personality sports. Skating and dog park are elements for injuries and clashes.
Passive Play (Park Concept #1)
I chose it because it has the most nature which people are missing in stressful every day lives. I think it would benefit from adventure playgrounds.
Passive Play (Park Concept #1)
I like Concept #1 & #3 a combo of both. But again, we do not need as many sport fields. Gotta look at SAFETY of dogs & kids & think of bad people stealing kids & dogs with ease of in & out access so close to these areas. Also need shade areas & seating for the spectators. Like the skate & pump track just not sure if it would be SAFE & also bad people driving up on those tracks with their own cars & motorbikes. Also really consider the ROAD it next to! FAST driving cars...unless you are planning to set the entire park back from the road a safe distance, it's not safe... your plans did not show the distance from the road. That's why I said putting the dog park & play area was a bad idea being too close to the road. Why not put the sport fields near the rode. I hope this input does not fall on deaf ears. If COF is spending all this $ then it should be well thought out with safety of people, dogs & driver's by in mind as well. TY (Table A.54) Round 2 Survey Question 8 Responses
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Community Outreach
85 ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 8:
PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS ABOUT WHY YOU CHOSE YOUR PREFERRED PARK CONCEPT. E.G. LIKES, DISLIKES, POSITIVES, NEGATIVES, IDEAS, NEEDS BEING MET, MISSING ELEMENTS.
ANSWERED: 183 | SKIPPED: 9
PREFERRED CONCEPT REASON FOR CHOICE, WRITE-IN RESPONSE
Passive Play (Park Concept #1) No skatepark, basketball court, pump track, or baseball field as those things are not a good use of space because of their lack of versatility Game On (Park Concept #2) Chose the plan with tennis courts nor having multi-use. No serious tennis player would use courts with pickle ball lines on them.
Game On (Park Concept #2) Good access to fields and playgrounds Game On (Park Concept #2) Liked the lay out better
Game On (Park Concept #2) More sports is good
Game On (Park Concept #2)
All the designs are great as long as there are tennis courts separate from pickle ball courts. Designing them together puts too many lines on the court making it difficult to see the lines that apply to each sport. It’s confusing.
Game On (Park Concept #2)
I like the game on plan the most however I wish one of the playgrounds in this design could be the adventure playground from concept 3 as it would be a nice variety to meet the needs of a wide range of children’s ages.
Game On (Park Concept #2)
#2 This concept makes parking available for all of the activities. Also it has parking close to the picnic areas (very important). Also there needs to be area for bicycle parking.
Game On (Park Concept #2)
I think we need to offer community sports activities for all. I like the fields, courts, etc. I think this one is perfect except I would probably take out one-two of the score fields and incorporate the skate and pump ideas if possible. I think activities are more desired that passive open areas.
Game On (Park Concept #2) This is a tough choice as all three concepts seem to be inviting different groups. But id have to go with concept 2 since it has more variety.
Game On (Park Concept #2) Park Concept #2 is covered more sports and needed . if it need to add some adventure feel, it definitely can switch one soccer field to make it.
Game On (Park Concept #2) tennis courts picnic area
Game On (Park Concept #2)
Most of my focus is on the Tennis area and being able to gather and celebrate. Having a seated area that’s somewhat shaded and bathrooms nearby.
Game On (Park Concept #2) Tennis!!!
Game On (Park Concept #2) As long as there are tennis courts I'm happy.
Game On (Park Concept #2) There are a lot of different activity areas for people of all ages, and it's definitely better than park number three.
Game On (Park Concept #2) I like the idea of multiple playgrounds Game On (Park Concept #2) Concept 2 appears to be the only one with tennis and pickle ball having completely separate playing surfaces! Critical!!!! A must! (Table A.55) Round 2 Survey Question 8 Responses (cont.)
86 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX B
ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 8:
PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS ABOUT WHY YOU CHOSE YOUR PREFERRED PARK CONCEPT. E.G. LIKES, DISLIKES, POSITIVES, NEGATIVES, IDEAS, NEEDS BEING MET, MISSING ELEMENTS.
PREFERRED CONCEPT REASON FOR CHOICE, WRITE-IN RESPONSE [CONTINUED] Game On (Park Concept #2)
It was the only option I saw with baseball fields, which historically do not lead to homeless issues, vandalism or crime and save families with kids in sports or field rental fees! No Dog Park, dog owners habitually fail to pick up after their animals and unleased/aggressive dogs just increase likelihood of a child or adult getting attacked and then a lawsuit (please avoid putting in a dog park!!!) Open Space/Nature Neworks are wonderful but again attract homeless so unless the no camping ordinance is enforced and regular police patrols or park rangers are deployed, then don't bother with this concept.
Game On (Park Concept #2)
Like I mentioned before, the Game On Concept has more to offer for the community as well as providing back to the city if done right. Our area is in need of a complex like this. some missing elements, must have Lights on soccer fields. this will allow the use for late games. Also if there is some sort of Concessions stand/Food Court this will provide more revenue for the city. need overflow parking, when there are tournaments parking lots can get extremely Full during these soccer events.
Game On (Park Concept #2) This would be something for everyone Game On (Park Concept #2) Love the idea of more soccer fields and Futsal! Organic Play (Park Concept #3) I think it has aspects my family would enjoy the most.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
Modern park concepts for all ages and backgrounds. Pump track should include a bicycle repair station. Amphitheater for local artist to display their musical talents.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
Love the idea of a unique adventure playground that other local parks don’t have. Older kids need climbing adventures. Love Splash pad, skate park, open space and Amphitheater. Dislike that there isn’t a toddler playground that may be better suited for the younger kids.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) So many more options in the #3 concept.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
I like the more diverse mix of sports. i don't like such a large chunk of park land being dedicated to just one sport - that being soccer. they could do with one less field to put in more pickleball courts.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) Like the new ideas pump track and splash pad Organic Play (Park Concept #3) Organic park
Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
The organic park has a lot of activities that most of our parks don’t have, or don’t have them put all together. The concept is really amazing for anybody in to different sports and activities.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
Like the adventure park and pump track, just move parking to the sides.
Maintain network of open space and natural areas as well with passive activities (e.g. picnic tables)
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) Love it
Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
The addition of a skate park and pump track put this FAR ahead of the other three concepts for me. These, along with the more traditional sports fields/courts, offer more options for the users of the park. Options that parks all to often forget to consider. Add in the amphitheater for outdoor performance space, this is easily the BEST for everyone. (Table A.56) Round 2 Survey Question 8 Responses (cont.)
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Community Outreach
87 ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 8:
PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS ABOUT WHY YOU CHOSE YOUR PREFERRED PARK CONCEPT. E.G. LIKES, DISLIKES, POSITIVES, NEGATIVES, IDEAS, NEEDS BEING MET, MISSING ELEMENTS.
PREFERRED CONCEPT REASON FOR CHOICE, WRITE-IN RESPONSE [CONTINUED] Organic Play (Park Concept #3) I think this concept would appeal to the largest amount of people without feeling overwhelming and sterile like concept # 2.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
I like the pump track and the big adventure playground, but not the skate park and amphitheater. Amphitheaters sound good in concept, but get little use; there are better uses for that land. Need to move the basketball courts away from the playground and picnic areas and add more pickleball.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) I like so many sports and activities being available. You need to provide separate large and small dog areas in the dog park.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) Unique and variation of activities Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
I like that tennis and pickleball are separate and specifically the adventure playground for kids. Though hard to tell...would prefer the option that provides the most tennis courts, assuming pickleball lines are not overly bright.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) Brings new elements to Fairfield with the amphitheater! Organic Play (Park Concept #3) A larger variety of activities people of all ages can enjoy and participate in.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T ALREADY HAVE IN OUR FAIRFIELD PARKS Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) Creates a destination that this location deserves. If you use #1 or #2 it makes this large brand new space just like any other park. This is a special opportunity to provide something lacking and special by providing the fun and excitement #3 provides. The community needs something more than they already have to get them to travel the distance here. #3 provides for all ages to play, have fun and enjoy the beauty this space has to offer.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
Out of the three options, Park Concept #3 provides the widest variety of amenities/ uses within the park, and also incorporates park components that arent commonly seen in parks throughout the nation. I like the layout of option 3 as well, with the open space closer toward the edges of the park away from the center where there is more activity/noise.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
The widespread variety of options will attract more people in our community to be able to come out and enjoy what our own city has to offer as opposed to going to other cities/counties.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) Adventure playground and pump track! Two elements that we don't have and/or are not common.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
Prefer #3 because of the nice playground, adventure park, pump track, and open spaces. However, there is too much emphasis on soccer fields in all versions. There is a very small area for tennis and pickleball courts. The amenities are very nice with #3, but there should be a more equitable balance between sports. For example, it looks like having 3 soccer fields (instead of 5) would allow for 1-2 baseball fields and perhaps more open space or other amenities.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) Passive Play and Game On are great but the Organic Park concept feels like a fresher, more innovative idea to me. Especially the pump track. (Table A.57) Round 2 Survey Question 8 Responses (cont.)
88 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX B
ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 8:
PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS ABOUT WHY YOU CHOSE YOUR PREFERRED PARK CONCEPT. E.G. LIKES, DISLIKES, POSITIVES, NEGATIVES, IDEAS, NEEDS BEING MET, MISSING ELEMENTS.
PREFERRED CONCEPT REASON FOR CHOICE, WRITE-IN RESPONSE [CONTINUED] Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
I love the Organic Play park concept. The adventure park, skate park, and pump track would draw folks from the entire city. The diverse activities offered seems like it would appeal to a broader audience compared to concept #2.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) See my comments in Concept 3. A fit track would make it a perfect park for my recreational needs.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) We do not need an amplitheater or a skate track. Keep more of the open space/walking trails.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
The larger playground structure is why I made my selection. The bigger and more special/unique the playground, the better. One comment about all three: the traffic pattern along the north end of the park creates some concern for public safety. The western portion is far off Vanden and may be a great place to hide late-night illicit behavior.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
Organic play is preferred b/c offers more needs to the community.
Uncertain about the skate park but if there are no skate parks in that area that people can go skate or walk to in less than 10 minutes keep it. The amphitheater isn’t needed but if you add shade there, perhaps it could be a nice outdoor space for meeting or you can expand the recreation center & add more open spaces for people to set up meetings for common interests. Maybe you can staffed hours or unstaffed hours like 24 hour gyms to help make sure people aren’t putting too loud music. Though you could set up a dance studio/ exercise room for classes
Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
I really liked that it has a bit of everything. I love the basketball, amphitheater, splash pad and dog park! All fun things that we need more of here in Fairfield.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
I really liked that it has a bit of everything. I love the basketball, amphitheater, splash pad and dog park! All fun things that we need more of here in Fairfield.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) 3. Amphitheater is needed Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
It’s hard to tell which one supports tennis the most, as that is the sport my family plays the most. I would love to see a minimum of 6 tennis courts, with lights even better since work and school gets in the way of weekday play. I do like the adventure playground and pump track in this version too.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) GREAT OPTIONS!
Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
I love a playground that is unique and may be more inclusive. This park also has a skate park and bike pump track which will appeal to the teens, and anything to get young people off their devices nowadays is valuable.
I like the 2 areas of open space. And the amphitheater will serve the community for events and music.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) Like the layout and the elements/activities included.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) Variety of activities for different people. I personally don't skate or bike, but think that's great to have available for those that do (Table A.58) Round 2 Survey Question 8 Responses (cont.)
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Community Outreach
89 ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 8:
PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS ABOUT WHY YOU CHOSE YOUR PREFERRED PARK CONCEPT. E.G. LIKES, DISLIKES, POSITIVES, NEGATIVES, IDEAS, NEEDS BEING MET, MISSING ELEMENTS.
PREFERRED CONCEPT REASON FOR CHOICE, WRITE-IN RESPONSE [CONTINUED] Organic Play (Park Concept #3) It’s all Natural
Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
I like the set up of the passive play park concept though I wish it had the adventure playground as well as a regular play structure for all ages and abilities and a bigger splash pad area.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) Love it! It would be a park for the whole family! Including our dogs! Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
I love the idea of an adventure playground in town. Also another splash pad is definitely a bonus. More shaded tables/ benches might be a good idea especially near the splash pad for parents.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) Not as much soccer fields and more tennis courts.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
I like the incorporation of bike, and skate area, and adventure playground. I don’t think we have an outdoor amphitheater in FF yet, so that’s nice too. However, parking seems limited and toddler playground is missing. Also additional indoor swimming is needed for more swimming classes
Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
I think the organic play has a lot of variety and would thus be able to meet a lot of people’s needs, whether they’re kids, teens, adults, and/ or parents/caregivers. This also meets different activity level needs— there is room for high activity like sports and skating, more casual areas like the dog park, picnic areas, and open spaces, as well as the endless opportunities the amphitheater could create. As a disabled person, this park seems the most welcoming to me, because there’s something here for everyone, and if my partner wanted to play basketball or something, I could come with him and still feel like there are good spaces for me to sit and read or walk or something.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) I chose number 1 I like the format Organic Play (Park Concept #3) The pump track is a new and exciting feature. The adventure/free play/ organic play style structure is really needed for todays children/youth.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
I really like how the park is more central and flows better than the other two park concepts. I like that the kids dont have to cross the parking lot to get to one activity to the other. I like that the park has fun activities for just about every one of all age groups. I dont like the location of the dog park and the recreation center, i think they should be swaped. I also think there should be a restroom closer to the pump track and open space area. I like how most of the areas that children will be playing in is set back and not so close to the main road. I like that you can be in one location and be able to watch all of your children that may be using different areas of the park, it seems more safe. I like that there are multiple enties to the parking lot to keep drive through traffic lower.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) I like to see more trees, grass, and natural play structures for the children. The parking seems organized with the layout
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) Why are all these plans so soccer focus? All have multiple soccer fields is that what is needed in the city?
(Table A.59) Round 2 Survey Question 8 Responses (cont.)
90 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX B
ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 8:
PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS ABOUT WHY YOU CHOSE YOUR PREFERRED PARK CONCEPT. E.G. LIKES, DISLIKES, POSITIVES, NEGATIVES, IDEAS, NEEDS BEING MET, MISSING ELEMENTS.
PREFERRED CONCEPT REASON FOR CHOICE, WRITE-IN RESPONSE [CONTINUED] Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
As stated above it's different. Provides lots of options for play and movement yet includes the performing arts. My concerns are for the disabled and individuals who may want to loiter around and trash the park.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) More updated different
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) Really love the adventure park and pump park - that would be a big draw for many families. We don't have much of these in Fairfield Organic Play (Park Concept #3) Please see comments above Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
Organic Play, a new concept for the city. This concept is throughout the Bay Area and can really enhance the child’s play and family play outside.
Which is really needed in this time of technology.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) This is an amazing park! It has it all and then some! Fun and relaxation! Variety to meet lots of interests. It is the best option.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
I love the integration of play and nature in concept #3. We need more spaces where kids of ranges of ages can play and explore their creative and active selves. This is critical for healthy risk exploration for toddlers through teens. We are lacking spaces like this in Solano County. I could see concerts here and art days in the park.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) brings more new ideas and not the same as other parks.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) Although more sports-oriented facilities are in demand, the organic play concept is unique and not represented (as much) in Fairfield parks.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) Lots of parking for lots of people, fun for all ages Organic Play (Park Concept #3) Diversity of recreation/sports activities and keeping nature appeal to an area being overturned with new housing.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) IT APPEARS #3 HAS THE BEST LAYOUT, IN MY OPINION. I FEEL IT COULD USE A LITTLE MORE PICNIC AREAS .
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) It offers things that Fairfield doesn’t have at the moment. This park may give our teen youth a positive place to be.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
I really ilke the amphitheater idea. We need more family oriented activities in Fairfield and whichever concept is chosen, I really hope this is added. We can have festivals in this area as well as a creekwalk type experience without having to travel to Vacaville.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) It's more Organic as it states. Plus more focused on exploration and personal growth in concept.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) Organic play provides fun activities for children and teens! We really need a skate park!!
Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
I feel it is a good blend of all the concepts available with out over doing it.
I would prefer not to have the pump track. i do think there needs to be to dog parks. One for small and one for large dogs; besides that i think most of the needs of the community will be met.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) Maybe a community garden (Table A.60) Round 2 Survey Question 8 Responses (cont.)
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Community Outreach
91 ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 8:
PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS ABOUT WHY YOU CHOSE YOUR PREFERRED PARK CONCEPT. E.G. LIKES, DISLIKES, POSITIVES, NEGATIVES, IDEAS, NEEDS BEING MET, MISSING ELEMENTS.
PREFERRED CONCEPT REASON FOR CHOICE, WRITE-IN RESPONSE [CONTINUED] Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
Organic Play would be the most aesthetically pleasing. The area could do with having lots of trees providing shade and blocking wind. Adventure playground will be very popular. Needs a baseball field and a basketball court.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
It gives most flexibility in ideas of different concepts: amphitheater is a “restful” place (similar to open space and picnic area and rec center in a a way”) while also being different from every other park in town so it can remain an alternative place to any other park in town. If it has the “same old elementS” why bother building it? We can continue to go to the same old parks. This is an opportunity to expand on what we have and provide options to other needs and lifestyles. This one does that while still being center. Game on is extremely sport centered so many would not enjoy visiting. Organic has elements for more people I think.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) Good overall balance for all.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) I think this design offers elements that are unique and not offered in any other Fairfield park.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
Great job on all of these. I felt like #3 had lots for the children to do - great place for whole family. Love amphitheater for live performances, appreciate the open space so that people can relax and enjoy nature too. Love the splash park and dog park - just has something for everyone!
Organic Play (Park Concept #3)
I see the Adventure Playground being very popular with families. The pump track is something new for our community, but judging by how many bikes are used in the current skate parks it would likely be a popular attraction. The amphitheater is a waste of real estate; please consider something else for that spot.
Organic Play (Park Concept #3) This park provides something for everyone and year round enjoyment. (Table A.61) Round 2 Survey Question 8 Responses (cont.)
92 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX B
ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 9:
WHAT ACTIVITIES ARE MOST IMPORTANT TO YOU? PICK YOUR TOP THREE (3) CHOICES.
ANSWERED: 186 | SKIPPED: 6
ANSWER OPTIONS ENGLISH SPANISH TOTAL
Active Recreation 117 0 117
Fitness / Cardio / Yoga 72 1 73
Performance 30 0 30
Summer Camps 68 1 69
Innovation / Technology 28 1 29
Multi-Media / Gaming 10 2 12
Hang Out 63 1 64
Formal Event 14 0 14
Lifelong Learning 32 0 32
Early Childhood Education 35 0 35
Crafts + DIY 37 0 37
Art + Music 61 0 61
Other (please specify) 14 0 14
TOTAL 581 6 587
WRITE-IN RESPONSES FOR ‘OTHER’
The outdoors For Active Recreation, there is a need for open use, indoor basketball courts.
Soccer senior activities such as bridge, mah jong, etc. Chess, checkers, etc. for all
Birthday parties! Baseball/softball
Tennis with professionally certified instructors since
public parks are the primary introductory venues for
the racquet sports.
Wellness and meditation
I'm mostly interested in tennis. Baseball fiels
Just a clean family friendly park without homeless,
drugs, gangs and graffiti. Nature
Afterschool care
Tennis
(Table A.62) Round 2 Survey Question 9 Responses
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Community Outreach
93 (Figure A.39) Round 2 Survey Question 9 Responses
94 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX B
ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 10:
I __(BLANK)__ IN THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD. PLEASE SELECT ALL THAT APPLY.
ANSWERED: 188 | SKIPPED: 4
ANSWER OPTIONS ENGLISH SPANISH TOTAL
Live 125 2 127
Work 93 0 93
Attend School 17 0 17
Shop 118 0 118
All of the above 28 0 28
Other (please specify) 15 0 15
TOTAL 396 2 398
WRITE-IN RESPONSES FOR ‘OTHER’
work
CASA for Solano County
Volunteer for Solano Surf Soccer Club in Fairfield
MEET WITH FRIENDS AT PUBLIC LOCATIONS SUCH AS
PARKS
Live in Suisun
Movies, eat, recreational classes
Summer fun
Retired President and CEO of national consulting firm
for racquet sports clubs!
Looking for work here
Play
I live on the border of Vacaville and One Lake
Son is going to preschool camp
Volunteer and worship
Live near/grew up
Coach
(Table A.63) Round 2 Survey Question 10 Responses
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Community Outreach
95 (Figure A.40) Round 2 Survey Question 10 Responses
96 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX B
ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 11:
WHAT IS YOUR ZIP CODE? (OPTIONAL)
ANSWERED: 188 | SKIPPED: 4
ANSWER OPTIONS ENGLISH SPANISH TOTAL
Prefer not to say 5 0 5
94533 96 1 97
94534 43 0 43
94535 1 0 1
95687 19 0 19
95688 9 0 9
Other (please specify) 13 1 14
TOTAL 186 2 188
WRITE-IN RESPONSES FOR ‘OTHER’
94585
95620
94585
94585
94585
94585
945855
94519
94597
94585
94608
94585
94585
94585
(Table A.64) Round 2 Survey Question 11 Responses
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Community Outreach
97 (Figure A.41) Round 2 Survey Question 11 Responses
98 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX B
ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 12:
PLEASE SELECT YOUR AGE GROUP. (OPTIONAL)
ANSWERED: 189 | SKIPPED: 3
ANSWER OPTIONS ENGLISH SPANISH TOTAL
Youth: Under 18 1 1 2
Young Adult: 19 to 34 44 1 45
Adult: 35 to 64 121 0 121
Senior: Over 65 21 0 21
TOTAL 187 2 189
(Table A.65) Round 2 Survey Question 12 Responses
(Figure A.42) Round 2 Survey Question 12 Responses
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Community Outreach
99 ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 13:
PLEASE SELECT THE RACE/ETHNICITY YOU IDENTIFY WITH. (OPTIONAL) ANSWERED: 184 | SKIPPED: 8
ANSWER OPTIONS ENGLISH SPANISH TOTAL
Caucasian or White 72 0 72
African American or Black 13 0 13
Hispanic/Latino(a) 37 2 39
Asian 20 0 20
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 6 0 6
Native American or Alaska Native 2 0 2
Two or more races 15 0 15
Prefer not to say 17 0 17
TOTAL 182 2 184
(Table A.66) Round 2 Survey Question 13 Responses
(Figure A.43) Round 2 Survey Question 13 Responses
100 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX B
ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 14:
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU’D LIKE TO US TO KNOW FOR THE FUTURE MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK?
ANSWERED: 65 | SKIPPED: 126
WRITE-IN RESPONSES
Make so that children with severe special needs can play at the playground and splash pads too.
Please consider input from maintenance workers. They will know the features that will be used and the ones that will be vandalized.
You guys are awesome for working so hard on this project and soliciting feedback from the community. Can you build a park in the empty space on Manuel Campos between Paradise Valley and Paradise Crest? Thank you
It's windy out there. Plant lots of trees.
What are you going to do about potential homeless within the park? Soccer fields please!
I believe this will be perfect for our communities and will attract a lot of events as well. Great idea and will be a great legacy for Matt Garcia.
It's very needed. Along with shade! It's hot here.
Thank you for creating this. This will be amazing for our city.
Looking forward to the completion of the Matt Garcia Community Park. Thank you for including us in your surveys.
Fairfield has an opportunity to give the community a place we can all use! It was the only option I saw with baseball fields, which historically do not lead to homeless issues, vandalism or crime and save families with kids in sports or field rental fees! Again....No basketball courts and no skate park they attract nuisance and just end up vandalized or trashed! No Dog Park, dog owners habitually fail to pick up after their animals and unleased/aggressive dogs just increase likelihood of a child or adult getting attacked and then a lawsuit (please avoid putting in a dog park!!!) Open Space/Nature Neworks are wonderful but again attract homeless so unless the no camping ordinance is enforced and regular police patrols or park rangers are deployed, then don't bother with this concept.
THESE ALL LOOK LIKE WONDERFUL OPTIONS. CAN'T WAIT TO VISIT WHICHEVER IS SELECTED.
The location is TERRIBLE -- it will have a lot of access from Vacaville residents from the adjacent new development. It will also only be accessible by residents in the affluent area of One Lake and not accessible by any other means than driving--out of the way destination. It will turn into an upper-class park.
Matt was a dear friend who believed in the spirit of this city. To honor him, the park should be a gathering place for all parts of our vibrant community to come together. Whichever design is selected, community togetherness has to be at the core of the space to ensure Matt’s legacy continues.
Adding a military discount for classes at the recreation center will encourage members of Travis afb to use the facility as well as businesses near the park
Whichever design you chose, please include restrooms. I would love a park that is fun for all ages for birthday parties, hangouts and get together
Please make sure you contact me too hopefully avoid costly mistakes relative to the tennis and pickle ball addition. The planning stage mistakes are very sad indeed.
Great ideas
We need to focus on supporting our youth and promoting the arts/learning for all residents.
Thank you for making a place for the community to enjoy, it's going to be a great park and I look forward to spending time there with my family.
Please include shade. And 5x more trash cans then you’ll think you’ll need. (Table A.67) Round 2 Survey Question 14 Responses
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Community Outreach
101
ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 14:
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU’D LIKE TO US TO KNOW FOR THE FUTURE MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK?
WRITE-IN RESPONSES [CONTINUED]
no
I would love to see the landscaping in the park be mindful of water retention and use a variety of droughtresistant native plants to create a healthy environment both human and non-human residents. I would also hope to avoid hostile architecture like the high-frequency sound emitting boxes at laurel creek park.
Parking looks limited in all 3
None
Why is it almost in vacaville?
I love this idea to honor Matt.
If you are picking concept #3, please remove the amphitheater and the pump park. Not very many people will be able to enjoy the pump park compared to the skate park. The amphitheater most certainly will hardly ever be put to good use and is a waste of space.
Hopefully there will be good restrooms and also a snack stand or vending machines Keep it simple
need more tennis courts
Thank you for making it possible
Plan it well...then MAINTAIN it well.
You could add a separate room that is only for events related to Matt Garcia values, his future goals, or help the community. Examples could be assorting basic needs bags for homeless or in case (socks, water bottle, 2 healthy snacks, toothbrush, & menstrual pads for women). Maybe a few food drives. Also designate as a place to keep cool or warm for over 90 degrees or extreme cold from 2pm to 9pm. Also a small library where you put 1 book in & take 1. The cycle repeats. These aren’t original ideas but might help some adults. "we need more tennis courts at Fairfield. Currently, most tennis courts and pickleball courts are sharing the same area/courts, city painted the pickleball court lines on top of the tennis court but not provide the pickclebal net which is a pain for both tennis & pickleball players. do you know that One tennis court can convert to three pickleball courts!? No matter what designs you pick, if necessary, please consider to build us tennis courts and pickleball courts separately, example. turn 4 tennis courts to 3 tennis courts with net +3 pickleball courts with net instead of 4 tennis courts plus paint the pickleball courts line on top of the tennis courts without pickeball net provided. thanks. " Keep it a simple park for families to go and play at. Walking trails would be nice. We do not have many safe walking trails in fairfield right now.
Thank you for reaching out for ideas.
Sad that this will be tucked away off in the far corner of town. Hoping the Allan Witt renovation doesn't get tabled for this.
I would love to see the Matt Garcia park include indoor basketball facilities where travel teams are able to host tournaments to help offset some of the expense, especially for lower income kids that are talented but unable to compete. Hosting tournaments can also bring revenue to the city as hundreds of fans and family members come to the city seeking food and shopping.
There should be a more equitable balance between space/quantity needed for the various sports.
No
Please build more than one tennis court. The tennis community in Fairfield is large and we need public places to play.
No
(Table A.68) Round 2 Survey Question 14 Responses (cont.)
102 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX B
ROUND 2 SURVEY QUESTION 14:
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU’D LIKE TO US TO KNOW FOR THE FUTURE MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK?
WRITE-IN RESPONSES [CONTINUED]
Thank you for creating this survey process and for creating such a large and wonderful park! Cheering for #3 to be selected :)
Avoid amenities that may promote loitering after hours. Hours for park should be 30 min before sunrise to 30 min after sunset. Parking lot needs to be equipped with a locking gate. If skate parks, basketball courts, pump tracks are build they need to be surrounded by fences and rims removed during non operating hours Please listen to the input
Thanks!!!
Matt was a friend of mine and im so happy to see his name live on. He loved Fairfield.
Please make the parking make sense. I'm originally from the bay area and Solano County residents are horrible in cramp parking lots. They look like deers in headlights, can't angle their cars to fit in, can't even back out of a parking spot, etc.
It would be nice to have an accessible play area/ sports fields for people with mobility issues Make sure that whichever design is chosen includes maintenance/public safety roads that reach all the back areas so that they are not neglected and are blocked off with bollards.
We can't wait until it is done. There are not a lot of play areas on this side of town. We also want to thank everyone that is working on planning this.
A statue or plaque of matt garcia maybe telling us a little about him around the park Being close to the train station, need to consider deterrents from crime and homeless encampment. Would hate to see this park end up like Allan Witt
No
I hope you plant trees
Different name for park. We had a gym and school respectively named after the late Matt García. thank you for working on this. more and better parks really make for a better city Thank you for continuing to honor Matt Garcia and for keeping his legacy alive. It's important for people to know who he is.
Areas for grandkids to play are paramount. The SCTA (Solano County Tennis Association) would love to partner with any tennis plans. See SCTA.tennis.
Bathrooms as long as they are maintained and cleaned would be wonderful! Que arreglaran las calles de donde vivo
(Table A.69) Round 2 Survey Question 14 Responses (cont.)
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Community Outreach
103
ROUND 2 POP-UP/OPEN HOUSE QUESTION 1:
WHAT ARE YOUR THREE FAVORITE ELEMENTS INCLUDED IN THE PASSIVE PLAY DESIGN?
ANSWER OPTIONS POP-UP OPEN HOUSE TOTAL
Recreation center 20 26 46
Playgrounds 34 26 60
Picnic Areas 18 14 32
Soccer Fields 15 16 31
Tennis/Pickleball Courts 22 14 36
Splash Pad 47 22 69
Dog Park 26 27 53
Open Space/Nature Trail Network 34 38 72
Parking 11 2 13
Nature/Zen Garden 1 0 1
Other 0 0 0
TOTAL 228 185 413
(Table A.70) Round 2 Pop-up/Open House Question 1 Responses
104 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX B
(Figure A.44) Round 2 Pop-up/Open House Question 1 Responses
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Community Outreach
105
ROUND 2 POP-UP/OPEN HOUSE QUESTION 2:
WHAT ARE YOUR THREE FAVORITE ELEMENTS INCLUDED IN THE GAME ON DESIGN?
ANSWER OPTIONS POP-UP OPEN HOUSE TOTAL
Recreation Center 10 22 32
Playgrounds 30 22 52
Picnic Areas 23 11 34
Soccer Fields 13 6 19
Futsal Courts 14 9 23
Tennis Court 18 14 32
Pickleball Court 10 7 17
Basketball Court 22 15 37
Baseball Field 18 11 29
Dog park 20 15 35
Splash Pad 30 26 56
Open Space/Nature Trail 22 23 45
Parking 11 8 19
Other - USTA min, 5 dedicated tennis courts 0 1 1
TOTAL 241 190 431
(Table A.71) Round 2 Pop-up/Open House Question 2 Responses
106 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX B
(Figure A.45) Round 2 Pop-up/Open House Question 2 Responses
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Community Outreach
107
ROUND 2 POP-UP/OPEN HOUSE QUESTION 3:
WHAT ARE YOUR THREE FAVORITE ELEMENTS INCLUDED IN THE ORGANIC PLAY DESIGN?
ANSWER OPTIONS POP-UP OPEN HOUSE TOTAL
Recreation Center 14 19 33
Adventure Playground 45 35 80
Picnic Areas 17 10 27
Soccer Fields 15 11 26
Tennis/Pickleball Court 13 7 20
Basketball Court 25 10 35
Skate Park 22 28 50
Pump Track 35 29 64
Outdoor Ampitheater 32 40 72
Splash Pad 41 18 59
Dog park 16 19 35
Open Space/Nature Trail Network 20 23 43
Parking 14 4 18
Other - Community Garden 1 0 1
Other - Baseball/Softball Field 0 1 1
TOTAL 310 254 564
(Table A.72) Round 2 Pop-up/Open House Question 3 Responses
108 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX B
(Figure A.46) Round 2 Pop-up/Open House Question 3 Responses
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Community Outreach
109
ROUND 2 POP-UP/OPEN HOUSE QUESTION 4:
WHAT ACTIVITIES ARE MOST IMPORTANT TO YOU?
ANSWER OPTIONS POP-UP OPEN HOUSE TOTAL
Active Recreation 20 21 41
Performance 8 15 23
Innovation/Technology 10 15 25
Hang Out 17 13 30
Life Long learninig 11 13 24
Crafts + DIY 12 17 29
Fitness/Cardio/Yoga 14 37 51
Summer Camps 17 21 38
Multi-Media Gaming 10 5 15
Formal Event 2 8 10
Early Childhood Education 11 16 27
Art + Music 28 29 57
TOTAL 160 210 370
(Table A.73) Round 2 Pop-up/Open House Question 4 Responses (Figure A.47) Round 2 Pop-up/Open House Question 4 Responses
110 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX B
ROUND 2 POP-UP/OPEN HOUSE QUESTION 5:
WHICH PARK DESIGN CONCEPT DO YOU PREFER? USE TOKEN TO SELECT ONE.
ANSWER OPTIONS POP-UP OPEN HOUSE TOTAL
Passive Play (Concept 1) 14 10 24
Game On (Concept #2) 25 23 48
Organic Play (Concept #3) 47 45 92
TOTAL 86 78 164
(Table A.74) Round 2 Pop-up/Open House Question 5 Responses (Figure A.48) Round 2 Pop-up/Open House Question 5 Responses
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Community Outreach
111
(Image A.49) Round 2 Pop-up Boards (Image A.50) Round 2 Pop-up Boards (Image A.51) Round 2 Pop-up Boards (Image A.52) Round 2 Pop-up Boards
112 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX B
(Image A.53) Round 2 Open House Boards (Image A.54) Round 2 Open House Boards (Image A.55) Round 2 Open House Boards (Image A.56) Round 2 Open House Boards
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Community Outreach
113
HELP SHAPE
THE FUTURE OF
YOUR PARK!
PICK YOUR FAVORITE
PARK CONCEPT!
See us inside to get a FREE HOUSE BREW!
(Image A.57) Round 2 Collateral, Social Media Post (Image A.58) Round 2 Collateral, Social Media Post (Image A.59) Round 2 Collateral, Sign
(Image A.60) Round 1 Collateral, Flyer
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN 115
APPENDIX C
Drainage and
Grading Concepts
The drainage and grading concept
plans for Matt Garcia Community
Park were produced by CBG.
MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN Page 286 of 1134 116 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
XX
MATT GARCIA PARK
CITY OF FAIRFIELD,
CA
1885 S. Arlington Ave. Suite 111
Reno, Nevada 89509
(775) 329-4955 * Fax (775) 329-5098
DRAINAGE CONCEPT
EXB-2
APPENDIX C
117
Drainage and Grading Concept
MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
MATT GARCIA PARK
CITY OF FAIRFIELD,
CA
1885 S. Arlington Ave. Suite 111
Reno, Nevada 89509
(775) 329-4955 * Fax (775) 329-5098
EXB-1
GRADING
DESIGN
EXHIBIT
XX
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN 119
APPENDIX D
Traffic Study
The traffic study for Matt Garcia
Community Park was conducted
by Fehr & Peers. Provided in this
appendix is a memorandum of the
complete traffic analysis and its
findings.
120 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX D
100 Pringle Avenue | Suite 600 | Walnut Creek, CA 94596 | (925) 930-7100 | Fax (925) 933-7090 www.fehrandpeers.com
Memorandum
Date: January 18, 2024
To: Caroline Vedder, PE | City of Fairfield
From: Valerie Tan, Ashlee Takushi, and Sarah Chan, PE TE | Fehr & Peers Subject: Matt Garcia Community Park, Level of Service Analysis and Site Plan Review WC23-3987
This technical memorandum documents the results of the local transportation analysis prepared for the proposed Matt Garcia Community Park (herein referred to as the Project) in Fairfield, California. The proposed Project site is located in the northeast area of the City, approximately 1.5 miles north of the Fairfield-Vacaville Hannigan Train Station. The Project Site, as shown on Figure 1, is a 50-acre park with multiple uses including soccer fields, tennis and pickleball courts, picnic areas, an all-wheels track, outdoor amphitheater, splash pad, dog park, and community plaza.
Vehicular site access will be provided via two access points along Vanden Road, a full-access signalized intersection to the south and a right turn only side-street stop-controlled intersection at the north.
Background & Analysis Purpose
The Fairfield Train Station Specific Plan (FTSSP) EIR was certified in 2011 and includes the Matt Garcia Community Park. At the time the EIR was completed, the park’s access points were not identified. The FTSSP EIR assumed the 50-acre park, would provide sports and baseball fields, a skate node, trails, sports courts, and picnic areas. The modified Project refines the park uses to include a recreation center, adventure playground and splash pad, soccer fields, tennis and pickleball courts, an all wheels track, amphitheater, and dog park. The purpose of this analysis is to evaluate the potential effects of the modified Project including understanding if the revised Project description would change the results of the FTSSP EIR, understanding local traffic operations at the Project access points, and reviewing the Project’s Site Plan.
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Traffic Study
121
Caroline Vedder, PE | City of Fairfield
January 18, 2024
Analysis Methodology
The following presents the analysis methodology and assumptions for the assessment.
Analysis Locations and Scenarios
The revised Project description is not expected to change the transportation distribution and the majority of intersections analyzed in the FTSSP EIR are not expected to be negatively affected. The following intersections were evaluated as part of this assessment:
1. Vanden Road/Matt Garcia North Access Point
2. Vanden Road/Canon Road/Matt Garcia South Access Point
3. Matt Garcia Internal South Driveway
4. Vanden Road/New Canon Road/Canon Road (FTSSP EIR Intersection) Intersections 1 through 3 were selected to determine the intersection lane configurations required to serve the estimated Project traffic. The intersections were evaluated during the weekday morning (7:00 to 9:00 AM), weekday evening (4:00 to 6:00 PM), and midday Saturday (12:00 to 3:00 PM) peak hours.
Intersection 4, Vanden Road/New Canon Road/Canon Road, was selected for evaluation because it was evaluated in the FTSSP EIR and is the closest to the Project site, thus, it is where projectrelated traffic will be most concentrated and therefore, will experience the potential effects of any changes in volumes as a result of the modified Project description. Consistent with the FTSSP EIR, the intersection was evaluated during the weekday morning (7:00 to 9:00 AM) and weekday evening (4:00 to 6:00 PM) peak hours.
The above intersections were evaluated under Cumulative with Project conditions which represent cumulative traffic forecasts identified in the FTSSP EIR plus traffic expected to be generated by the modified Project. The FTSSP EIR only evaluated weekday morning and evening conditions, therefore, Saturday midday peak hour volumes were developed by adjusting the through volume on Vanden Road using Streetlight data.
122 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX D
1 2
3 4
Key Study Intersections
1. Vanden Road/Matt Garcia North Access Point
2. Vanden Road/Canon Road/Matt Garcia South
Access Point
3. Matt Garcia Internal South Driveway
4. Vanden Road/New Canon Road/Canon Road
WC23-3987_1_SitePlan
Site Plan
Figure 1
Site Plan Source: Gates & Associates, Jan. 16, 2024
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Traffic Study
123
Caroline Vedder, PE | City of Fairfield
January 18, 2024
Analysis Methodology
Synchro software was used to perform this analysis, using methodologies from the Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition. The analysis results are summarized in vehicle delay in seconds and LOS. LOS is a qualitative description of operations ranging from LOS A, when the roadway facility has excess capacity and vehicles experience little or no delay, to LOS F, where the volume of vehicles exceeds the capacity, resulting in long queues and excessive delays.
For signalized intersections, LOS is based on the average delay experienced by all vehicles passing through the intersection. This methodology uses various intersection characteristics (such as traffic volumes, lane geometry, and signal phasing) to estimate the delay per vehicle. The delay per vehicle is a portion of the total delay attributed to the signal operations and includes initial deceleration, queue move up time, time stopped, and acceleration.
At unsignalized intersections, operations are defined by the average control delay per vehicle (measured in seconds) for each stop-controlled movement. This incorporates delay associated with deceleration, acceleration, stopping, and moving up in the queue. For all-way stop-controlled intersections, the LOS is represented by the average control delay for the whole intersection. For side-street stop-controlled intersections, the average delay and worst-case approach delay and associated LOS are reported in this study.
The average control delays and LOS designations for signalized and unsignalized intersections are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1: Intersection LOS and Average Control Delay (seconds/vehicle) LOS Signalized Unsignalized
A ≤ 10.0 ≤ 10.0
B 10.1 to 20.0 10.0 – 15.0
C 20.1 to 35.0 15.1 – 25.0
D 35.1 to 55.0 25.1 – 35.0
E 55.1 to 80.0 35.1 – 50.0
F > 80.0 > 50.0
Source: Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition
The Fairfield Guidelines for Project VMT Screening Transportation Analysis (2020) and Circulation Element of the City of Fairfield General Plan (2012) provides the following LOS standards for intersections:
• Arterial streets – LOS D or better
124 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX D
Caroline Vedder, PE | City of Fairfield
January 18, 2024
• Collector streets – LOS C or better
• Local streets – LOS B or better
Highest functional classification at an intersection controls the classification of the intersection (e.g., at the intersection of an arterial and a collector, the intersection would be classified as arterial).
The City’s guidelines denote LOS standards for the PM peak hour; however, for the purpose of this analysis have also been compared to the weekday AM and Saturday Midday peak hour for informational purposes. Table 2 shows the City’s LOS standards applied to each study intersection.
Table 2: Study Intersections LOS Standards
Intersection Functional Classification Intersection Control¹ LOS Standard
1. Vanden Road/Matt Garcia North
Access Point Arterial SSSC E2
2. Vanden Road/Canon Road/Matt Garcia
South Access Point Arterial Signal D
3. Matt Garcia Internal South Driveway Local AWSC B
4. Vanden Road/New Canon Road/Canon
Road (FTSSP EIR Intersection) Arterial Signal D
Notes:
1. Intersection controls: SSSC=side-street stop-controlled; signal=signalized control; AWSC=all-way stop-controlled
2. The City’s Guidelines for Transportation Impact Reports notes that small increases in volume at side-street stop-controlled intersections may result in large increases in reported delay. It is therefore difficult to establish fixed significance thresholds based on peak hour LOS for these locations. There is no LOS standard, however, the City sites that an improvement is required if a movement is LOS F, the peak hour signal warrant is met, and a minimum of 10 vehicles is added to the critical movement.
Sources: City of Fairfield’s Guidelines for Project VMT Screening Transportation Analysis, December 2020.
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Traffic Study
125
Caroline Vedder, PE | City of Fairfield
January 18, 2024
Project Characteristics
This section provides an overview of the proposed Project components and addresses the proposed Project trip generation, distribution, and assignment characteristics used to evaluate potential Project effects on the surrounding roadway network. The amount of traffic associated with the Project was estimated using a three-step process:
1. Trip Generation – The amount of vehicle traffic entering/exiting the Project site was estimated.
2. Trip Distribution – The direction trips would use to approach and depart the site was projected.
3. Trip Assignment – Trips were then assigned to specific roadway segments and intersection turning movements.
Trip Generation
Trip generation refers to the process of estimating the amount of vehicular traffic a project would add to the surrounding roadway system. Estimates were created for daily trips, the peak one-hour periods during the weekday morning and evening commute hours when traffic volumes on adjacent streets are typically at their highest, and during the Saturday midday peak hour when the Project is expected to generate the most traffic. The Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) publishes weekday daily, morning, evening, and Saturday midday trip generation rates in the Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition. This manual is a national compilation of trip generation statistics for land uses of various sizes and types.
The modified Project details the specific uses included in the park, therefore, where applicable, the ITE trip generation rates were utilized. However, given the limited recreational land uses types included in the Trip Generation Manual, custom rates were established based on published data collection studies and the anticipated maximum number of users expected on each facility. Table 3 presents the results of the trip generation analysis performed for the Project. Using the methodology described above, the Project is expected to generate 2,391 daily, 125 morning peak hour trips, 452 evening peak hour trips, and 586 Saturday midday peak hour trips.
126 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX D
Caroline Vedder, PE | City of Fairfield
January 18, 2024
Table 3: Matt Garcia Community Park Trip Generation Estimates Use Size ITE
Code Daily
Weekday Saturday
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Midday
In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total
Recreation
Center
40,000
SF 495 1,153 50 26 76 65 73 138 23 20 43
Adventure
Playground
1.03 Acres 411 89 0 0 0 13 10 23 15 12 27
Soccer Fields1 6 fields Custom 428 11 2 13 78 41 119 150 163 313 Tennis Courts2 8
courts Custom 243 10 10 20 24 24 48 32 32 64
Pickleball
Courts3
4 courts
Custom 121 8 8 16 16 16 32 16 16 32
All Wheels
Track
0.53 Acres 411 89 0 0 0 12 11 23 15 12 27
Outdoor
Amphitheater
2.23 Acres 411 90 0 0 0 13 10 23 15 12 27
Splash Pad 0.46
Acres 411 89 0 0 0 12 11 23 15 11 26
Dog Park 1.01
Acres 411 89 0 0 0 12 11 23 15 12 27
Total 2,391 79 46 125 245 207 452 296 290 586
Notes:
1. Daily/PM/SAT rates use ITE Land Use Code 488; AM: One team (11 players) practice, 20% outbound trips – https://westernite.org/datacollectionfund/2011/UH%20Final%20Report%202011.pdf
2. Daily: ITE Land Use Code 490; AM: 2 courts doubles, 1 court singles; PM: 4 courts doubles, 4 courts singles; SAT:
8 courts doubles; 50% inbound/outbound (ITE Land Use 490/LifeTime Beaverton); everyone analyzed as a separate trip -
https://apps2.beavertonoregon.gov/DevelopmentProjects/ApplicantMaterials/Applicant%20PC%20Testimony% 20(5-28-19)%20DEA%20TIA%20Addendum%205%20-%20Change%20of%20Use.pdf
3. Daily: ITE Land Use Code 490; AM: 2 courts doubles, 1 court singles: PM: 4 courts doubles; SAT: 4 courts doubles; 50% inbound/outbound (ITE Land Use 490/LifeTime Beaverton); everyone analyzed as a separate trip - https://apps2.beavertonoregon.gov/DevelopmentProjects/ApplicantMaterials/Applicant%20PC%20Testimony% 20(5-28-19)%20DEA%20TIA%20Addendum%205%20-%20Change%20of%20Use.pdf Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition and Fehr & Peers, June 2023.
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Traffic Study
127
Caroline Vedder, PE | City of Fairfield
January 18, 2024
Project Trip Distribution and Assignment
Project trip distribution refers to the directions of approach and departure that vehicles would take to access and leave the site. Estimates of regional Project trip distribution were developed based on existing travel patterns in the area from Streetlight Data. The resulting trip distribution percentages for weekday morning peak hour, weekday evening peak hour, and Saturday midday peak hour are shown on Figure 2.
The Project trip generation estimates, in combination with the expected trip distribution patterns, were used to assign vehicle trips to the local roadway network, as shown on Figure 3.
128 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX D
Union Creek
Union Creek
aV dn ne d R
McCrory Rd
d Ret a G N
aV dn ne d R
Canon Rd
Lake Trail
Cannon
2 3
4 1
70%50%
30%50%
WC23-3987_2_TripDistro
Project Trip Distribution
Figure 2
Project Site Study Intersection # Weekday AM/PM
Saturday
X%
Y%
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Traffic Study
129
Union Creek
Un oi n Creek
Vanden Rd
McCrory Rd
N Gate Rd
Vanden Rd
Canon Rd
Lake Trail
Cannon
2 4
3 1
WC23-3987_X_Volumes
AM (PM) [Saturday] Signalized Intersection Project Site # Study Intersection Peak Hour Tra c Volumes
XX (YY) [ZZ] STOP Stop Sign
2. Vanden Rd/Matt Garcia S Access Pt/Canon Rd
1. Vanden Rd/Matt Garcia N Access Pt Vanden Rd
Matt Garcia N Access Pt
Matt Garcia N Access Pt Canon Rd Vanden Rd
3. Matt Garcia Internal Dwy/S Access Pt
Matt Garcia Internal Dwy Matt Garcia S Access Pt
Matt Garcia Internal Dwy
STOP
STOP
POTS
STOP
STOP
55 (172) [207]
23 (102) [142]
14 (62) [87] 17 (51) [62] 10 (43) [61]
23 (102) [142]
10 (43) [61] 8 (22) [27] 17 (51) [62]
1 (3) [5]
31 (138) [193]
1 (3) [5]
2 (10) [14]
1 (3) [5] 1 (3) [5] 4 (16) [22]
7 (22) [27]
22 (67) [81]
43 (134) [161]
A AF FC
C F FC
A
CF CF CA ACF
Project Trip Assignment
Figure 3
55 (172)
24 (105)
4. Vanden Rd/New Canon Rd/Canon Rd
New Canon Road Canon Road Vanden Rd
C
C
130 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX D
Caroline Vedder, PE | City of Fairfield
January 18, 2024
Cumulative with Project
Traffic Conditions
This section presents the evaluation of intersection level of service under Cumulative with Project conditions.
Cumulative Traffic Volumes and Lane Configuration
Assumptions
This section describes the cumulative traffic volumes and lane configurations utilized in the study.
Cumulative Traffic Volumes
Cumulative traffic volumes were established based on forecasts prepared in the FTSSP EIR.
Volumes and lane configurations were adjusted to account for the change in development plans since the EIR was certified. Based on discussions with City staff and the project team, the cumulative traffic volumes do not incorporate the industrial development anticipated in the FTSSP EIR Planning Area 6 as the development plans for the area are speculative.
The Project traffic volumes in Figure 3 were added to cumulative traffic volumes to estimate the Cumulative with Project traffic volumes, presented on Figure 4.
Cumulative Lane Configuration Assumptions
The following lane configurations were assumed at the Project access points:
Vanden Road/Matt Garcia North Access Point
• Northbound: two thru lanes
• Southbound: one thru lane, one shared thru-right turn lane • Eastbound: one dedicated right turn lane
Vanden Road/Canon Road/Matt Garcia South Access Point
• Northbound: one dedicated left turn lane, two thru lanes • Southbound: two thru lanes, one dedicated right turn lane • Eastbound: one dedicated left turn pocket, one shared thru-right turn lane Matt Garcia Internal South Driveway
• Northbound: one shared left-thru-right turn lane
• Southbound: one shared left-thru-right turn lane
• Eastbound: one shared left-thru-right turn lane
• Westbound: one dedicated left turn pocket (100 feet), one shared thru-right turn lane
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Traffic Study
131
Caroline Vedder, PE | City of Fairfield
January 18, 2024
The analysis assumed the latest Vanden Road improvements at the Vanden Road/New Canon Road/Canon Road intersection, which includes the Canon Road overcrossing and the Vanden Road widening and re-alignment.
Cumulative with Project Conditions Analysis Results
Intersection Operations
FTSSP EIR Consistency
Consistent with the FTSSP EIR, the Vanden Road/New Canon Road/Canon Road intersection was analyzed for the morning and evening weekday peak hours. The LOS was compared to the FTSSP EIR results to identify if the modified Project would worsen delay beyond what was identified in the FTSSP EIR. The intersection operations for this intersection for Cumulative with Project conditions are summarized in Table 4. Detailed calculation sheets are provided in Appendix A.
Table 4: Cumulative with Project Level of Service Summary Intersection Control1 Peak
Hour2
FTTSP 2030 with
Project
Cumulative with
Project
Delay3 LOS Delay LOS
Vanden Road/New Canon
Road/Canon Road (FTSSP EIR
Intersection)
Signal AM
PM
35.2 D 42.0 D
58.54 E 30.5 C
Notes:
1. Signal = Signalized
2. AM= Weekday morning peak hour, PM = Weekday evening peak hour
3. Whole intersection average delay reported for signalized intersections. Delay calculated per HCM 6th methodologies.
4. Although the weekday PM peak hour delay and LOS is above the City’s LOS standard, the TSSP acknowledges this substantial adverse effect and does not have an improvement measure identified.
Under the FTSSP EIR, the Vanden Road/New Canon Road/Canon Road intersection was anticipated to operate at LOS D and E during the morning and evening peak hours, respectively.
However, with the modified Project description and revised background assumptions, the Vanden Road/New Canon Road/Canon Road intersection is expected to operate at LOS D during the morning peak hour and LOS D during the evening peak hour. Therefore, the Project’s modified description is not anticipated to worsen LOS conditions beyond what was concluded in the FTSSP EIR.
132 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX D
Caroline Vedder, PE | City of Fairfield
January 18, 2024
Matt Garcia Park Project Access Point
The intersection operations for the Cumulative with Project conditions at the Project access points are summarized in Table 5. Detailed calculation sheets are provided in Appendix A.
Table 5: Cumulative with Project Level of Service Summary Intersection Control1 Peak Hour2
Cumulative with Project
Delay3 LOS
1 Vanden Road/Matt Garcia
North Access Point SSSC
AM
PM
SAT
0.1 (12.1) A (B)
0.2 (15.1) A (C)
0.4 (13.3) A (B)
2 Vanden Road/Canon
Road/Matt Garcia South
Access Point
Signal
AM
PM
SAT
3.9 A
10.4 B
13.2 B
3 Matt Garcia Internal South
Driveway AWSC
AM
PM
SAT
7.4 A
8.5 A
9.1 A
Notes:
1. Existing intersection traffic control type: SSSC = Side-Street Stop-Controlled, Signal = Signalized, AWSC = AllWay Stop Controlled
2. AM= Weekday morning peak hour, PM = Weekday evening peak hour, SAT = Saturday midday peak hour
3. Whole intersection average delay reported for signalized and all-way stop-controlled intersections. Side-Street stop-controlled delay presented as Whole Intersection Average Delay (Worst Movement Delay). Delay calculated per HCM 6th methodologies.
Source: Fehr & Peers, June 2023.
The LOS analysis was completed assuming an all-way stop control at the Internal South Driveway (intersection 3). The roadway configurations would include two lanes exiting and entering the site to accommodate potential queues at the Internal South Driveway. If there is not sufficient right of way to accommodate four lanes between the Vanden Road/Matt Garcia South Access Point and Internal South Driveway intersections, a side-street stop control at the Internal South Driveway should be considered, with free movements for the east-west direction. The roadway configuration between Vanden Road and the internal park circulator would include two lanes exiting and one lane entering the site with median.
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Traffic Study
133
Union Creek
Un oi n Creek
Vanden Rd
McCrory Rd
N Gate Rd
Vanden Rd
Canon Rd
Lake Trail
Cannon
2 4
3 1
WC23-3987_X_Volumes
AM (PM) [Saturday] Signalized Intersection Project Site # Study Intersection Peak Hour Tra c Volumes
XX (YY) [ZZ] STOP Stop Sign
2. Vanden Rd/Matt Garcia S Access Pt/Canon Rd
1. Vanden Rd/Matt Garcia N Access Pt Vanden Rd
Matt Garcia N Access Pt
Matt Garcia N Access Pt Canon Rd Vanden Rd
3. Matt Garcia Internal Dwy/S Access Pt
Matt Garcia Internal Dwy Matt Garcia S Access Pt
Matt Garcia Internal Dwy
STOP
STOP
POTS
STOP
STOP
55 (172) [207]
23 (102) [142]
14 (62) [87] 17 (51) [62] 10 (43) [61]
23 (102) [142]
10 (43) [61] 8 (22) [27] 17 (51) [62]
1 (3) [5]
31 (138) [193]
1 (3) [5]
2 (10) [14]
1 (3) [5] 1 (3) [5] 4 (16) [22]
7 (22) [27]
22 (67) [81]
43 (134) [161]
A AF FC
C F FC
A
CF CF CA ACF
Project Trip Assignment
Figure 3
55 (172)
24 (105)
4. Vanden Rd/New Canon Rd/Canon Rd
New Canon Road Canon Road Vanden Rd
C
C
134 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX D
Caroline Vedder, PE | City of Fairfield
January 18, 2024
Vehicle Queues
In addition to the LOS and delay calculations, Fehr & Peers also calculated the estimated 95th percentile queue lengths at the Project access point to estimate the turn storage lengths. The Project’s access points were evaluated for the weekday morning, weekday evening, and Saturday morning scenarios, as presented in Table 6. As shown, under Cumulative with Project conditions, the 95th percentile queue is not expected to exceed the proposed turn pocket lengths.
Table 6: Cumulative with Project Conditions 95th Percentile Turn Pocket Queue Summary
Intersection Control Approach Storage
Length (ft)1
Cumulative with Project
AM PM SAT
1 Vanden Road/Matt
Garcia North Access
Point
SSSC EBR 425 25 50 75
2 Vanden Road/Canon
Road/Matt Garcia South
Access Point
Signal
EBL 200 50 125 150
NBL 300 75 200 200
3 Matt Garcia Internal
South Driveway AWSC WBTR 200 75 100 100
Notes:
1. An additional 60 to 90 feet of storage is typically provided in the taper area outside of the through lane, which is not reflected in the storage length above.
2. Storage length is based on Matt Garcia Community Park Site Plan (Figure 1) Source: Fehr & Peers, June 2023.
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Traffic Study
135
Caroline Vedder, PE | City of Fairfield
January 18, 2024
Site Access Review
Site access and internal circulation were reviewed for vehicles, pedestrians, bicyclists, and emergency vehicles entering and exiting the Project. Recommendations are provided to improve wayfinding, reduce driver confusion, and denote efficient linkages between the Project and existing transportation network. It is recommended that the conceptual site plan continue to be evaluated as the site’s design plans progress. When available, the final site improvement plans should also be reviewed by City of Fairfield staff to identify and address additional transportation issues that cannot be identified based on a review of the current site plan before the Project is built. A summary of the site plan review and comments are included as Figure 5.
Vehicle Access and Circulation
The Project can be accessed via two access points along Vanden Road. The northern access point is approximately 28 feet in width and side street stop controlled with right in, right out access. The southern access point is signalized and is proposed to be approximately 36 feet in width, which can accommodate up to three lanes of travel (12 foot lanes).
The following improvements are recommended to enhance vehicular access and circulation throughout the project site:
• Mark direction of travel at the ingress and egress points • Consider allocating pick-up and drop-off locations at the northern parallel parking spaces near the soccer fields
• Consider a southbound right turn pocket at the Matt Garcia North Access Point • Maintain landscaping at Project access point, internal intersections, and crosswalks to reduce sight distance conflicts. Shrubs should not be higher than approximately 30 inches and tree canopies should be approximately six feet from the ground • Vanden Road and Matt Garcia South Access Point intersection improvements ◦ Vanden Road: Include a southbound right turn pocket (min 100 feet) and northbound left turn pocket (min 200 feet) at the Matt Garcia Southern Access Point intersection ◦ Matt Garcia Southern Access Point Roadway:
▪ As described in the intersection operations analysis section above, include two lanes exiting the site (one dedicated left turn pocket and one shared thru-right lane) and two lanes entering the site (one dedicated left turn pocket (100 feet) and one shared thru-right)
136 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX D
Caroline Vedder, PE | City of Fairfield
January 18, 2024
▪ Install a raised median along the west leg to the Matt Garcia Internal South Driveway
The vehicular access and circulation recommendations are based on an all way stop controlled intersection at the Matt Garcia Internal South Driveway. If there is insufficient right of way to accommodate the four lanes recommended between the Vanden Road/Matt Garcia Southern Access Point and Internal Southern Access Point intersections, a side-street stop control at the Internal Southern Access Point intersection should be considered. The east-west legs would operate as free movements, while the north-south circulator road would include a stop control.
The east leg of the intersection could include one lane for exiting the site, and two lanes (one left turn pocket, one shared thru-right) for entering the site with no median.
Pedestrian and Bicycle Access and Circulation
Existing sidewalk and Class II bike lanes are present along Vanden Road, but terminate south of the project site fronting the One Lake residences near Lake Trail. The Solano Transportation Authority’s Solano County Active Transportation Plan (2020) proposes Class II buffered bike lanes along Vanden Road and the Project frontage. The Project site plans show sidewalk along part of the project frontage, on the west side to Vanden Road. The following improvements are recommended to provide a continuous pedestrian and bicycle network to and from the park:
• Continue and fill in sidewalk gap along the west side of Vanden Road from the Vanden Road/Canon Road/Matt Garcia South Access Point to the Vanden Road/Matt Garcia North Access Point to continue 10-foot minimum sidewalk with continuous 5-foot buffer • Stripe high-visibility crosswalks on the western leg at the Project Access point intersections
• Stripe Class II buffered bike lanes along both sides of Vanden Road, consistent with the proposed bicycle network from the Solano County Active Transportation Plan Walkways and crosswalks are provided within the site, connecting the surface lots and various uses.
Recommendations to improve circulation, wayfinding, pedestrian and bicycle visibility, and encourage pedestrian and bicyclists travel modes are provided below:
• Stripe high-visibility crossings by using patterns or raised crossings • Add R1-5a “YIELD HERE TO PEDESTRIANS” or W15-1 signage throughout the park to keep vehicular speeds down
• Provide short-term and long-term bicycle parking and signage As the Project site plan continues to evolve, we recommend continued evaluation as designs progress.
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Traffic Study
137
Caroline Vedder, PE | City of Fairfield
January 18, 2024
Emergency Vehicle Access
Several factors determine whether a project has enough access for emergency vehicles, including:
1. Number of access points (both public and emergency access only)
2. Width of access points
3. Width of internal roadways
The Project access points described in the Vehicular Site Access and Circulation section above would serve as access points for emergency vehicles. Based on a review of an emergency vehicle turning assessment included as Figures 6A – 6D, a 40-foot Fire Truck (UCFD 107’ Aerial Ladder Pierce Arrow) can be accommodated at the Project access points along Vanden Road but may require traversing the opposing travel lane when turning within internal roadways. The corner radius along the west leg of the Internal South Driveway should be revisited to ensure the southbound right and eastbound right movements can be made without mounting the internal sidewalk.
A WB 40 semi-truck was also evaluated as it may be used for events at the amphitheater. We recommend trucks of this size to only use the Vanden Road/Canon Road/Matt Garcia South Access Point for ingress and egress, along with the Internal South Intersection for loading purposes, as shown in Figure 6E.
Additional design considerations for the internal roundabout should be considered. Using a design speed of 5 mph, the roundabout must be designed with a truck apron around the center island to provide room for emergency vehicles and semi-trucks to turn. The ingress and egress legs of the roundabout should also be redesigned to accommodate the wide turning angles.
This concludes our assessment for the Matt Garcia Great Park. For questions or comments, please contact Sarah Chan at (925) 930-7100.
MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
CHAPTER A
138
Include signage for direction
of travel through roundabout
• Mark direction of travel at the ingress and egress points • Add way nding signage to di
erent parking areas and uses
• Stripe high-visibility crossings by using patterns or raised crossings • Add R1-5a "YIELD HERE TO PEDESTRIANS" or W15-1 signage throughout the park • Provide short-term and long-term bicycle parking and signage through park destinations • Maintain landscaping at Project access point, internal intersections, and crosswalks to reduce sight distance con icts;
shrubs should not be higher than approximately 30 inches and tree canopies should be approximately six feet from the ground • The Project site plan should continue to be evaluated as designs progress Overall Recommendations:
Continue 10-foot minimum
sidewalk along the project
frontage with continuous
5-foot bu
er
Include a left turn pocket turning
into the park (200 feet)
Include a right turn pocket turning
into the site (min 100 feet)
Consider a southbound
right turn pocket
Fill in 10-foot minimum sidewalk
gap along the project frontage
with continuous 5-foot bu
er
Mark direction of travel at the
ingress and egress points
Consider allocating pick-up
and drop-o
locations
Mark direction of travel at the
ingress and egress points
Stripe a high-visibility crosswalk
across the western leg
Continue existing Class II bu
ered bike lanes
on both sides of the roadway along the
project frontage, consistent with the
Solano County Active Transportation Plan
Include two lanes exiting the site:
one dedicated left turn pocket
and one shared thru-right
Install raised median
along the west leg
Include two lanes entering the site:
one dedicated left turn pocket (100 feet)
and one shared thru-right
1 2
3 4
Key Study Intersections
1. Vanden Road/Matt Garcia North Access Point
2. Vanden Road/Canon Road/Matt Garcia South
Access Point
3. Matt Garcia Internal South Driveway
4. Vanden Road/New Canon Road/Canon Road
WC23-3987_5_SitePlanRec
Site Access and Circulation Recommendations
Figure 5
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Traffic Study
139
Emergency and Truck Access Turning Assessment
Figure 6A
1":50'
WC23-3987_6A_AutoTurn
MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
CHAPTER A
140
Emergency and Truck Access Turning Assessment
Figure 6B
1":50'
WC23-3987_6B_AutoTurn
1":50'
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Traffic Study
141
Emergency and Truck Access Turning Assessment
Figure 6C 1":50'
WC23-3987_6C_AutoTurn
1":50'
MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
CHAPTER A
142
Emergency and Truck Access Turning Assessment
Figure 6D
1":50'
WC23-3987_6D_AutoTurn
1":50'1":50'
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Traffic Study
143
Emergency and Truck Access Turning Assessment
Figure 6E
1":50'
WC23-3987_6E_AutoTurn
Lock to Lock TimeSteering AngleArticulating Angle
WB-40Tractor WidthTrailer WidthTractor TrackTrailer Track
12.50 3.00
feet
8.008.00 :8.008.00
0.00 :::
3.00 25.50
7.50 33.00
:::
6.020.370.0
144 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX D
Appendix A: LOS Calculation
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Traffic Study
145
HCM 6th TWSC Matt Garcia Park
1: Vanden Road & Matt Garcia North Access Point Cumulative Plus Project AM Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.1
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 10 0 1320 914 8
Future Vol, veh/h 0 10 0 1320 914 8
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 0 - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 11 0 1435 993 9
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All - 501 - 0 - 0
Stage 1 - - - - - -
Stage 2 - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy - 6.94 - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy - 3.32 - - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 515 0 - - -
Stage 1 0 - 0 - - -
Stage 2 0 - 0 - - -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 515 - - - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - -
Stage 1 - - - - - -
Stage 2 - - - - - -
Approach EB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 12.1 0 0
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) - 515 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.021 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 12.1 - -
HCM Lane LOS - B - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0.1 - -
146 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX D
Queuing and Blocking Report Matt Garcia Park
Cumulative Plus Project AM
Fehr & Peers SimTraffic Report
Intersection: 1: Vanden Road & Matt Garcia North Access Point Movement EB
Directions Served R
Maximum Queue (ft) 25
Average Queue (ft) 5
95th Queue (ft) 22
Link Distance (ft) 750
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Traffic Study
147
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Matt Garcia Park 2: Vanden Road & Matt Garcia South Access Point Cumulative Plus Project AM Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 23 14 55 1297 907 17
Future Volume (veh/h) 23 14 55 1297 907 17
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 25 0 60 1410 986 11
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 45 40 78 3145 2830 1262
Arrive On Green 0.03 0.00 0.04 0.88 0.80 0.80
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 1781 3647 3647 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 25 0 60 1410 986 11
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1781 1777 1777 1585
Q Serve(g_s), s 1.4 0.0 3.3 7.6 7.8 0.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.4 0.0 3.3 7.6 7.8 0.1
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 45 40 78 3145 2830 1262
V/C Ratio(X) 0.56 0.00 0.77 0.45 0.35 0.01
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 330 293 240 3145 2830 1262
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.50 0.50 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.2 0.0 47.3 1.1 2.9 2.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.6 0.0 7.8 0.2 0.3 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.7 0.0 1.6 0.1 1.6 0.4
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 58.8 0.0 55.1 1.3 3.2 2.1
LnGrp LOS E A E A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 25 1470 997
Approach Delay, s/veh 58.8 3.5 3.2
Approach LOS E A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 93.0 7.0 8.9 84.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 72.5 18.5 13.5 54.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.6 3.4 5.3 9.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 14.4 0.0 0.1 7.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 3.9
HCM 6th LOS A
148 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX D
Queues Matt Garcia Park
2: Vanden Road & Matt Garcia South Access Point Cumulative Plus Project AM Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 25 15 60 1410 986 18
v/c Ratio 0.20 0.13 0.39 0.43 0.35 0.01
Control Delay 47.2 22.0 49.6 1.7 4.9 2.5
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 47.2 22.0 49.6 1.7 4.9 2.5
Queue Length 50th (ft) 15 0 37 0 58 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 41 20 75 127 181 7
Internal Link Dist (ft) 126 1579 1530
Turn Bay Length (ft) 310 190
Base Capacity (vph) 327 305 238 3294 2832 1270
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.08 0.05 0.25 0.43 0.35 0.01
Intersection Summary
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Traffic Study
149
HCM 6th AWSC Matt Garcia Park
3: Matt Garcia Internal Dwy & Matt Garcia South Access Point Cumulative Plus Project AM Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 7.4
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 2 1 43 22 7 0 1 31 4 1 0
Future Vol, veh/h 1 2 1 43 22 7 0 1 31 4 1 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 1 2 1 47 24 8 0 1 34 4 1 0
Number of Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 2 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 2
Conflicting Approach RightNB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 2 1
HCM Control Delay 7.1 7.8 6.7 7.4
HCM LOS A A A A
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1WBLn1WBLn2 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 0% 25% 100% 0% 80%
Vol Thru, % 3% 50% 0% 76% 20%
Vol Right, % 97% 25% 0% 24% 0%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 32 4 43 29 5
LT Vol 0 1 43 0 4
Through Vol 1 2 0 22 1
RT Vol 31 1 0 7 0
Lane Flow Rate 35 4 47 32 5
Geometry Grp 2 5 7 7 2
Degree of Util (X) 0.034 0.005 0.066 0.039 0.006
Departure Headway (Hd) 3.497 4.062 5.107 4.438 4.262
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 1010 878 704 810 831
Service Time 1.565 2.099 2.816 2.146 2.332
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.035 0.005 0.067 0.04 0.006
HCM Control Delay 6.7 7.1 8.2 7.3 7.4
HCM Lane LOS A A A A A
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.1 0 0.2 0.1 0
150 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX D
Queuing and Blocking Report Matt Garcia Park
Cumulative Plus Project AM
Fehr & Peers SimTraffic Report
Intersection: 3: Matt Garcia Internal Dwy & Matt Garcia South Access Point Movement WB WB NB
Directions Served L TR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 51 54 28
Average Queue (ft) 26 22 22
95th Queue (ft) 53 55 40
Link Distance (ft) 114 114 237
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Traffic Study
151
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Matt Garcia Park 4: Vanden Road & New Canon Road/Canon Road Cumulative Plus Project AM Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 250 0 131 55 0 20 146 1082 73 140 755 26 Future Volume (veh/h) 250 0 131 55 0 20 146 1082 73 140 755 26 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 272 0 19 60 0 1 159 1176 40 152 821 13 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 305 0 279 77 0 76 500 1846 823 109 1066 476
Arrive On Green 0.17 0.00 0.18 0.04 0.00 0.05 0.28 0.52 0.52 0.06 0.30 0.30 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 0 1585 1781 0 1585 1781 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 272 0 19 60 0 1 159 1176 40 152 821 13 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 0 1585 1781 0 1585 1781 1777 1585 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 13.4 0.0 0.9 3.0 0.0 0.1 6.3 21.4 1.1 5.5 18.9 0.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 13.4 0.0 0.9 3.0 0.0 0.1 6.3 21.4 1.1 5.5 18.9 0.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 305 0 279 77 0 76 500 1846 823 109 1066 476 V/C Ratio(X) 0.89 0.00 0.07 0.78 0.00 0.01 0.32 0.64 0.05 1.40 0.77 0.03 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 307 0 439 170 0 317 500 1846 823 109 1066 476 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 36.5 0.0 30.9 42.6 0.0 40.8 25.6 15.5 10.7 42.3 28.7 8.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 25.9 0.0 0.1 15.1 0.0 0.1 0.4 1.7 0.1 222.7 5.1 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln8.0 0.0 0.4 1.6 0.0 0.0 2.6 7.9 0.4 9.0 8.2 0.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 62.4 0.0 31.0 57.8 0.0 40.9 25.9 17.2 10.8 264.9 33.8 8.4 LnGrp LOS E A C E A D C B B F C A
Approach Vol, veh/h 291 61 1375 986
Approach Delay, s/veh 60.3 57.5 18.0 69.1
Approach LOS E E B E
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s10.0 51.2 8.4 20.3 29.7 31.5 19.9 8.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.5 33.0 8.6 24.9 11.5 27.0 15.5 18.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.5 23.4 5.0 2.9 8.3 20.9 15.4 2.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 5.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 2.6 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 42.0
HCM 6th LOS D
152 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX D
HCM 6th TWSC Matt Garcia Park
1: Vanden Road & Matt Garcia North Access Point Cumulative Plus Project PM Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.2
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 43 0 1524 1203 22
Future Vol, veh/h 0 43 0 1524 1203 22
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 0 - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 47 0 1657 1308 24
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All - 666 - 0 - 0
Stage 1 - - - - - -
Stage 2 - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy - 6.94 - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy - 3.32 - - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 402 0 - - -
Stage 1 0 - 0 - - -
Stage 2 0 - 0 - - -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 402 - - - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - -
Stage 1 - - - - - -
Stage 2 - - - - - -
Approach EB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 15.1 0 0
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) - 402 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.116 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 15.1 - -
HCM Lane LOS - C - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0.4 - -
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Traffic Study
153
Queuing and Blocking Report Matt Garcia Park
Cumulative Plus Project PM
Fehr & Peers SimTraffic Report
Intersection: 1: Vanden Road & Matt Garcia North Access Point Movement EB
Directions Served R
Maximum Queue (ft) 30
Average Queue (ft) 17
95th Queue (ft) 41
Link Distance (ft) 750
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
154 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX D
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Matt Garcia Park 2: Vanden Road & Matt Garcia South Access Point Cumulative Plus Project PM Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 102 62 172 1422 1195 51
Future Volume (veh/h) 102 62 172 1422 1195 51
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 111 5 187 1546 1299 26
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 141 125 222 2953 2349 1048
Arrive On Green 0.08 0.08 0.12 0.83 0.66 0.66
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 1781 3647 3647 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 111 5 187 1546 1299 26
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1781 1777 1777 1585
Q Serve(g_s), s 6.1 0.3 10.3 13.0 19.5 0.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.1 0.3 10.3 13.0 19.5 0.6
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 141 125 222 2953 2349 1048
V/C Ratio(X) 0.79 0.04 0.84 0.52 0.55 0.02
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 240 214 365 2953 2349 1048
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.58 0.58 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 45.2 42.5 42.8 2.5 9.1 5.8
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 9.4 0.1 5.4 0.4 0.9 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 3.1 0.3 4.7 1.7 6.3 1.0
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 54.6 42.7 48.2 2.9 10.0 5.9
LnGrp LOS D D D A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 116 1733 1325
Approach Delay, s/veh 54.1 7.8 9.9
Approach LOS D A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 87.6 12.4 17.0 70.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 77.5 13.5 20.5 52.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 15.0 8.1 12.3 21.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 17.1 0.1 0.3 10.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 10.4
HCM 6th LOS B
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Traffic Study
155
Queues Matt Garcia Park
2: Vanden Road & Matt Garcia South Access Point Cumulative Plus Project PM Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 111 67 187 1546 1299 55
v/c Ratio 0.57 0.29 0.68 0.55 0.61 0.06
Control Delay 53.5 13.4 52.0 4.6 15.4 3.7
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 53.5 13.4 52.0 4.6 15.4 3.7
Queue Length 50th (ft) 68 0 114 146 261 1
Queue Length 95th (ft) 122 39 177 206 390 19
Internal Link Dist (ft) 126 1579 1530
Turn Bay Length (ft) 310 190
Base Capacity (vph) 238 271 362 2830 2120 969
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.47 0.25 0.52 0.55 0.61 0.06
Intersection Summary
156 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX D
HCM 6th AWSC Matt Garcia Park
3: Matt Garcia Internal Dwy & Matt Garcia South Access Point Cumulative Plus Project PM Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.5
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 3 10 3 134 67 22 0 3 138 16 3 0
Future Vol, veh/h 3 10 3 134 67 22 0 3 138 16 3 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 3 11 3 146 73 24 0 3 150 17 3 0
Number of Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 2 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 2
Conflicting Approach RightNB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 2 1
HCM Control Delay 7.7 9 7.8 8.1
HCM LOS A A A A
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1WBLn1WBLn2 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 0% 19% 100% 0% 84%
Vol Thru, % 2% 62% 0% 75% 16%
Vol Right, % 98% 19% 0% 25% 0%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 141 16 134 89 19
LT Vol 0 3 134 0 16
Through Vol 3 10 0 67 3
RT Vol 138 3 0 22 0
Lane Flow Rate 153 17 146 97 21
Geometry Grp 2 5 7 7 2
Degree of Util (X) 0.171 0.022 0.216 0.126 0.028
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.016 4.613 5.347 4.672 4.909
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 898 777 664 757 732
Service Time 2.019 2.636 3.14 2.464 2.921
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.17 0.022 0.22 0.128 0.029
HCM Control Delay 7.8 7.7 9.6 8.1 8.1
HCM Lane LOS A A A A A
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.6 0.1 0.8 0.4 0.1
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Traffic Study
157
Queuing and Blocking Report Matt Garcia Park
Cumulative Plus Project PM
Fehr & Peers SimTraffic Report
Intersection: 3: Matt Garcia Internal Dwy & Matt Garcia South Access Point Movement EB WB WB NB SB
Directions Served LTR L TR LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 31 95 76 76 26
Average Queue (ft) 12 64 47 43 10
95th Queue (ft) 37 103 77 74 30
Link Distance (ft) 327 114 114 237 284
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
158 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX D
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Matt Garcia Park 4: Vanden Road & New Canon Road/Canon Road Cumulative Plus Project PM Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 175 0 54 78 0 40 297 1379 17 60 892 305 Future Volume (veh/h) 175 0 54 78 0 40 297 1379 17 60 892 305 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 190 0 5 85 0 2 323 1499 10 65 970 140 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 208 0 167 109 0 79 610 2084 930 83 1035 461
Arrive On Green 0.12 0.00 0.11 0.06 0.00 0.05 0.34 0.59 0.59 0.05 0.29 0.29 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 0 1585 1781 0 1585 1781 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 190 0 5 85 0 2 323 1499 10 65 970 140 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 0 1585 1781 0 1585 1781 1777 1585 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 9.5 0.0 0.3 4.2 0.0 0.1 13.1 27.1 0.2 3.2 24.0 4.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.5 0.0 0.3 4.2 0.0 0.1 13.1 27.1 0.2 3.2 24.0 4.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 208 0 167 109 0 79 610 2084 930 83 1035 461 V/C Ratio(X) 0.91 0.00 0.03 0.78 0.00 0.03 0.53 0.72 0.01 0.78 0.94 0.30 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 208 0 328 196 0 317 610 2084 930 99 1035 461 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.77 0.77 0.77 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 39.3 0.0 36.1 41.6 0.0 40.7 23.8 13.3 7.7 42.4 31.1 12.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 39.5 0.0 0.1 11.1 0.0 0.1 0.9 2.2 0.0 22.1 13.6 1.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln6.4 0.0 0.1 2.2 0.0 0.0 5.2 9.4 0.1 1.9 11.4 2.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 78.8 0.0 36.2 52.7 0.0 40.8 24.7 15.5 7.8 64.6 44.7 13.3 LnGrp LOS E A D D A D C B A E D B
Approach Vol, veh/h 195 87 1832 1175
Approach Delay, s/veh 77.7 52.4 17.1 42.0
Approach LOS E D B D
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s8.7 57.3 10.0 14.0 35.3 30.7 15.0 9.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 38.5 9.9 18.6 17.3 26.2 10.5 18.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.2 29.1 6.2 2.3 15.1 26.0 11.5 2.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 6.3 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 30.5
HCM 6th LOS C
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Traffic Study
159
HCM 6th TWSC Matt Garcia Park
1: Vanden Road & Matt Garcia North Access Point Cumulative Plus Project Saturday Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.4
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 61 0 1078 927 27
Future Vol, veh/h 0 61 0 1078 927 27
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - 0 - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 66 0 1172 1008 29
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All - 519 - 0 - 0
Stage 1 - - - - - -
Stage 2 - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy - 6.94 - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy - 3.32 - - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 502 0 - - -
Stage 1 0 - 0 - - -
Stage 2 0 - 0 - - -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - 502 - - - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - -
Stage 1 - - - - - -
Stage 2 - - - - - -
Approach EB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 13.3 0 0
HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) - 502 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.132 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) - 13.3 - -
HCM Lane LOS - B - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0.5 - -
160 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX D
Queuing and Blocking Report Matt Garcia Park
Cumulative Plus Project Saturday
Fehr & Peers SimTraffic Report
Intersection: 1: Vanden Road & Matt Garcia North Access Point Movement EB
Directions Served R
Maximum Queue (ft) 72
Average Queue (ft) 30
95th Queue (ft) 51
Link Distance (ft) 750
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Traffic Study
161
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Matt Garcia Park 2: Vanden Road & Matt Garcia South Access Point Cumulative Plus Project Saturday Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 142 87 207 936 926 62
Future Volume (veh/h) 142 87 207 936 926 62
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 154 10 225 1017 1007 27
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 191 170 265 2817 2110 941
Arrive On Green 0.11 0.11 0.15 0.79 0.59 0.59
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 1781 3647 3647 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 154 10 225 1017 1007 27
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1781 1777 1777 1585
Q Serve(g_s), s 7.6 0.5 11.1 7.5 14.5 0.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.6 0.5 11.1 7.5 14.5 0.6
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 191 170 265 2817 2110 941
V/C Ratio(X) 0.80 0.06 0.85 0.36 0.48 0.03
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 327 291 426 2817 2110 941
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.85 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 39.2 36.1 37.3 2.7 10.4 7.6
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 7.7 0.1 7.6 0.3 0.8 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 3.7 0.5 5.1 1.3 4.9 1.0
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 47.0 36.2 44.9 3.0 11.1 7.6
LnGrp LOS D D D A B A
Approach Vol, veh/h 164 1242 1034
Approach Delay, s/veh 46.3 10.6 11.1
Approach LOS D B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 75.8 14.2 17.9 57.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 64.5 16.5 21.5 38.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.5 9.6 13.1 16.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 8.3 0.2 0.4 6.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.2
HCM 6th LOS B
162 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX D
Queues Matt Garcia Park
2: Vanden Road & Matt Garcia South Access Point Cumulative Plus Project Saturday Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Lane Group EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 154 95 225 1017 1007 67
v/c Ratio 0.62 0.31 0.70 0.38 0.54 0.08
Control Delay 46.5 10.1 45.8 4.5 16.9 4.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 46.5 10.1 45.8 4.5 16.9 4.2
Queue Length 50th (ft) 83 0 121 84 191 0
Queue Length 95th (ft) 140 40 185 132 303 23
Internal Link Dist (ft) 126 1579 1530
Turn Bay Length (ft) 310 190
Base Capacity (vph) 324 367 422 2683 1861 864
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.48 0.26 0.53 0.38 0.54 0.08
Intersection Summary
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Traffic Study
163
HCM 6th AWSC Matt Garcia Park
3: Matt Garcia Internal Dwy & Matt Garcia South Access Point Cumulative Plus Project Saturday Fehr & Peers Synchro 11 Report
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 9.1
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 5 14 5 161 81 27 0 5 193 22 5 0
Future Vol, veh/h 5 14 5 161 81 27 0 5 193 22 5 0
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 5 15 5 175 88 29 0 5 210 24 5 0
Number of Lanes 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 2 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 2
Conflicting Approach RightNB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 2 1
HCM Control Delay 8.1 9.7 8.6 8.4
HCM LOS A A A A
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1WBLn1WBLn2 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 0% 21% 100% 0% 81%
Vol Thru, % 3% 58% 0% 75% 19%
Vol Right, % 97% 21% 0% 25% 0%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 198 24 161 108 27
LT Vol 0 5 161 0 22
Through Vol 5 14 0 81 5
RT Vol 193 5 0 27 0
Lane Flow Rate 215 26 175 117 29
Geometry Grp 2 5 7 7 2
Degree of Util (X) 0.25 0.035 0.272 0.16 0.042
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.178 4.841 5.589 4.91 5.131
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 861 736 642 729 697
Service Time 2.2 2.893 3.331 2.653 3.169
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.25 0.035 0.273 0.16 0.042
HCM Control Delay 8.6 8.1 10.4 8.6 8.4
HCM Lane LOS A A B A A
HCM 95th-tile Q 1 0.1 1.1 0.6 0.1
164 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX D
Queuing and Blocking Report Matt Garcia Park
Cumulative Plus Project Saturday
Fehr & Peers SimTraffic Report
Intersection: 3: Matt Garcia Internal Dwy & Matt Garcia South Access Point Movement EB WB WB NB SB
Directions Served LTR L TR LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 51 92 95 209 48
Average Queue (ft) 17 59 43 56 13
95th Queue (ft) 45 93 79 117 36
Link Distance (ft) 327 114 114 237 284
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN 165
APPENDIX E
Environmental Site
Assessment - Phase 1
The environmental site assessment
for the first construction phase
of Matt Garcia Community Park
was conducted by NCE March
2022. Provided in this appendix is
a memorandum of the complete
analysis and its findings.
MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN Page 336 of 1134 166 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment - Final
Proposed Matt Garcia Park
Fairfield, CA
March 2022
Prepared for:
Gates and Associates
Casey Case
1655 North Main Street, Suite 365
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Prepared by:
Matthew Kinney
Staff Geologist
Mary Snow, PG, PMP
Senior Geologist
NCE
8795 Folsom Blvd., Ste. #250
Sacramento, CA 95826
(916) 388-5655
NCE Project No. 1170.01.55
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
167
MATT GARCIA PARK
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 i
Executive Summary
At the request of Gates and Associates, NCE conducted a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) of the approximate 50-acre planned Matt Garcia Community Park (Site), located west of Vanden Road and approximately 800 feet north of the intersection of Vanden Road and Canon Road (Figures 1 and 2) in Fairfield, Solano County, California.
The Phase I ESA was performed in accordance with the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process, Designation E1527- 21 (ASTM 2021) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) All Appropriate Inquiries (AAI) Final Rule. ESA activities included reviewing readily available information and environmental data relating to a property; interviewing readily available persons knowledgeable about the Site; reviewing readily available maps, aerial photographs and records maintained by federal, state, and local regulatory agencies; and conducting a site visit.
PURPOSE
This Phase I ESA was requested to support a change in use of the Site from agricultural/commercial to a public park. The primary purpose of a Phase I ESA is to identify, to the extent feasible:
• Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) resulting from the improper use, manufacture, storage, and/or disposal of hazardous or toxic substances at the Site and surrounding properties.
• Historical RECs (HRECs), a past release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products that has occurred in connection with the property and has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority or meeting unrestricted use criteria established by a regulatory authority, without subjecting the property to any required controls. • Controlled RECs (CRECs), a recognized environmental condition resulting from a past release of hazardous substances or petroleum products that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority with hazardous substances or petroleum products allowed to remain in place subject to the implementation of required controls.
This ESA is also intended to satisfy the level of effort often referred to as AAI in the Comprehensive, Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), 42 USC § 9601, with the objective of allowing a potential buyer of the Site to qualify for the landowner liability protections afforded by CERCLA. The qualifications of the Environmental Professional completing this ESA and responsible for preparation of this report meet those standards included in the AAI Final Rule.
168 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
MATT GARCIA PARK
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 ii
FINDINGS
Based on the review of available historical information, and verified through a visit to the Site by NCE personnel, the Site has been used as agricultural land since at least 1937. The Site and surrounding areas consist of agricultural land with residences and associated farming improvements, undeveloped land, and ranching.
Vanden Road is adjacent to the east of the Site and is the main thoroughfare for the area. The Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) is east of and parallel to Vanden Road.
Based on the Site reconnaissance and a review of historical documents, the Site and surrounding area follow this general timeline:
• By 1908, the Site is undeveloped with some roads and few buildings in the surrounding area, including dirt roads along the northern and southern Site boundaries, and present-day Vanden Road along the eastern perimeter of the Site. A seasonal stream transects the Site from the northwest to the southeast. The Site appears to be part of a larger farm. • By 1952, a residence and agricultural outbuildings are present west of the Site.
• By 1980, the seasonal stream is now an engineered creek bordering the eastern, southern, and southeastern perimeter of the Site. • In mid-2017, the central portion of the Site (near the eastern Site boundary) contains an area of uncultivated land with soil stockpiles.
ON-SITE
RECs in connection with the Site are identified below.
• Aerially Deposited Lead (ADL) is lead originating from automotive exhaust gases that settles in soils near roadways. ADL is commonly found in shallow soils (as deep as three feet) near roadways that existed during the time that gasoline contained lead. Leaded gasoline was outlawed in California in 1992.
Vanden Road has existed adjacent to the eastern Site boundary since at least 1937. ADL is a constituent of potential concern (COPC) in Site soils near the eastern Site boundary near Vanden Road.
• Organochlorine Pesticides (OCPs) are a set of pesticides including DDT that were commonly used in agricultural settings beginning in the 1940s through the mid-1970s, when they were found to be carcinogenic to humans and a threat to wildlife. OCPs are resilient compounds that persist in shallow soil for decades in agricultural areas. The Site was used as a farm during the time that OCPs were applied to crops. OCPs are COPCs at the Site. • Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) are semi-volatile organic compounds that have historical presence in lubricants and hydraulic fluids, and are produced when coal, oil, gasoline, and wood are burned. The presence of PAHs in soil is associated with historical railroad activities.
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
169
MATT GARCIA PARK
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 iii
Railroad tracks have existed parallel to the eastern Site boundary since at least 1908. PAHs are a COPC in Site soils near the eastern Site boundary. • A small 5- to 10-yard soil stockpile is present in the eastern central portion of the Site (Photo 21). Historical Google Earth imagery dating back to May 2017 shows this area of the Site was not cultivated, and vehicular work was present in the area. Two small stockpiles appear in Google Earth images beginning after this time. Stockpiles of unknown origin can contain COPCs generated from on-site and off-site activities.
Additional items of concern identified at the Site are listed below. • A 20-inch diameter Kinder Morgan underground fuel transmission line is beneath the Site along its eastern boundary (Figure 2). According to on-site Kinder Morgan personnel, the depth of this facility ranges from 4 to 7 feet and is deeper where the line crosses under Union Creek in the southern portion of the Site.
Work performed when developing Matt Garcia Community Park should occur with knowledge of the location and depth of this sensitive infrastructure. • A small amount of highly weathered treated wood waste (TWW) is located near the eastern Site boundary in the central portion of the Site. Historical wood treatment practices included the use of hazardous chemicals including pentachlorophenol, chromium (including hexavalent chromium), and arsenic.
Any leaching of COPCs from this small amount of TWW would be considered de minimis and does not warrant further investigation.
In the state of California, TWW is considered Class 1 Waste as of August 31, 2021, and must be disposed of at an appropriate facility. Recology Hay Road Landfill accepts disposal of TWW.
• Black mesh fencing delineates a section of land in the southeastern portion of the Site, extending from the southern Site boundary north along the eastern Site boundary (Figure 2). Mr. Doug Gilman, a City of Fairfield inspector, indicated that the fencing is in place to shield a protected species of salamander from farming operations on the Site.
Consult a biologist familiar with local fauna to determine the appropriate steps to ensure continued protection of this species of salamander.
Historical aerial photographs and topographic maps, and NCE’s Site reconnaissance indicate dry farming was identified as the only land use on the Site since at least 1908. No historical or current structures or improvements were identified.
OFF-SITE
RECs in connection with the Site and originating off-site are identified below.
170 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
MATT GARCIA PARK
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 iv
• Arsenic is a toxic heavy metal and is a historical component of weed abatement chemicals. Weed abatement chemicals containing arsenic were commonly used near railroad lines. The UPRR has existed parallel to the eastern Site boundary since at least 1908. Arsenic is a COPC in Site soils near the eastern Site boundary.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the findings of this Phase I ESA as described above, NCE recommends further action be taken to determine the presence of COPCs at the Site. • To determine the presence of ADL, arsenic, and PAHs at the Site, conduct shallow soil sampling and analysis as part of a Limited Phase II ESA near the eastern Site boundary.
• To determine the presence of OCPs at the Site, conduct shallow soil sampling and analysis as part of a Limited Phase II ESA across the Site. • To determine the suitability of the soil stockpile to be reused at the Site, or the manner in which it can be disposed, collect and analyze soil for the presence of metals, petroleum hydrocarbons, volatile organic compounds, SVOCs, and OCPs as part of a Limited Phase II ESA.
• To properly dispose of TWW currently located on the Site, consult the DTSC Managing Hazardous Waste website Treated Wood Waste (TWW) | Department of Toxic Substances Control (ca.gov). The Recology Hay Road Landfill in Vacaville accepts disposal of treated wood waste. • To ensure the safety of workers developing and constructing Matt Garcia Community Park and the integrity of the subsurface Kinder Morgan fuel line (Figure 2), clearly and accurately delineate the location and depth of this sensitive infrastructure prior to improving the Site.
• To ensure the proper steps are taken to address the presence of a protected native species of salamander on the Site, consult a biologist who is familiar with local fauna to determine appropriate and necessary actions.
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
171
MATT GARCIA PARK
TABLE OF CONTENTS FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 Table of Contents
1 Introduction.......................................................................................1
1.1 Purpose .......................................................................................... 1
1.2 Scope ............................................................................................. 2
1.3 Data Gaps ....................................................................................... 3 2 Site Salient Assignment Information .................................................4 3 Site Description .................................................................................5
3.1 Site Location.................................................................................... 5
3.2 Physical Site Setting ......................................................................... 5
3.2.1 Topography ............................................................................... 5
3.2.2 Surface Waters and Wetlands ....................................................... 5
3.2.3 Geology, Groundwater and Seismicity............................................ 5
3.3 Current Site Use............................................................................... 6
3.4 Utilities ........................................................................................... 6
3.5 Surrounding Land Use....................................................................... 7 4 Historical Use.....................................................................................8
4.1 Historical Topographic Maps............................................................... 8
4.2 Historical Aerial Photographs.............................................................. 9
4.3 Historical Fire Insurance Maps .......................................................... 11
4.4 Building Permits ............................................................................. 11
4.5 City Directory ................................................................................ 12
4.6 Chain-of-Ownership........................................................................ 12
4.7 Environmental Liens and Activity and Use Limitations .......................... 12
4.8 Property Tax Map Report................................................................. 12
4.9 Regulatory Actions and Previous Reports ........................................... 12 5 Regulatory Review...........................................................................13
5.1 Radius Map Report ......................................................................... 13
5.1.1 EnviroStor ............................................................................... 16
5.2 GeoTracker.................................................................................... 17 6 Interviews .......................................................................................18
6.1 Present Owners.............................................................................. 18
6.2 Title Records.................................................................................. 18
6.3 Relationship of Purchase Price to Fair Market Value ............................. 18
172 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
MATT GARCIA PARK
TABLE OF CONTENTS FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 i
6.4 Common Knowledge or Reasonably Ascertainable Information .............. 18
6.5 Historical Site Use .......................................................................... 18
6.6 Proceedings Involving the Site ......................................................... 18
6.7 Occupants ..................................................................................... 19
6.8 Past Owners .................................................................................. 19 7 Site Reconnaissance ........................................................................20
7.1 Summary of Observations ............................................................... 20
7.2 Chemical Storage and Usage............................................................ 21
7.3 Bulk Storage Tanks......................................................................... 21
7.4 Site Waste and Wastewater ............................................................. 21
7.4.1 Solid Waste.............................................................................. 21
7.4.2 Sanitary Sewage ...................................................................... 21
7.4.3 Hazardous Waste...................................................................... 21
7.5 Stained Soil, Stained Pavement, of Stressed Vegetation....................... 21
7.6 Liquid Discharges ........................................................................... 21
7.7 Pools of Liquid ............................................................................... 21
7.8 Pits, Ponds, or Lagoons ................................................................... 21
7.9 Wells ............................................................................................ 22
7.10 On-site Fill .................................................................................... 22
7.11 Drums and Containers for Storing Waste ........................................... 22
7.12 Floor Drains and Sumps .................................................................. 22
7.13 Odors ........................................................................................... 22
7.14 Air Emissions ................................................................................. 22
7.15 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) ...................................................... 22
7.16 Asbestos-Containing Materials.......................................................... 22
7.17 Lead-Containing Materials ............................................................... 23
7.17.1 Lead in Drinking Water (LIW) ..................................................... 23
7.17.2 Lead-Based Paint (LBP) ............................................................. 23
7.18 Radon........................................................................................... 23 8 Findings and Recommendations.......................................................24
8.1 On-site Findings ............................................................................. 24
8.1.1 Aerially Deposited Lead ............................................................. 24
8.1.2 Organochlorine Pesticides .......................................................... 24
8.1.3 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons ............................................... 25
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
173
MATT GARCIA PARK
TABLE OF CONTENTS FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 ii
8.1.4 Soil Stockpile of Unknown Origin................................................. 25
8.2 Additional Items of Concern............................................................. 25
8.2.1 Underground Fuel Transmission Line ........................................... 25
8.2.2 Treated Wood Waste ................................................................. 25
8.2.3 Protected Salamander Species .................................................... 26
8.3 Off-site Findings............................................................................. 26
8.4 Recommendations .......................................................................... 26 9 Limitations.......................................................................................28 10 References.......................................................................................30 Distribution and Quality Control
List of Figures
Figure 1. ................................................................................Site Vicinity Map Figure 2. ..................................................................................Site Detail Map List of Appendices
A. Radius Map Report
B. Historical Topographic Maps
C. Historical Aerial Photographs
D. Sanborn Maps
E. Building Permit Report
F. City Directory Report
G. Environmental Lien and AUL Search
H. Property Tax Map Report
I. Pre-Survey Questionnaire
J. Photo Log
174 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
MATT GARCIA PARK
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 iii
List of Abbreviations
Abbreviation Definition
AAI All Appropriate Inquiries
ACM Asbestos-containing Materials
ADL Aerially Deposited Lead
AMSD Approximate Minimum Search Distance
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
AUL Activity and Use Limitations
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
CGS California Geological Survey
COPC Chemical of Potential Concern
CREC Controlled Recognized Environmental Condition
EDR Environmental Database Resources, Inc.
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ESA Environmental Site Assessment
HREC Historical Recognized Environmental Condition
PCB Polychlorinated biphenyls
REC Recognized Environmental Condition
Site Matt Garcia Community Park
SVOC Semi-volatile Organic Compound
TWW Treated Wood Waste
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
175
MATT GARCIA PARK
INTRODUCTION FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 1 1 Introduction
At the request of Gates and Associates (Gates), NCE conducted a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) of the approximately 50-acre proposed Matt Garcia Community Park (Site), a current dry farming operation that the City of Fairfield plans to develop for public use. The Site is located on the west side of Vanden Road, approximately 800 feet north of the intersection of Vanden Road and Canon Road in Fairfield, Solano County, California (see Figures 1 and 2).
The Phase I ESA was performed in accordance with the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process (ASTM E1527-21) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) “All Appropriate Inquiries” (AAI) Final Rule (40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 312).
This report presents the Phase I ESA findings and recommendations regarding environmental conditions associated with the Site.
1.1 PURPOSE
This Phase I ESA was requested to support a change in use of the Site from agricultural/commercial to a public park. The primary purpose of this Phase I ESA was to identify, to the extent feasible:
• Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) resulting from the improper use, manufacture, storage, and/or disposal of hazardous or toxic substances at the Site and surrounding properties. ASTM E1527-21 defines the term RECs as:
“(1) the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on or at the subject property due to a release to the environment; (2) the likely presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on or at the subject property due to a release or likely release to the environment; or (3) the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on or at the subject property under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment.”
• Historical RECs (HRECs) – a past release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products that has occurred in connection with the property and has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority and meets unrestricted use criteria established by a regulatory authority, without subjecting the property to any controls.
• Controlled RECs (CRECs) – a recognized environmental condition resulting from a past release of hazardous substances or petroleum products that has
176 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
MATT GARCIA PARK
INTRODUCTION FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 2 been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority with hazardous substances or petroleum products allowed to remain in place, subject to the implementation of required controls.
The Phase I ESA was also prepared to satisfy the level of effort often referred to as AAI in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), 42 United States Code § 9601, with the objective of allowing a potential buyer of the Site to qualify for the landowner liability protections afforded by CERCLA. The qualifications of the Environmental Professional completing this ESA and responsible for preparation of this report meet those standards included in the AAI Final Rule.
1.2 SCOPE
The scope of the Phase I ESA for the Site included the following:
• Review readily available environmental databases maintained by federal, state, and local agencies. Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR), of Shelton, Connecticut, provided the Radius Map Report, which is attached as Appendix A.
• Review readily available historical documents, including topographic maps, aerial photographs, certified Sanborn fire insurance maps, building permit report, city directory report, an environmental lien and activity and use limitation (AUL) search, and property tax map report to look at previous facilities and activities on and in the vicinity of the Site. Copies of these documents are included in Appendices B through H.
• Develop and deliver Pre-Survey Questionnaire (Questionnaire). The questionnaire was emailed Gates on February 14, 2021, who then forwarded the Questionnaire to the City of Fairfield. As of February 28, 2022, the Questionnaire has not been returned to NCE.
• Conduct Site reconnaissance:
o Visually observe on-site conditions for evidence of environmental impacts, such as soil-staining, stressed vegetation, ponded liquids, mounded soils, excavations, discarded drums, or monitoring wells o Identify potential environmental concerns such as underground storage tanks, aboveground storage tanks, polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB)-containing materials, or other hazardous materials or wastes present at the Site.
o Assess the Site with respect to surrounding property uses and natural surface features.
• Review available documents such as previously prepared environmental reports.
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
177
MATT GARCIA PARK
INTRODUCTION FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 3 • Review United States Fish and Wildlife Service-identified wetlands within and in the vicinity of the Site.
• Review published radon occurrence maps to assess if the Site is located in an area with a propensity for elevated radon concentrations. • Prepare report summarizing the findings of the investigation.
1.3 DATA GAPS
According to ASTM E1527-21 §3.3.21, a data gap is a lack of, or inability to obtain, required information despite good-faith efforts to gather such information. Data gaps may result from incompleteness in any of the activities required by the ASTM Standard. Data gaps identified during this Phase I ESA are summarized in the following table:
Data Gap Explanation Significance of Gap
A Questionnaire
was submitted
to Gates but
was not
returned as of
the delivery of
this ESA.
The Questionnaire was
submitted to Gates on
February 14, 2022, who
then forwarded the
Questionnaire to the City of
Fairfield. A response was
not received by the time
this ESA was completed.
The Site visit, review of historical
documents, database search, and
aerial photo investigations
provided adequate information to
understand the Site history. It is
unlikely that interviews with the
Site owner or state, federal, or
local government officials would
alter the outcome of the analysis.
Interviews were
not conducted
with the Site
owner, state,
federal, or local
government
officials.
It was not deemed critical
to contact state, federal, or
local government officials to
understand the presence of
RECs, HRECs or CRECs, or
potential RECs, HRECs or
CRECs in connection with
the Site.
The Site visit, review of historical
documents, database search, and
aerial photo investigations
provided adequate information to
understand the Site history. It is
unlikely that interviews with the
Site owner or state, federal, or
local government officials would
alter the outcome of the analysis.
178 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
MATT GARCIA PARK
SITE SALIENT ASSIGNMENT INFORMATION FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 4 2 Site Salient Assignment Information
NCE Project No.: 1170.01.55
Project Name: Matt Garcia Community Park
Assessor Parcel Numbers: Not Available
City, County, State and Zip: Fairfield, Solano County, California 95687 Primary Use: Dry Farming
Age of Improvements: None
Site Area: 50 Acres
Reported Number of
Tenants:
None
Number of Buildings: 0
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
179
MATT GARCIA PARK
SITE DESCRIPTION FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 5 3 Site Description
3.1 SITE LOCATION
The Site is located in a rural area within the city limits of Fairfield, California, approximately 6.3 miles northeast of the downtown area (Figure 1).
The region’s climate is characterized as Mediterranean with hot, dry summers and mild to cool, wet winters. The average precipitation is 24.81 inches (U.S. Climate Data 2022).
3.2 PHYSICAL SITE SETTING
The following subsections provide details regarding topography, surface waters, wetlands, and geology.
3.2.1 Topography
According to the United States Geological Survey dated 2018, the elevation of the Site is approximately 100 feet above mean sea level (Appendix B).
3.2.2 Surface Waters and Wetlands
Surface Waters
Union Creek is an engineered creek that is adjacent to the west, south, and southeast of the Site (Figure 2). This creek originates east of Peabody Road near California State Prison Solano in Vacaville, approximately one mile northwest of the Site. Putah South Canal is an engineered creek that is approximately 0.7 miles west of the Site. Multiple sloughs within the San Francisco Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve lie south of the City of Fairfield and Travis Air Force Base, approximately 5.5 miles south of the Site.
Wetlands
According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2018 National Wetlands Inventory, there is an intermittent stream that flows along the western, southern, and southeastern portions of the Site (Union Creek).
3.2.3 Geology, Groundwater and Seismicity
Geology
The Site is located in a small valley within the eastern margin of the Coast Ranges geomorphic province, near the western edge of the Great Valley geomorphic province. This region consists of sedimentary and volcanic rocks, which form rolling hills bordering the valley in which the Site is located. These rocks range in age from Miocene to Pliocene (Thomasson Jr. et al., 1960).
180 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
MATT GARCIA PARK
SITE DESCRIPTION FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 6 The Site is underlain by the Quaternary-age alluvium, a heterogeneous assemblage of fluvial deposits derived from the foothills of the Coast Ranges north of the Site.
The hills to the southwest of the Site are within the Guinda Formation. The hills to the northeast of the Site consist of Markley Sandstone. Both formations are marine in origin (California Geological Survey [CGS] 1998).
Hydrogeology
The Site is located within the San Francisco Bay Hydrologic Region as defined by the Department of Water Resources. According to the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board, groundwater in this region ranges from near-surface to 50 feet below the ground surface. The groundwater flow direction is typically toward the south (DWR, 2022).
According to the EDR report, public water supply wells are not located within 1 mile of the Site (Appendix A). Confirmation of specific geologic and hydrogeological factors affecting groundwater flow beneath the Site is beyond the scope of this ESA.
Seismicity
According to the CGS “Fault Activity Map of California,” the Site is underlain by the Vaca Fault block which displays evidence of late Quaternary displacement. In addition, the Kirby Hills Fault is located approximately 3 miles south of the Site. The Cordelia and Green Valley fault blocks are located approximately 6 miles west of the Site. The Midland Fault is located approximately 12 miles east of the Site (CGS 2010).
3.3 CURRENT SITE USE
Review of historical aerial photographs and topographic maps, as well as the Site reconnaissance, indicates that the Site is and has historically been used for agricultural dry farming.
3.4 UTILITIES
There are no known utilities associated with the Site, as shown in the table below.
Utility Provider
Water None known
Sanitary Sewer None known
Storm Drainage None known
Electric None known
Gas/Oil None known
Steam None known
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
181
MATT GARCIA PARK
SITE DESCRIPTION FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 7 Utility Provider
Chilled Water None known
3.5 SURROUNDING LAND USE
The Solano County Zoning Designation for the Site and the surrounding unincorporated area is Agricultural within a Surface Mining Overlay Zone (A-20) (Solano County 2022). The Site is in the northern portion of the Fairfield Train Station Specific Planning area within the City of Fairfield and zoned for park.
182 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
MATT GARCIA PARK
HISTORICAL USE FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 8 4 Historical Use
The historical records review included researching and examining the following records:
• Historical topographic maps (Appendix B)
• Historical aerial photographs (Appendix C)
• Historical fire insurance maps (Sanborn maps) (Appendix D) • Building Permit Report (Appendix E)
• City Directory Image Report (Appendix F)
• Environmental liens and AULs (Appendix G)
• Property tax maps (Appendix H)
The results of this review are provided below.
4.1 HISTORICAL TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS
NCE reviewed historical topographic maps provided by EDR for years 1908, 1917, 1953, 1968, 1973, 1980, 2012, 2015, and 2018. The results of this review are provided in the following table.
Year Site Surrounding Properties
1908 The Site is depicted
adjacent to the west of a
road (present-day Vanden
Road). Minor improved
roads are adjacent to the
southern and northern
boundaries of the Site. A
seasonal creek is depicted
transecting the Site from
northwest to southeast.
There are no buildings
depicted within the Site.
A structure is depicted southwest of the
Site at the end of the minor improved
road. The Southern Pacific Railroad is
adjacent to the east of present-day
Vanden Road. A structure is depicted
approximately 500 feet west of the
northern portion of the Site. A bench
marker of 89 feet elevation is south of
the Site near the present-day
intersection of Vanden Road and Canon
Road. A bench marker of 163 feet
elevation is on a hill east of the
northern Site boundary.
1917 No substantive changes are
depicted within the Site.
No substantive changes are depicted
surrounding the Site.
1953 No substantive changes are
depicted within the Site.
Several additional structures are
depicted west of the southern portion of
the Site. The structure west of the
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
183
MATT GARCIA PARK
HISTORICAL USE FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 9 Year Site Surrounding Properties
northern portion of the Site is no longer
depicted.
1968 No substantive changes are
depicted within the Site.
No substantive changes are depicted
surrounding the Site.
1973 An engineered creek is
depicted along the western
portion of the northern Site
boundary; this stream
connects to the seasonal
stream transecting the Site.
Several structures and a railroad spur
are depicted southeast of the
intersection of present-day Canon Road
and Vanden Road.
1980 The seasonal stream is now
depicted as an engineered
creek adjacent to the
eastern, southern, and
southeastern Site
boundaries.
No substantive changes are depicted
surrounding the Site.
2012-
2018
No structures are depicted
on this map. The
engineered creek is depicted
as Union Creek.
No substantive changes are depicted
surrounding the Site.
4.2 HISTORICAL AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS
Historical aerial photographs frequently provide visual documentation of Site conditions at the time of the photographs. Activities such as dumping or industrial use can often be discerned through the review of aerial photographs. NCE reviewed historical aerial photographs for the years 1937, 1952, 1968, 1974, 1984, 1993, 2006, 2009, 2012, and 2016 from EDR (Appendix C), along with aerial images publicly provided by Google Earth for the Site and surrounding areas. In Google Earth, where there were multiple photographs available for a single year, the highlights from those photographs are summarized. The following table provides a summary of the findings.
Site Location
Year Site Surrounding Areas Source(s)
1937 The Site appears to be
part of a larger
A residence and several
agricultural outbuildings are
EDR
184 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
MATT GARCIA PARK
HISTORICAL USE FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 10 Site Location
Year Site Surrounding Areas Source(s)
agricultural dry farming
operation. A meandering
creek transects the Site in
a northwest-southeast
direction. An unimproved
road transects the central
portion of the Site in an
east-west direction from
the creek to beyond the
western Site boundary.
Several trees are adjacent
to the southern Site
boundary.
west of the Site. A minor road
is adjacent to the southern Site
boundary. Vanden Road is
adjacent to the eastern Site
boundary. South of the Site,
Canon Road intersects Vanden
Road from the east.
Surrounding land appears to
be used for agricultural dry
farming. A railroad appears
parallel to present day Vanden
Road.
1952 Site appears substantively
the same.
No substantive changes appear
surrounding the Site.
EDR
1968 An engineered creek
appears along the western
portion of the northern
Site boundary and
connecting to the creek
transecting the Site. The
creek transecting the Site
now meanders to a lesser
magnitude.
Multiple structures and corrals
are southeast of the
intersection of Vanden Road
and Canon Road. An
engineered creek is northeast
of the Site.
EDR
1974 Site appears substantively
the same.
No substantive changes appear
surrounding the Site.
EDR
1984 The engineered creek now
appears adjacent to the
eastern, southern, and
southeastern Site
boundaries, and no longer
transects the Site.
High voltage electrical
transmission lines are parallel
and east of Vanden Road and
the railroad. The minor road
transecting the Site from the
creek beyond the western Site
boundary no longer appears.
EDR
1993 Site appears substantively
the same.
No substantive changes appear
surrounding the Site.
EDR
2006-
2012
A low-lying area denoted
by darker shades of green
vegetation appears within
the Site in the general
A low-lying area denoted by
darker shades of green
vegetation appears north of
EDR
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
185
MATT GARCIA PARK
HISTORICAL USE FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 11 Site Location
Year Site Surrounding Areas Source(s)
location of the former
creek.
the Site in the general location
of the former creek.
2016-
2021
An area of uncultivated
land with green vegetation
is in the eastern-central
portion of the Site
appearing in a May 2017
image from Google Earth.
Evidence of vehicular
traffic appears within this
area. Two small stockpiles
of soil appear in this
location through the most
recent Google Earth image
captured in September
2021.
No substantive changes appear
surrounding the Site.
EDR and
Google
Earth
4.3 HISTORICAL FIRE INSURANCE MAPS
Sanborn Maps constitute a source of prior site uses for many cities and towns in the United States. The maps were originally created to assist insurance underwriters in understanding the potential fire risk of structures requiring insurance; however, they are also useful in determining the previous uses of a site. Sanborn Maps often contain information relating to uses of individual structures, locations of certain petroleum and chemical storage tanks, and the storage of other potentially toxic substances. Sanborn Maps began their coverage in 1867 and continued through the 1990s.
NCE requested EDR to conduct a search for available Sanborn Maps. EDR reported that Sanborn Map coverage was not available for the Site (report of findings is included as Appendix D). Searching an information source such as Sanborn Maps constitutes part of the due-diligence necessary for an ESA. The lack of Sanborn Mapping suggests that there was no historical industrial activity on or in the immediate vicinity of the Site, or simply that no Sanborn mapping was conducted in this area.
4.4 BUILDING PERMITS
NCE requested EDR to conduct a search for building permits at and in the vicinity of the Site. No building permits in connection with the Site or in the vicinity of the Site were identified during the search (report of findings included in Appendix E).
186 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
MATT GARCIA PARK
HISTORICAL USE FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 12 4.5 CITY DIRECTORY
NCE requested EDR to conduct a search of historical directory listings in connection with the Site and surrounding area. The search included records dating back to 1963. The records included no information for the Site. Listings for surrounding properties included primarily private residences along with a storage business, towing service, elementary school, an auto parts business, and an auto dismantler.
The City Directory Report is included as Appendix F.
4.6 CHAIN-OF-OWNERSHIP
NCE understands that the Site is currently owned by the City of Fairfield. No information was available regarding previous owner(s) of the Site.
4.7 ENVIRONMENTAL LIENS AND ACTIVITY AND USE LIMITATIONS A search for environmental liens and AULs was also performed for the Site. No environmental liens or AULs were identified as part of the search. Details are provided in Appendix G.
4.8 PROPERTY TAX MAP REPORT
A search for property tax maps was performed by EDR. The search did not identify any property tax maps in connection with the Site. A copy of the Property Tax Map Report is provided as Appendix H.
4.9 REGULATORY ACTIONS AND PREVIOUS REPORTS
No regulatory actions or previous reports were provided for the Site or discovered in our records search. As stated in Section 4.7, there were no environmental liens or AULs identified in connection with the Site.
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
187
MATT GARCIA PARK
REGULATORY REVIEW FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 13 5 Regulatory Review
5.1 RADIUS MAP REPORT
As part of this Phase I ESA, NCE conducted a records search using electronic database services provided by EDR. The Radius Report is a listing of facilities identified on select federal and state standard source environmental databases within the approximate minimum search distances specified by ASTM E1527-21 and EPA’s AAI.
NCE reviewed each environmental database in the EDR Radius Report. The following table shows a list of the databases searched and the number of facilities listed in each database.
Databases Reviewed
Minimum Search
Distance (MSD)
(Miles)
Number of
Facilities
Within
AMSD
Federal Databases
NPL 1.000 0
Proposed NPL 1.000 0
NPL LIENS 1.000 0
Delisted NPL 1.000 0
FEDERAL FACILTITY 0.500 0
SEMS 0.500 0
SEMS-ARCHIVE 0.500 0
CORRACTS 1.000 0
RCRA-TSDF 0.500 0
RCRA – LQG 0.250 0
RCRA – SQG 0.250 0
RCRA – VSQG 0.250 0
LUCIS 0.500 0
US ENG CONTROLS 0.500 0
US INST CONTROL 0.500 0
ERNS 0.001 0
State and Tribal Databases
RESPONSE 1.000 0
ENVIROSTOR 1.000 1
SWF/LF 0.500 0
LUST 0.500 0
INDIAN LUST 0.500 0
CPS-SLIC 0.500 0
Sacramento Co. CS 0.500 0
FEMA UST 0.250 0
UST 0.250 0
AST 0.250 0
INDIAN UST 0.250 0
INDIAN VCP 0.500 0
VCP 0.500 0
188 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
MATT GARCIA PARK
REGULATORY REVIEW FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 14 Databases Reviewed
Minimum Search
Distance (MSD)
(Miles)
Number of
Facilities
Within
AMSD
BROWNFIELDS 0.500 0
US BROWNFIELDS 0.500 0
WMUDS/SWAT 0.500 0
SWRCY 0.500 0
HAULERS 0.001 0
INDIAN ODI 0.500 0
DEBRIS REGION 9 0.500 0
ODI 0.500 0
IHS OPEN DUMPS 0.500 0
US HIST CDL 0.001 0
HIST Cal-Sites 1.000 0
SCH 0.250 0
CDL 0.001 0
Toxic Pits 1.000 0
CERS HAZ WASTE 0.250 0
US CDL 0.001 0
PFAS 0.500 0
Local Registered Storage Tanks
SWEEPS UST 0.250 0
HIST UST 0.250 0
CERS TANKS 0.250 0
CA FID UST 0.250 0
Local Land Records
LIENS 0.001 0
LIENS 2 0.001 0
DEED 0.500 0
Records of Emergency Release Reports
HMIRS 0.001 0
CHMIRS 0.001 0
LDS 0.001 0
MCS 0.001 0
SPILLS 90 0.001 0
Other Ascertainable Records
RCRA NONGEN/NLR 0.250 0
FUDS 1.000 0
DOD 1.000 0
SCRD DRYCLEANERS 0.500 0
US FIN ASSUR 0.001 0
EPA WATCH LIST 0.001 0
2020 COR ACTION 0.250 0
TSCA 0.001 0
TRIS 0.001 0
SSTS 0.001 0
ROD 1.000 0
RMP 0.001 0
RAATS 0.001 0
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
189
MATT GARCIA PARK
REGULATORY REVIEW FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 15 Databases Reviewed
Minimum Search
Distance (MSD)
(Miles)
Number of
Facilities
Within
AMSD
PRP 0.001 0
PADS 0.001 0
ICIS 0.001 0
FTTS 0.001 0
MLTS 0.001 0
COAL ASH DOE 0.001 0
COAL ASH EPA 0.500 0
PCB TRANSFORMER 0.001 0
RADINFO 0.001 0
HIST FTTS 0.001 0
DOT OPS 0.001 0
CONSENT 1.000 0
INDIAN RESERV 1.000 0
FUSRAP 1.000 0
UMTRA 0.500 0
LEAD SMELTERS 0.001 0
US AIRS 0.001 0
US MINES 0.250 0
ABANDONED MINES 0.250 0
FINDS 0.001 0
ECHO 0.001 0
DOCKET HWC 0.001 0
UXO 1.000 0
FUELS PROGRAM 0.250 0
CA BOND EXP. PLAN 1.000 0
Cortese 0.500 0
CUPA Listings 0.250 0
DRYCLEANERS 0.250 0
EMI 0.001 0
ENF 0.001 0
Financial Assurance 0.001 0
HAZNET 0.001 0
ICE 0.001 0
HIST CORTESE 0.500 0
HWP 1.000 0
HWT 0.250 0
MINES 0.250 0
Sacramento Co. ML 0.250 0
MWMP 0.250 0
NPDES 0.001 0
PEST LIC 0.001 0
PROC 0.500 0
NOTIFY 65 1.000 0
UIC 0.001 0
WASTEWATER PITS 0.500 0
WDS 0.001 0
190 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
MATT GARCIA PARK
REGULATORY REVIEW FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 16 Databases Reviewed
Minimum Search
Distance (MSD)
(Miles)
Number of
Facilities
Within
AMSD
WIP 0.250 0
MILITARY PRIV. SITES 0.001 0
PROJECT 0.001 0
WDR 0.001 0
CIWQS 0.001 0
CERS 0.001 0
NON-CASE INFO 0.001 0
OTHER OIL GAS 0.001 0
PROD WATER PONDS 0.001 0
SAMPLING POINT 0.001 0
WELL STIM PROJ 0.001 0
HWTS Site 0
MINES MRDS 0.001 0
EDR Exclusive Records
EDR MGP 1.000 0
EDR HIST AUTO 0.125 0
EDR HIST CLEANER 0.125 0
Exclusive Recovered Govt. Archives
RGA LF 0.001 0
RGA LUST 0.001 0
Notes:
Facilities may be listed in more than one database.
The results of the database review are summarized below.
5.1.1 EnviroStor
The California Department of Toxic Substances Control’s Envirostor database lists facilities that have known contamination or sites for which there may be reasons to investigate further, including federal Superfund sites, State Response, military facilities, voluntary cleanup, and school sites.
Analysis/Comment:
There is one facility listed within approximately 1.0 mile of the Site:
• Papin Property School Site – Vacaville, 5591 Vanden Road, located approximately 0.98 miles north-northeast of the Site.
Considering the nature of this facility as a proposed school site, the potential for releases from this property that would impact the Site appears low.
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
191
MATT GARCIA PARK
INTERVIEWS FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 17 5.2 GEOTRACKER
The State Water Resources Control Board GeoTracker website was also searched for regulated facilities in the vicinity of the Site. There were no facilities requiring cleanup listed on these databases within approximately 1.3 miles of the Site.
According to GeoTracker, there are several sites with fuel-related cleanups over 1.5 miles southwest and northeast of the Site.
Travis Air Force Base is located approximately 1.5 miles south of the Site. Various cleanup activities are currently underway at this facility for contamination of soil and groundwater from solvents, fuels, radioactive materials, and other contaminants. Impacts to soil and groundwater resulting from historical activities related to this facility are not shown to extend to soil or groundwater at or beneath the Site (California State Water Quality Control Board 2022).
192 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
MATT GARCIA PARK
INTERVIEWS FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 18 6 Interviews
The following table presents a summary of parties contacted for documentation or information pertaining to the Site as part of this assessment:
Name Affiliation Telephone No. Relationship to the
Site
Gates and Associates Park Site Designer (916) 736-8176 City Consultant
6.1 PRESENT OWNERS
A Questionnaire was emailed to the Site designer, Gates, on February 14, 2022.
Gates then sent the questionnaire to the City of Fairfield, the Site owner. The questionnaire was not returned as of the completion of this ESA.
6.2 TITLE RECORDS
No chain-of titles were provided by Gates, and a title records search/review was not requested. Information pertaining to the deeds associated with the Site are discussed in Section 4.6 and included in Appendix G.
6.3 RELATIONSHIP OF PURCHASE PRICE TO FAIR MARKET VALUE NCE has no information regarding the relationship of the purchase price to the fair market value of the Site.
6.4 COMMON KNOWLEDGE OR REASONABLY ASCERTAINABLE INFORMATION Common knowledge or reasonably ascertainable information was not acquired through the Questionnaire or interviews of the Site owner, user, or occupants.
6.5 HISTORICAL SITE USE
Historical record and document research indicate that the Site has predominantly been used for agricultural dry farming since at least 1937, as described in Section
4. 6.6 PROCEEDINGS INVOLVING THE SITE
Review of the EDR Report, indicates there are no pending, threatened, or past litigation, administrative proceedings, or notices from governmental agencies regarding violations of environmental laws regarding hazardous substances or petroleum products.
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
193
MATT GARCIA PARK
INTERVIEWS FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 19 6.7 OCCUPANTS
The Site appears to be used for dry farming. Structures or other improvements were not observed during the Site reconnaissance. Occupation of the Site is likely to only occur during typical agricultural operations.
6.8 PAST OWNERS
NCE did not interview the previous owner(s) of the Site. The Questionnaire was reportedly sent to the City of Fairfield by Gates, and has not been returned as of the completion of this ESA.
194 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
MATT GARCIA PARK
SITE RECONNAISSANCE FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 20 7 Site Reconnaissance
As noted in Section 1, a reconnaissance of the Site and surrounding vicinity was conducted by NCE staff on February 10, 2022. Doug Gilman, a City of Fairfield Inspector, met NCE staff at the Site prior to accessing the property. NCE staff conducted reconnaissance of the Site unaccompanied to assess the possible presence of RECs.
The weather conditions at the time of the Site visit were sunny with clear skies; there were no weather-induced limitations to NCE’s visit. Photographs taken as part of the Site visit are provided in the Photo Log (Appendix J).
7.1 SUMMARY OF OBSERVATIONS
The Site consists of mostly flat land used for dry farming. Union Creek flows through one ditch along the western Site boundary. There are two parallel ditches along the southern and southeastern Site boundaries (Photos 1 through 3, Appendix J). A small 5- to 10-yard stockpile of soil is present in the eastern central portion of the Site (Photo 21, Appendix J). The soil comprising this stockpile appears similar to surrounding Site soils.
Vegetation across the Site consists of cultivated grasses ranging in height from 6 inches to 2 feet. An area of taller, brown vegetation is in the eastern and southern portion of the Site and appears to be uncultivated (Photo 5, Appendix J). This area is delineated from the rest of the Site by black mesh fencing (approximately 1 foot in height). Mr. Gilman indicated that the fencing was used to preserve a protected species of salamander.
At the time of the reconnaissance, Kinder Morgan personnel were on-site marking the subsurface location of a fuel transmission line (Photos 3, 7, and 22, Appendix J). The line is beneath the eastern portion of the Site at a depth of 4-to-7 feet; it sits deeper where it transects Union Creek in the southern portion of the Site (Figure 2). Kinder Morgan personnel indicated that the fuel line is 20 inches in diameter and transmits gasoline and jet fuel. A portion of the fuel-line service and maintenance infrastructure is in the northern portion of the Site along the eastern Site boundary.
A small amount of highly weathered, treated wood waste (TWW) is located near the eastern Site boundary in the central portion of the Site (Photo 6, Appendix J). This waste consists of 2 lengths of pressure-treated wood: one is approximately 12 inches by 4 inches by 8 feet and the other is approximately 2 inches by 4 inches by 2 feet.
Land adjacent to the western portion of the Site contains a residence, an agricultural outbuilding in various states of repair, corrals, sheep, and recreational vehicles. Fuel storage was not observed in this area. It is unclear if the structures
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
195
MATT GARCIA PARK
SITE RECONNAISSANCE FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 21 or residence are currently occupied or utilized. A dirt road adjacent to the southern Site boundary leads to the residence and outbuildings. Vanden Road is adjacent to the eastern Site boundary, beyond which is the UPRR line. Rolling hills are southwest and northeast of the Site. Land to the north and northwest of the Site appears to be used for dry farming.
7.2 CHEMICAL STORAGE AND USAGE
No chemical storage tanks were observed within or in the vicinity of the Site.
7.3 BULK STORAGE TANKS
No bulk storage tanks were observed within or adjacent to the Site.
7.4 SITE WASTE AND WASTEWATER
7.4.1 Solid Waste
NCE did not observe evidence of improper solid waste disposal at the Site.
7.4.2 Sanitary Sewage
Based on observations made during the Site visit, there are no septic systems located within the Site.
7.4.3 Hazardous Waste
No hazardous waste was observed at the Site.
7.5 STAINED SOIL, STAINED PAVEMENT, OF STRESSED VEGETATION No stained soils or pavement were observed in the vicinity of the Site. Green vegetation consistent with the time of year for this area was observed throughout the Site.
7.6 LIQUID DISCHARGES
NCE did not observe any liquid discharges during the Site visit.
7.7 POOLS OF LIQUID
NCE did not observe any standing surface water or pools containing liquids likely to be hazardous substances or petroleum products during the Site visit.
7.8 PITS, PONDS, OR LAGOONS
NCE did not observe any man-made or natural depressions in the ground surface that were likely to hold liquid or sludge containing hazardous substances or petroleum products. The location of Union Creek is depicted on Figure 2.
196 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
MATT GARCIA PARK
SITE RECONNAISSANCE FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 22 7.9 WELLS
There are no water supply wells located within the Site. Water supply wells were not observed on land adjacent to the Site during the Site reconnaissance.
7.10 ON-SITE FILL
The primary use of the Site for the last several decades has been agricultural dry farming. As noted in sections 4.2 and 7.1, a small 5- to 10-yard stockpile of soil is located on the eastern central portion of the Site. The origin of this stockpile is not known but may have been generated by activities related to the current agricultural use of the Site.
7.11 DRUMS AND CONTAINERS FOR STORING WASTE
No drums or containers for storing waste were observed at the Site.
7.12 FLOOR DRAINS AND SUMPS
NCE did not identify any floor drains or sumps within the boundaries of the Site.
There are no existing structures at the Site.
7.13 ODORS
NCE did not identify noxious or foul odors suspected to represent an environmental concern in connection with the Site.
7.14 AIR EMISSIONS
NCE did not observe processes or equipment emitting noticeable vapors or fumes at the Site.
7.15 POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS (PCBS)
PCBs can be present in coolants or lubricating oils used in older electrical transformers, hydraulic systems, and other similar equipment. In November 1979, the EPA generally prohibited the domestic manufacture of PCBs in electromagnets, transformers, and heat-transfer and hydraulic equipment. If present, features such as transformers are inspected for obvious leaks and physical evidence such as stains or cracks indicating possible current or past leaks. Transformers were not observed within or near the Site.
7.16 ASBESTOS-CONTAINING MATERIALS
Many building materials such as structural steel fireproofing, acoustic finishes, ceiling texture, ceiling tile, suspended ceiling panels, textured and elastomeric paints, window putty, flexible duct connectors, rubbery pipe insulation tape, building wiring insulation, pipe, boiler, and vessel insulation, interior plaster, and duct insulation commonly contained asbestos until the late 1970s.
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
197
MATT GARCIA PARK
SITE RECONNAISSANCE FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 23 There were no structures present at the Site and based on a review of historical documents, it is unlikely that the Site previously contained any buildings. Testing for the presence of ACM was not included in the scope of work for this investigation.
Obvious ACM was not observed by NCE during the Site visit.
7.17 LEAD-CONTAINING MATERIALS
7.17.1 Lead in Drinking Water (LIW)
The major source of LIW is leaching of lead from household plumbing materials or water service lines used to bring water from the main to the home or building. Lead can leach into drinking water through contact with the plumbing, solder, fixtures, and faucets (brass), and fittings.
There were no structures present at the Site and based on a review of historical documents, it is unlikely that the Site previously contained any buildings.
7.17.2 Lead-Based Paint (LBP)
There are no existing structures on the Site, and it is unlikely the Site previously contained any buildings.
7.18 RADON
Radon is a naturally occurring radioactive gas. It is released during the natural decay of uranium, radium, and thorium in soil, rock, and groundwater beneath homes and buildings. As uranium naturally breaks down, it releases radon gas, which is a colorless, odorless, radioactive gas. Radon enters homes through direct floors, cracks in concrete walls and floors, floor drains, and sumps. When radon becomes trapped in buildings and concentrations accumulate and increase indoors, exposure to radon can become a concern. Its occurrence in the state of California is influenced primarily by geology.
Based on statistical information maintained within the EPA dated 1993, radon concentrations in Solano County have a low rating, with an average of 2 picocuries per liter (pCi/L). These concentrations are less than or equal to the 2.0 pCi/L action level established by EPA (EPA 1992). Based on this information, it is unlikely that radon represents an environmental concern at the Site.
198 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
MATT GARCIA PARK
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 24 8 Findings and Recommendations
Based on information provided to NCE by Gates, the review of historical information available, and the Site reconnaissance, the Site has been part of an agricultural dry farming operation since at least 1937. The Site and surrounding areas generally consist of agricultural or undeveloped land with some residences, ranching, and farming. Vanden Road and the UPRR are adjacent and parallel to the eastern Site boundary.
8.1 ON-SITE FINDINGS
This section details RECs that were identified at the Site during this investigation.
RECs include those listed below. Additional details associated with each REC is provided in Sections 8.1.1 through 8.1.5.
1. Potential for elevated lead levels as a result of ADL in near surface soils
2. Potential for elevated arsenic in near surface soils as a result of weed control associated with the UPRR rail alignment
3. Potential for OCPs in near surface soils resulting from commonly used agricultural chemicals
4. Potential for PAHs in near surface soils associated with the UPRR rail alignment
5. Potential for COPCs within the stockpiled soil of unknown origin
8.1.1 Aerially Deposited Lead
Aerially deposited lead (ADL) is lead originating from automotive exhaust gases that settle in soils near roadways. ADL is commonly found in shallow soils (as deep as 3 feet) near roadways that existed during the time that gasoline contained lead.
Leaded gasoline was outlawed in California in 1992. Vanden Road has existed adjacent to the eastern Site boundary since at least 1937. ADL is a constituent of potential concern (COPC) in Site soils near the eastern Site boundary near Vanden Road.
8.1.2 Organochlorine Pesticides
Organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) are a set of pesticides including DDT that were commonly used in agricultural settings from the 1940s through the mid-1970s, when they were found to be carcinogenic to humans and a threat to wildlife. OCPs are resilient compounds that persist in shallow soil for decades in agricultural areas.
The Site was used as a farm during the time that OCPs were applied to crops. OCPs are COPCs at the Site.
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
199
MATT GARCIA PARK
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 25 8.1.3 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) that have historical presence in lubricants and hydraulic fluids. PAHs are produced when coal, oil, gasoline, and wood are burned. The presence of PAHs in soil is associated with historical railroad activities. The UPRR has existed parallel to the eastern Site boundary since at least 1908 and PAHs are a COPC in Site soils near the eastern Site boundary.
8.1.4 Soil Stockpile of Unknown Origin
A small 5- to 10-yard stockpile is present in the eastern central portion of the Site (Photo 21). Historical Google Earth imagery dating back to May 2017 shows this area of the Site was not cultivated, and vehicular work was present in the area.
Two small stockpiles appear in Google Earth images beginning after this time.
Stockpiles of unknown origin can contain COPCs generated from on-site and off-site activities including fuels, solvents, lubricants, and heavy metals.
8.2 ADDITIONAL ITEMS OF CONCERN
This section details RECs that were identified at the Site.
8.2.1 Underground Fuel Transmission Line
A Kinder Morgan underground fuel transmission line with a diameter of 20 inches is beneath the Site along its eastern boundary (Figure 2). According to Kinder Morgan personnel, the depth of this facility ranges from 4 to 7 feet and is deeper where the line crosses under Union Creek in the southern portion of the Site.
Work performed when constructing Matt Garcia Community Park should occur with knowledge of the location and depth of this sensitive infrastructure.
8.2.2 Treated Wood Waste
A small amount of highly weathered TWW is located near the eastern Site boundary in the central portion of the Site. Historical wood-treating practices included the use of hazardous chemicals including pentachlorophenol, chromium (including hexavalent chromium), and arsenic. Any leaching of COPCs from this small amount of TWW would be considered de minimis and does not warrant further investigation.
In the state of California, TWW is considered Class 1 Waste as of August 31, 2021, and must be taken to an appropriate facility. Recology Hay Road Landfill accepts disposal of TWW.
200 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
MATT GARCIA PARK
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 26 8.2.3 Protected Salamander Species
Black mesh fencing delineates a section land in the southeastern portion of the Site, extending from the southern Site boundary north along the eastern Site boundary (Figure 2). Mr. Doug Gilman, a City of Fairfield inspector, indicated that the fencing is in place to shield a protected species of salamander from farming operations on the Site.
NCE recommends the City consult a biologist familiar with local fauna to determine the appropriate steps to ensure continued protection of this species of salamander.
8.3 OFF-SITE FINDINGS
RECs in connection with the Site and originating off-site are identified below.
Arsenic is a toxic heavy metal and is a historical component of weed abatement chemicals. Weed abatement chemicals containing arsenic were commonly used near railroad lines. The UPRR has existed parallel to the eastern Site boundary since at least 1908. Arsenic is a COPC in Site soils near the eastern Site boundary.
8.4 RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the findings of this Phase I ESA, NCE recommends further action be taken to determine the presence and/or absence of COPCs at the Site. These recommended actions are listed below.
1. To evaluate whether ADL, arsenic, or PAHs are present at the Site, conduct shallow soil sampling and analysis activities near the eastern Site boundary.
2. To evaluate whether OCPs are present at the Site, conduct shallow soil sampling and analysis activities across the Site.
3. To evaluate the whether the soil stockpile can be reused at the Site, and/or to evaluate appropriate disposal options, collect and analyze the soil for the presence of metals, petroleum hydrocarbons, volatile organic compounds, SVOCs, and OCPs.
4. Properly dispose of TWW currently located on the Site. The Recology Hay Road Landfill in Vacaville accepts disposal of treated wood waste. Further information is available at DTSC Managing Hazardous Waste website (https://dtsc.ca.gov/toxics-in-products/treated-wood-waste/).
5. To ensure the safety of workers developing and constructing Matt Garcia Community Park and the integrity of the subsurface Kinder Morgan fuel line (Figure 2), clearly and accurately delineate the location and depth of this sensitive infrastructure.
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
201
MATT GARCIA PARK
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 27 6. To ensure the proper steps are taken to address the presence of a protected native species of salamander on the Site, consult a biologist who is familiar with local fauna to determine appropriate and necessary actions.
202 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
MATT GARCIA PARK
LIMITATIONS FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 28 9 Limitations
Information presented in this report does not confirm the presence or absence of subsurface contamination at the property but indicates whether the possibility of such contamination exists. The professional opinions expressed herein are based on limited data; no other warranty is given or implied by this report. A more extensive assessment, including a surface and/or subsurface investigation and chemical analyses of soil and/or groundwater samples, would provide more definitive information concerning Site-specific conditions. This report is complete and accurate to the extent that cited reports and agency information are complete and accurate.
This report has been prepared in compliance with the ASTM standard entitled “Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process” E1527-21 as well as the EPA AAI rule.
The observations described in this report were made under the conditions stated herein. The conclusions presented in the report were based solely upon the services described herein, and not on scientific tasks or procedures beyond the scope of described services within the constraints imposed by the client. The work described in this report was carried out in accordance with the Terms and Conditions of the contract.
In preparing this report, NCE has relied on certain information provided by federal, state, and local officials and other parties referenced therein, and on information contained in the files of governmental agencies, which were readily available to NCE at the time of this assessment. Although there may have been some degree of overlap in the information provided by these various sources, NCE did not attempt to independently verify the accuracy or completeness of all information reviewed or received during the course of this site assessment. Observations were made of the Site and of the structures on the Site as indicated in this report. Where access to portions of the Site or to structures on the Site was unavailable or limited, NCE renders no opinion as to the presence of direct or indirect evidence relating to petroleum substances, hazardous substances, or both, in that portion of the Site and structure. In addition, NCE renders no opinion as to the presence of indirect evidence relating to hazardous material or oil, where direct observation of the ground surface, interior walls, floors, ceiling or a structure is obstructed by objects or materials, including snow, covering on or over these surfaces.
NCE does not represent that the Site referred to herein contains no petroleum or hazardous or toxic substances or other conditions beyond those observed by NCE during the Site reconnaissance.
NCE has produced this document under an agreement between NCE and Gates. All terms and conditions of that agreement are included within this document by
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
203
MATT GARCIA PARK
LIMITATIONS FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 29 reference. Any reliance upon this document, or upon NCE’s performance of services in preparing this document, is conditioned upon the relying party’s acceptance and acknowledgement of the limitations, qualifications, terms, conditions, and indemnities set forth in that agreement, and property ownership/management disclosure limitations, if any. It is not to be relied upon by any party other than Gates, nor used for any purpose other than that specifically stated in our Agreement or within this report’s Introduction Section without NCE’s advance and express written consent, except as noted in the Additional Reliance Section.
Environmental Professional Declaration:
We declare that, to the best of our professional knowledge and belief, we meet the definition of Environmental Professional as defined in 40 CFR § 312.10.
We have the specific qualifications based on education, training, and experience to assess a property of the nature, history, and setting of the Site. We have developed and performed this Phase I ESA consistent with the AAI guidance and in general conformance with the standard and practices set forth in 40 CFR Part 312.
204 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
MATT GARCIA PARK
REFERENCES FAIRFIELD, CA
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - FINAL MARCH 2022 30 10 References
California Department of Water Resources. 2022 "Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Data Viewer". Accessed February 14, 2022. https://sgma.water.ca.gov/webgis/?appid=SGMADataViewer#gwlevels California State Water Quality Control Board. 2022 “GeoTracker.” Accessed February 15, 2022. https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/ California Department of Toxic Substances Control. 2022 "EnviroStor." Accessed February 15, 2022. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/
CGS. 2010. “Fault Activity Map of California (2010).”
https://gis.data.ca.gov/datasets/cadoc::fault-activity-map-of-california-2010 EPA. 1992. “Radon Zones (with State Information).”
https://geopub.epa.gov/Radon/
Thomasson Jr., et al. Geology, Water Resources, and Usable Groundwater Storage Capacity of Part of Solano County, California. 1960.
———. 2005. “All Appropriate Inquiries Rule.” http://www.mccarter.com/EPAs-ALLNRCS. 2019. “Web Soil Survey.” http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/.
Solano County. 2022. “Solano County Assessor’s Parcel Viewer: Zoning Designations.”
http://assessorparcelviewer.ssolanocounty.net/JSViewer/assessor.html.
U.S. Climate Data. 2021. “Climate Fairfield - California.” https://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/Fairfield/california/unitedstates/usca0967 USFWS. 2018. “Wetland Mapper.”
https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Mapper.html.
USGS. 1992. “Fairfield.” http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/qfaults/map/
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
205
Figures
206 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E Document Path: P:\Active Projects\Gates & Assoc - 1170\1170.01.55 - Fairfield Matt Garcia Park MP\GIS\AGP\User\Project - cvaz1.aprx FIGURE
SOURCE JOB NUMBER DRAWN DATE REVISED APPROVED
Bing Aerial Basemap 1170.01.55 cvaz 1/20/2022 2/28/2022 - Proposed Matt Garcia Park 1 City of Fairfield
Vicinity Map
0 1,000 2,000ft.
1:24,000
¯ Legend
Project area
Contra
Costa
County
Napa
County
Yolo
County
0 20 40
mi.
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
207
Document Path: P:\Active Projects\Gates & Assoc - 1170\1170.01.55 - Fairfield Matt Garcia Park MP\GIS\AGP\User\Project - cvaz.aprx FIGURE
SOURCE JOB NUMBER DRAWN DATE REVISED APPROVED
Bing Aerial Basemap; NCE 2022 1170.01.55 cvaz 2/14/2022 3/1/2022 gfasiano 2 Proposed Matt Garcia Park
City of Fairfield
Project Detail Map
0 200 400ft.
1 in. = 400 ft.
¯
&
& &
&
&
& &
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
& &
& &
& &
&
&
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11
14 15
16 21
22 Project site
20" Kinder Morgan fuel line
Salamander fencing
Approx. Location of soil stockpile
Approx. Location of treated wood debris
Photo locations
Approx. Location of aboveground Kinder Morgan Facility
Union Pacific Railroad
12 13
17 20 19
18 Residential and
Agriculture
outbuildings
&
&
208 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
Appendix A
RADIUS MAP REPORT
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
209
FORM-LBB-KKT
The EDR Radius Map™ Report with GeoCheck®
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
Shelton, CT 06484
Toll Free: 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com
Fairfield - Matt Garcia Park
See Lat/Lon
Vacaville, CA 95687
Inquiry Number: 6827807.2s
January 21, 2022
210 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
SECTION PAGE
Executive Summary ES1
Overview Map 2
Detail Map 3
Map Findings Summary 4
Map Findings 9
Orphan Summary 12
Government Records Searched/Data Currency Tracking GR-1
GEOCHECK ADDENDUM
Physical Setting Source Addendum A-1
Physical Setting Source Summary A-2
Physical Setting SSURGO Soil Map A-5
Physical Setting Source Map A-11
Physical Setting Source Map Findings A-13
Physical Setting Source Records Searched PSGR-1
TC6827807.2s Page 1
Thank you for your business.
Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050
with any questions or comments.
Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE,
ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.
Copyright 2020 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.
EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
211
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6827807.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
A search of available environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR).
The report was designed to assist parties seeking to meet the search requirements of EPA’s Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312), the ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments (E1527-21), the ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments for Forestland or Rural Property (E 2247-16), the ASTM Standard Practice for Limited Environmental Due Diligence: Transaction Screen Process (E 1528-14) or custom requirements developed for the evaluation of environmental risk associated with a parcel of real estate.
TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION
ADDRESS
SEE LAT/LON
VACAVILLE, CA 95687
COORDINATES
Latitude (North): 38.3063890 - 38ˆ 18’ 23.00’’
Longitude (West): 121.9493670 - 121ˆ 56’ 57.72’’
Universal Tranverse Mercator: Zone 10
UTM X (Meters): 591861.2
UTM Y (Meters): 4240126.0
Elevation: 92 ft. above sea level
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH TARGET PROPERTY
Target Property Map: 12021597 ELMIRA, CA
Version Date: 2018
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY IN THIS REPORT
Portions of Photo from: 20140606
Source: USDA
212 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
6827807.2s Page 2
1 PAPIN PROPERTY SCHOO 5591 VANDEN ROAD ENVIROSTOR, SCH Higher 5194, 0.984, NNE
MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:
SEE LAT/LON
VACAVILLE, CA 95687
Click on Map ID to see full detail.
MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)
ID SITE NAME ADDRESS DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTION
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
213
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6827807.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
TARGET PROPERTY SEARCH RESULTS
The target property was not listed in any of the databases searched by EDR.
DATABASES WITH NO MAPPED SITES
No mapped sites were found in EDR’s search of available ("reasonably ascertainable ") government records either on the target property or within the search radius around the target property for the following databases:
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Lists of Federal NPL (Superfund) sites
NPL National Priority List
Proposed NPL Proposed National Priority List Sites
NPL LIENS Federal Superfund Liens
Lists of Federal Delisted NPL sites
Delisted NPL National Priority List Deletions
Lists of Federal sites subject to CERCLA removals and CERCLA orders FEDERAL FACILITY Federal Facility Site Information listing SEMS Superfund Enterprise Management System
Lists of Federal CERCLA sites with NFRAP
SEMS-ARCHIVE Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive Lists of Federal RCRA facilities undergoing Corrective Action CORRACTS Corrective Action Report
Lists of Federal RCRA TSD facilities
RCRA-TSDF RCRA - Treatment, Storage and Disposal
Lists of Federal RCRA generators
RCRA-LQG RCRA - Large Quantity Generators
RCRA-SQG RCRA - Small Quantity Generators
RCRA-VSQG RCRA - Very Small Quantity Generators (Formerly Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators)
Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries LUCIS Land Use Control Information System
214 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6827807.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4
US ENG CONTROLS Engineering Controls Sites List
US INST CONTROLS Institutional Controls Sites List
Federal ERNS list
ERNS Emergency Response Notification System
Lists of state- and tribal (Superfund) equivalent sites RESPONSE State Response Sites
Lists of state and tribal landfills and solid waste disposal facilities SWF/LF Solid Waste Information System
Lists of state and tribal leaking storage tanks
LUST Geotracker’s Leaking Underground Fuel Tank Report
INDIAN LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land CPS-SLIC Statewide SLIC Cases
Lists of state and tribal registered storage tanks
FEMA UST Underground Storage Tank Listing
UST Active UST Facilities
AST Aboveground Petroleum Storage Tank Facilities
INDIAN UST Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
Lists of state and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
INDIAN VCP Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing
VCP Voluntary Cleanup Program Properties
Lists of state and tribal brownfield sites
BROWNFIELDS Considered Brownfieds Sites Listing
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Local Brownfield lists
US BROWNFIELDS A Listing of Brownfields Sites
Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites
WMUDS/SWAT Waste Management Unit Database
SWRCY Recycler Database
HAULERS Registered Waste Tire Haulers Listing
INDIAN ODI Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands ODI Open Dump Inventory
DEBRIS REGION 9 Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations IHS OPEN DUMPS Open Dumps on Indian Land
Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites
US HIST CDL Delisted National Clandestine Laboratory Register
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
215
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6827807.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5
HIST Cal-Sites Historical Calsites Database
SCH School Property Evaluation Program
CDL Clandestine Drug Labs
Toxic Pits Toxic Pits Cleanup Act Sites
CERS HAZ WASTE CERS HAZ WASTE
US CDL National Clandestine Laboratory Register
PFAS PFAS Contamination Site Location Listing
AQUEOUS FOAM Former Fire Training Facility Assessments Listing Local Lists of Registered Storage Tanks
SWEEPS UST SWEEPS UST Listing
HIST UST Hazardous Substance Storage Container Database CERS TANKS California Environmental Reporting System (CERS) Tanks CA FID UST Facility Inventory Database
Local Land Records
LIENS Environmental Liens Listing
LIENS 2 CERCLA Lien Information
DEED Deed Restriction Listing
Records of Emergency Release Reports
HMIRS Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System
CHMIRS California Hazardous Material Incident Report System LDS Land Disposal Sites Listing
MCS Military Cleanup Sites Listing
SPILLS 90 SPILLS 90 data from FirstSearch
Other Ascertainable Records
RCRA NonGen / NLR RCRA - Non Generators / No Longer Regulated FUDS Formerly Used Defense Sites
DOD Department of Defense Sites
SCRD DRYCLEANERS State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Listing US FIN ASSUR Financial Assurance Information
EPA WATCH LIST EPA WATCH LIST
2020 COR ACTION 2020 Corrective Action Program List
TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act
TRIS Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
SSTS Section 7 Tracking Systems
ROD Records Of Decision
RMP Risk Management Plans
RAATS RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
PRP Potentially Responsible Parties
PADS PCB Activity Database System
ICIS Integrated Compliance Information System
FTTS FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
MLTS Material Licensing Tracking System
COAL ASH DOE Steam-Electric Plant Operation Data
COAL ASH EPA Coal Combustion Residues Surface Impoundments List PCB TRANSFORMER PCB Transformer Registration Database
RADINFO Radiation Information Database
216 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6827807.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6
HIST FTTS FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing DOT OPS Incident and Accident Data
CONSENT Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
INDIAN RESERV Indian Reservations
FUSRAP Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program
UMTRA Uranium Mill Tailings Sites
LEAD SMELTERS Lead Smelter Sites
US AIRS Aerometric Information Retrieval System Facility Subsystem US MINES Mines Master Index File
ABANDONED MINES Abandoned Mines
FINDS Facility Index System/Facility Registry System
DOCKET HWC Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket Listing
UXO Unexploded Ordnance Sites
ECHO Enforcement & Compliance History Information
FUELS PROGRAM EPA Fuels Program Registered Listing
CA BOND EXP. PLAN Bond Expenditure Plan
Cortese "Cortese" Hazardous Waste & Substances Sites List CUPA Listings CUPA Resources List
DRYCLEANERS Cleaner Facilities
EMI Emissions Inventory Data
ENF Enforcement Action Listing
Financial Assurance Financial Assurance Information Listing HAZNET Facility and Manifest Data
ICE ICE
HIST CORTESE Hazardous Waste & Substance Site List
HWP EnviroStor Permitted Facilities Listing
HWT Registered Hazardous Waste Transporter Database
MINES Mines Site Location Listing
MWMP Medical Waste Management Program Listing
NPDES NPDES Permits Listing
PEST LIC Pesticide Regulation Licenses Listing
PROC Certified Processors Database
Notify 65 Proposition 65 Records
UIC UIC Listing
UIC GEO UIC GEO (GEOTRACKER)
WASTEWATER PITS Oil Wastewater Pits Listing
WDS Waste Discharge System
WIP Well Investigation Program Case List
MILITARY PRIV SITES MILITARY PRIV SITES (GEOTRACKER)
PROJECT PROJECT (GEOTRACKER)
WDR Waste Discharge Requirements Listing
CIWQS California Integrated Water Quality System
CERS CERS
NON-CASE INFO NON-CASE INFO (GEOTRACKER)
OTHER OIL GAS OTHER OIL & GAS (GEOTRACKER)
PROD WATER PONDS PROD WATER PONDS (GEOTRACKER)
SAMPLING POINT SAMPLING POINT (GEOTRACKER)
WELL STIM PROJ Well Stimulation Project (GEOTRACKER)
HWTS Hazardous Waste Tracking System
MINES MRDS Mineral Resources Data System
EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS
EDR Exclusive Records
EDR MGP EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
217
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6827807.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7
EDR Hist Auto EDR Exclusive Historical Auto Stations
EDR Hist Cleaner EDR Exclusive Historical Cleaners
EDR RECOVERED GOVERNMENT ARCHIVES
Exclusive Recovered Govt. Archives
RGA LF Recovered Government Archive Solid Waste Facilities List RGA LUST Recovered Government Archive Leaking Underground Storage Tank SURROUNDING SITES: SEARCH RESULTS
Surrounding sites were identified in the following databases.
Elevations have been determined from the USGS Digital Elevation Model and should be evaluated on a relative (not an absolute) basis. Relative elevation information between sites of close proximity should be field verified. Sites with an elevation equal to or higher than the target property have been differentiated below from sites with an elevation lower than the target property.
Page numbers and map identification numbers refer to the EDR Radius Map report where detailed data on individual sites can be reviewed.
Sites listed in bold italics are in multiple databases.
Unmappable (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis.
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Lists of state- and tribal hazardous waste facilities
ENVIROSTOR: The Department of Toxic Substances Control’s (DTSC’s) Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program’s (SMBRP’s) EnviroStor database identifes sites that have known contamination or sites for which there may be reasons to investigate further. The database includes the following site types: Federal Superfund sites (National Priorities List (NPL)); State Response, including Military Facilities and State Superfund; Voluntary Cleanup; and School sites. EnviroStor provides similar information to the information that was available in CalSites, and provides additional site information, including, but not limited to, identification of formerly-contaminated properties that have been released for reuse, properties where environmental deed restrictions have been recorded to prevent inappropriate land uses, and risk characterization information that is used to assess potential impacts to public health and the environment at contaminated sites.
A review of the ENVIROSTOR list, as provided by EDR, and dated 10/25/2021 has revealed that there is 1 ENVIROSTOR site within approximately 1 mile of the target property.
Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ PAPIN PROPERTY SCHOO 5591 VANDEN ROAD NNE 1/2 - 1 (0.984 mi.) 1 9 Facility Id: 60000127
Status: No Action Required
218 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC6827807.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 8
Due to poor or inadequate address information, the following sites were not mapped. Count: 1 records.
Site Name Database(s) ____________ ____________
FORMER RR RIGHT-OF-WAY (VANDEN RD. ENVIROSTOR, VCP
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
219
EDR Inc.
220 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
EDR Inc.
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
221
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Distance Target Total
Database (Miles) Property < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Lists of Federal NPL (Superfund) sites
NPL 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Proposed NPL 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
NPL LIENS 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Lists of Federal Delisted NPL sites
Delisted NPL 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Lists of Federal sites subject to
CERCLA removals and CERCLA orders
FEDERAL FACILITY 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
SEMS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
Lists of Federal CERCLA sites with NFRAP
SEMS-ARCHIVE 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
Lists of Federal RCRA facilities
undergoing Corrective Action
CORRACTS 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Lists of Federal RCRA TSD facilities
RCRA-TSDF 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
Lists of Federal RCRA generators
RCRA-LQG 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
RCRA-SQG 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
RCRA-VSQG 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
Federal institutional controls /
engineering controls registries
LUCIS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
US ENG CONTROLS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
US INST CONTROLS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
Federal ERNS list
ERNS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
Lists of state- and tribal
(Superfund) equivalent sites
RESPONSE 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Lists of state- and tribal
hazardous waste facilities
ENVIROSTOR 1.000 0 0 0 1 NR 1
Lists of state and tribal landfills
and solid waste disposal facilities
SWF/LF 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
TC6827807.2s Page 4
222 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Distance Target Total
Database (Miles) Property < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted Lists of state and tribal leaking storage tanks
LUST 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
INDIAN LUST 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
CPS-SLIC 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
Lists of state and tribal registered storage tanks
FEMA UST 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
UST 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
AST 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
INDIAN UST 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
Lists of state and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
INDIAN VCP 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
VCP 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
Lists of state and tribal brownfield sites
BROWNFIELDS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Local Brownfield lists
US BROWNFIELDS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
Local Lists of Landfill / Solid
Waste Disposal Sites
WMUDS/SWAT 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
SWRCY 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
HAULERS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
INDIAN ODI 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
ODI 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
DEBRIS REGION 9 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
IHS OPEN DUMPS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
Local Lists of Hazardous waste /
Contaminated Sites
US HIST CDL 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
HIST Cal-Sites 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
SCH 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
CDL 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
Toxic Pits 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
CERS HAZ WASTE 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
US CDL 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
PFAS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
AQUEOUS FOAM TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
Local Lists of Registered Storage Tanks
SWEEPS UST 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
HIST UST 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
CERS TANKS 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
TC6827807.2s Page 5
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
223
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Distance Target Total
Database (Miles) Property < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted CA FID UST 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
Local Land Records
LIENS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
LIENS 2 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
DEED 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
Records of Emergency Release Reports
HMIRS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
CHMIRS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
LDS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
MCS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
SPILLS 90 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
Other Ascertainable Records
RCRA NonGen / NLR 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
FUDS 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
DOD 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
SCRD DRYCLEANERS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
US FIN ASSUR 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
EPA WATCH LIST 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
2020 COR ACTION 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
TSCA 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
TRIS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
SSTS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
ROD 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
RMP 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
RAATS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
PRP 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
PADS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
ICIS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
FTTS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
MLTS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
COAL ASH DOE 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
COAL ASH EPA 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
PCB TRANSFORMER 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
RADINFO 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
HIST FTTS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
DOT OPS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
CONSENT 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
INDIAN RESERV 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
FUSRAP 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
UMTRA 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
LEAD SMELTERS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
US AIRS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
US MINES 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
ABANDONED MINES 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
FINDS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
DOCKET HWC 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
UXO 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
ECHO 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
TC6827807.2s Page 6
224 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Distance Target Total
Database (Miles) Property < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted FUELS PROGRAM 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
CA BOND EXP. PLAN 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
Cortese 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
CUPA Listings 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
DRYCLEANERS 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
EMI 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
ENF 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
Financial Assurance 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
HAZNET 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
ICE 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
HIST CORTESE 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
HWP 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
HWT 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
MINES 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
MWMP 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
NPDES 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
PEST LIC 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
PROC 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
Notify 65 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
UIC 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
UIC GEO 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
WASTEWATER PITS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0
WDS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
WIP 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0
MILITARY PRIV SITES 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
PROJECT 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
WDR 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
CIWQS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
CERS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
NON-CASE INFO 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
OTHER OIL GAS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
PROD WATER PONDS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
SAMPLING POINT 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
WELL STIM PROJ 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
HWTS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0
MINES MRDS 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS
EDR Exclusive Records
EDR MGP 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
EDR Hist Auto 0.125 0 NR NR NR NR 0
EDR Hist Cleaner 0.125 0 NR NR NR NR 0
EDR RECOVERED GOVERNMENT ARCHIVES
Exclusive Recovered Govt. Archives
RGA LF 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
RGA LUST 0.001 0 NR NR NR NR 0
- Totals -- 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
TC6827807.2s Page 7
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
225
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Distance Target Total
Database (Miles) Property < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted NOTES:
TP = Target Property
NR = Not Requested at this Search Distance
Sites may be listed in more than one database
TC6827807.2s Page 8
226 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
Future Due Date: Not reported
Future Document Type: Not reported
Future Sub Area Name: Not reported
Future Area Name: Not reported
Comments: Not reported
Completed Date: 07/07/2005
Completed Document Type: Phase 1
Completed Sub Area Name: Not reported
Completed Area Name: PROJECT WIDE
Comments: Not reported
Completed Date: 07/08/2005
Completed Document Type: Cost Recovery Closeout Memo
Completed Sub Area Name: Not reported
Completed Area Name: PROJECT WIDE
Completed Info:
Alias Type: Envirostor ID Number
Alias Name: 60000127
Alias Type: Project Code (Site Code)
Alias Name: 104481
Alias Type: Alternate Name
Alias Name: TRAVIS USD-PAPIN PROPERTY SCHOOL SITE
Potential Description: NMA
Confirmed COC: NONE SPECIFIED
Potential COC: NONE SPECIFIED No Contaminants found
Past Use: NONE
APN: NONE SPECIFIED
Longitude: -121.9475
Latitude: 38.32131
Funding: School District
Site Mgmt Req: NONE SPECIFIED
Restricted Use: NO
Special Program: Not reported
Senate: 03
Assembly: 11
Division Branch: Northern California Schools & Santa Susana Supervisor: Shahir Haddad
Program Manager: Angela Garcia
Lead Agency: SMBRP
Regulatory Agencies: SMBRP
NPL: NO
Acres: 30
Site Type Detailed: School
Site Type: School Investigation
Site Code: 104481
Status Date: 07/07/2005
Status: No Action Required
Facility ID: 60000127
City,State,Zip: SOLANO COUNTY, CA 95687
Address: 5591 VANDEN ROAD
Name: PAPIN PROPERTY SCHOOL SITE
ENVIROSTOR:
5194 ft.
0.984 mi.
Relative:
Higher
Actual:
94 ft.
1/2-1 SOLANO COUNTY, CA 95687
NNE 5591 VANDEN ROAD SCH N/A
1 PAPIN PROPERTY SCHOOL SITE ENVIROSTOR S118757069
TC6827807.2s Page 9
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
227
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
Comments: Not reported
Completed Date: 07/07/2005
Completed Document Type: Phase 1
Completed Sub Area Name: Not reported
Completed Area Name: PROJECT WIDE
Comments: Not reported
Completed Date: 07/08/2005
Completed Document Type: Cost Recovery Closeout Memo
Completed Sub Area Name: Not reported
Completed Area Name: PROJECT WIDE
Completed Info:
Alias Type: Envirostor ID Number
Alias Name: 60000127
Alias Type: Project Code (Site Code)
Alias Name: 104481
Alias Type: Alternate Name
Alias Name: TRAVIS USD-PAPIN PROPERTY SCHOOL SITE
Potential Description: NMA
Confirmed COC: NONE SPECIFIED
Potential COC: NONE SPECIFIED, No Contaminants found
Past Use: NONE
APN: NONE SPECIFIED
Longitude: -121.9475
Latitude: 38.32131
Funding: School District
Restricted Use: NO
Status Date: 07/07/2005
Status: No Action Required
Special Program Status: Not reported
Senate: 03
Assembly: 11
Site Code: 104481
Division Branch: Northern California Schools & Santa Susana Supervisor: Shahir Haddad
Project Manager: Angela Garcia
Lead Agency Description: DTSC - Site Cleanup Program
Lead Agency: SMBRP
Cleanup Oversight Agencies: SMBRP
National Priorities List: NO
Acres: 30
Site Mgmt. Req.: NONE SPECIFIED
Site Type Detail: School
Site Type: School Investigation
Facility ID: 60000127
City,State,Zip: SOLANO COUNTY, CA 95687
Address: 5591 VANDEN ROAD
Name: PAPIN PROPERTY SCHOOL SITE
SCH:
Schedule Revised Date: Not reported
Schedule Due Date: Not reported
Schedule Document Type: Not reported
Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported
Schedule Area Name: Not reported
PAPIN PROPERTY SCHOOL SITE (Continued) S118757069
TC6827807.2s Page 10
228 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
Schedule Revised Date: Not reported
Schedule Due Date: Not reported
Schedule Document Type: Not reported
Schedule Sub Area Name: Not reported
Schedule Area Name: Not reported
Future Due Date: Not reported
Future Document Type: Not reported
Future Sub Area Name: Not reported
Future Area Name: Not reported
PAPIN PROPERTY SCHOOL SITE (Continued) S118757069
TC6827807.2s Page 11
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
229
ORPHAN SUMMARY
City EDR ID Site Name Site Address Zip Database(s)Count: 1 records.FAIRFIELD S123785063 FORMER RR RIGHT-OF-WAY (VANDEN RD. VANDEN ROAD 94533 ENVIROSTOR, VCP TC6827807.2s Page 12
230 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
To maintain currency of the following federal and state databases, EDR contacts the appropriate governmental agency on a monthly or quarterly basis, as required.
Number of Days to Update: Provides confirmation that EDR is reporting records that have been updated within 90 days from the date the government agency made the information available to the public.
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Lists of Federal NPL (Superfund) sites
NPL: National Priority List
National Priorities List (Superfund). The NPL is a subset of CERCLIS and identifies over 1,200 sites for priority cleanup under the Superfund Program. NPL sites may encompass relatively large areas. As such, EDR provides polygon coverage for over 1,000 NPL site boundaries produced by EPA’s Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC) and regional EPA offices.
Date of Government Version: 10/20/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/05/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 11/29/2021
Number of Days to Update: 24
Source: EPA
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: 01/13/2022
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/11/2022
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
NPL Site Boundaries
Sources:
EPA’s Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC) Telephone: 202-564-7333
EPA Region 1 EPA Region 6
Telephone 617-918-1143 Telephone: 214-655-6659
EPA Region 3 EPA Region 7
Telephone 215-814-5418 Telephone: 913-551-7247
EPA Region 4 EPA Region 8
Telephone 404-562-8033 Telephone: 303-312-6774
EPA Region 5 EPA Region 9
Telephone 312-886-6686 Telephone: 415-947-4246
EPA Region 10
Telephone 206-553-8665
Proposed NPL: Proposed National Priority List Sites
A site that has been proposed for listing on the National Priorities List through the issuance of a proposed rule in the Federal Register. EPA then accepts public comments on the site, responds to the comments, and places on the NPL those sites that continue to meet the requirements for listing.
Date of Government Version: 10/20/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/05/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 11/29/2021
Number of Days to Update: 24
Source: EPA
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: 01/13/2022
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/11/2022
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
NPL LIENS: Federal Superfund Liens
Federal Superfund Liens. Under the authority granted the USEPA by CERCLA of 1980, the USEPA has the authority to file liens against real property in order to recover remedial action expenditures or when the property owner received notification of potential liability. USEPA compiles a listing of filed notices of Superfund Liens.
TC6827807.2s Page GR-1
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
231
Date of Government Version: 10/15/1991
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/02/1994
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/30/1994
Number of Days to Update: 56
Source: EPA
Telephone: 202-564-4267
Last EDR Contact: 08/15/2011
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/28/2011
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
Lists of Federal Delisted NPL sites
Delisted NPL: National Priority List Deletions
The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) establishes the criteria that the EPA uses to delete sites from the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425.(e), sites may be deleted from the NPL where no further response is appropriate.
Date of Government Version: 10/20/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/05/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 11/29/2021
Number of Days to Update: 24
Source: EPA
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: 01/13/2022
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/11/2022
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
Lists of Federal sites subject to CERCLA removals and CERCLA orders FEDERAL FACILITY: Federal Facility Site Information listing A listing of National Priority List (NPL) and Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) sites found in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) Database where EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Office is involved in cleanup activities.
Date of Government Version: 05/25/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/24/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/20/2021
Number of Days to Update: 88
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: 703-603-8704
Last EDR Contact: 12/29/2021
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/11/2022
Data Release Frequency: Varies
SEMS: Superfund Enterprise Management System
SEMS (Superfund Enterprise Management System) tracks hazardous waste sites, potentially hazardous waste sites, and remedial activities performed in support of EPA’s Superfund Program across the United States. The list was formerly know as CERCLIS, renamed to SEMS by the EPA in 2015. The list contains data on potentially hazardous waste sites that have been reported to the USEPA by states, municipalities, private companies and private persons, pursuant to Section 103 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA).
This dataset also contains sites which are either proposed to or on the National Priorities List (NPL) and the sites which are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL.
Date of Government Version: 10/20/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/05/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 11/29/2021
Number of Days to Update: 24
Source: EPA
Telephone: 800-424-9346
Last EDR Contact: 01/13/2022
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/25/2022
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
Lists of Federal CERCLA sites with NFRAP
SEMS-ARCHIVE: Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive TC6827807.2s Page GR-2
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
232 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
SEMS-ARCHIVE (Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive) tracks sites that have no further interest under the Federal Superfund Program based on available information. The list was formerly known as the CERCLIS-NFRAP, renamed to SEMS ARCHIVE by the EPA in 2015. EPA may perform a minimal level of assessment work at a site while it is archived if site conditions change and/or new information becomes available. Archived sites have been removed and archived from the inventory of SEMS sites. Archived status indicates that, to the best of EPA’s knowledge, assessment at a site has been completed and that EPA has determined no further steps will be taken to list the site on the National Priorities List (NPL), unless information indicates this decision was not appropriate or other considerations require a recommendation for listing at a later time. The decision does not necessarily mean that there is no hazard associated with a given site; it only means that. based upon available information, the location is not judged to be potential NPL site.
Date of Government Version: 10/20/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/05/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 11/29/2021
Number of Days to Update: 24
Source: EPA
Telephone: 800-424-9346
Last EDR Contact: 01/13/2022
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/25/2022
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
Lists of Federal RCRA facilities undergoing Corrective Action CORRACTS: Corrective Action Report
CORRACTS identifies hazardous waste handlers with RCRA corrective action activity.
Date of Government Version: 09/13/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/15/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/12/2021
Number of Days to Update: 27
Source: EPA
Telephone: 800-424-9346
Last EDR Contact: 12/17/2021
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/04/2022
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
Lists of Federal RCRA TSD facilities
RCRA-TSDF: RCRA - Treatment, Storage and Disposal
RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Transporters are individuals or entities that move hazardous waste from the generator offsite to a facility that can recycle, treat, store, or dispose of the waste. TSDFs treat, store, or dispose of the waste.
Date of Government Version: 09/13/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/15/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/12/2021
Number of Days to Update: 27
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: (415) 495-8895
Last EDR Contact: 12/17/2021
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/04/2022
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
Lists of Federal RCRA generators
RCRA-LQG: RCRA - Large Quantity Generators
RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Large quantity generators (LQGs) generate over 1,000 kilograms (kg) of hazardous waste, or over 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month.
Date of Government Version: 09/13/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/15/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/12/2021
Number of Days to Update: 27
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: (415) 495-8895
Last EDR Contact: 12/17/2021
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/04/2022
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
TC6827807.2s Page GR-3
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
233
RCRA-SQG: RCRA - Small Quantity Generators
RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Small quantity generators (SQGs) generate between 100 kg and 1,000 kg of hazardous waste per month.
Date of Government Version: 09/13/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/15/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/12/2021
Number of Days to Update: 27
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: (415) 495-8895
Last EDR Contact: 12/17/2021
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/04/2022
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
RCRA-VSQG: RCRA - Very Small Quantity Generators (Formerly Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators) RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Very small quantity generators (VSQGs) generate less than 100 kg of hazardous waste, or less than 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month.
Date of Government Version: 09/13/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/15/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/12/2021
Number of Days to Update: 27
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: (415) 495-8895
Last EDR Contact: 12/17/2021
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/04/2022
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries LUCIS: Land Use Control Information System
LUCIS contains records of land use control information pertaining to the former Navy Base Realignment and Closure properties.
Date of Government Version: 07/12/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/06/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/22/2021
Number of Days to Update: 77
Source: Department of the Navy
Telephone: 843-820-7326
Last EDR Contact: 11/08/2021
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/21/2022
Data Release Frequency: Varies
US ENG CONTROLS: Engineering Controls Sites List
A listing of sites with engineering controls in place. Engineering controls include various forms of caps, building foundations, liners, and treatment methods to create pathway elimination for regulated substances to enter environmental media or effect human health.
Date of Government Version: 08/23/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/23/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 11/12/2021
Number of Days to Update: 81
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: 703-603-0695
Last EDR Contact: 11/18/2021
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/06/2022
Data Release Frequency: Varies
US INST CONTROLS: Institutional Controls Sites List
A listing of sites with institutional controls in place. Institutional controls include administrative measures, such as groundwater use restrictions, construction restrictions, property use restrictions, and post remediation care requirements intended to prevent exposure to contaminants remaining on site. Deed restrictions are generally required as part of the institutional controls.
Date of Government Version: 08/23/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/23/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 11/12/2021
Number of Days to Update: 81
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: 703-603-0695
Last EDR Contact: 11/19/2021
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/07/2022
Data Release Frequency: Varies
TC6827807.2s Page GR-4
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
234 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
Federal ERNS list
ERNS: Emergency Response Notification System
Emergency Response Notification System. ERNS records and stores information on reported releases of oil and hazardous substances.
Date of Government Version: 09/13/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/21/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 12/15/2021
Number of Days to Update: 85
Source: National Response Center, United States Coast Guard Telephone: 202-267-2180
Last EDR Contact: 12/16/2021
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 04/04/2022
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
Lists of state- and tribal (Superfund) equivalent sites RESPONSE: State Response Sites
Identifies confirmed release sites where DTSC is involved in remediation, either in a lead or oversight capacity.
These confirmed release sites are generally high-priority and high potential risk.
Date of Government Version: 10/25/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/26/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/14/2022
Number of Days to Update: 80
Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control
Telephone: 916-323-3400
Last EDR Contact: 10/26/2021
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/07/2022
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
Lists of state- and tribal hazardous waste facilities
ENVIROSTOR: EnviroStor Database
The Department of Toxic Substances Control’s (DTSC’s) Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program’s (SMBRP’s) EnviroStor database identifes sites that have known contamination or sites for which there may be reasons to investigate further. The database includes the following site types: Federal Superfund sites (National Priorities List (NPL)); State Response, including Military Facilities and State Superfund; Voluntary Cleanup; and School sites. EnviroStor provides similar information to the information that was available in CalSites, and provides additional site information, including, but not limited to, identification of formerly-contaminated properties that have been released for reuse, properties where environmental deed restrictions have been recorded to prevent inappropriate land uses, and risk characterization information that is used to assess potential impacts to public health and the environment at contaminated sites.
Date of Government Version: 10/25/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/26/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/14/2022
Number of Days to Update: 80
Source: Department of Toxic Substances Control
Telephone: 916-323-3400
Last EDR Contact: 10/26/2021
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/07/2022
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
Lists of state and tribal landfills and solid waste disposal facilities SWF/LF (SWIS): Solid Waste Information System
Active, Closed and Inactive Landfills. SWF/LF records typically contain an inve ntory of solid waste disposal facilities or landfills. These may be active or i nactive facilities or open dumps that failed to meet RCRA Section 4004 criteria for solid waste landfills or disposal sites.
Date of Government Version: 08/09/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/10/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 11/05/2021
Number of Days to Update: 87
Source: Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery
Telephone: 916-341-6320
Last EDR Contact: 11/09/2021
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 02/21/2022
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
Lists of state and tribal leaking storage tanks
TC6827807.2s Page GR-5
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
235
LUST REG 5: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Database
Leaking Underground Storage Tank locations. Alameda, Alpine, Amador, Butte, Colusa, Contra Costa, Calveras, El Dorado, Fresno, Glenn, Kern, Kings, Lake, Lassen, Madera, Mariposa, Merced, Modoc, Napa, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Shasta, Solano, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Tulare, Tuolumne, Yolo, Yuba counties.
Date of Government Version: 07/01/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/22/2008
Date Made Active in Reports: 07/31/2008
Number of Days to Update: 9
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region (5) Telephone: 916-464-4834
Last EDR Contact: 07/01/2011
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/17/2011
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
LUST REG 6L: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Case Listing For more current information, please refer to the State Water Resources Control Board’s LUST database.
Date of Government Version: 09/09/2003
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/10/2003
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/07/2003
Number of Days to Update: 27
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Lahontan Region (6) Telephone: 530-542-5572
Last EDR Contact: 09/12/2011
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/26/2011
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
LUST REG 4: Underground Storage Tank Leak List
Los Angeles, Ventura counties. For more current information, please refer to the State Water Resources Control Board’s LUST database.
Date of Government Version: 09/07/2004
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/07/2004
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/12/2004
Number of Days to Update: 35
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Los Angeles Region (4) Telephone: 213-576-6710
Last EDR Contact: 09/06/2011
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/19/2011
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
LUST REG 3: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Database
Leaking Underground Storage Tank locations. Monterey, San Benito, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz counties.
Date of Government Version: 05/19/2003
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/19/2003
Date Made Active in Reports: 06/02/2003
Number of Days to Update: 14
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Coast Region (3) Telephone: 805-542-4786
Last EDR Contact: 07/18/2011
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/31/2011
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
LUST REG 2: Fuel Leak List
Leaking Underground Storage Tank locations. Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, Sonoma counties.
Date of Government Version: 09/30/2004
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/20/2004
Date Made Active in Reports: 11/19/2004
Number of Days to Update: 30
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Bay Region (2) Telephone: 510-622-2433
Last EDR Contact: 09/19/2011
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/02/2012
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
LUST REG 7: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Case Listing Leaking Underground Storage Tank locations. Imperial, Riverside, San Diego, Santa Barbara counties.
Date of Government Version: 02/26/2004
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/26/2004
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/24/2004
Number of Days to Update: 27
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Colorado River Basin Region (7) Telephone: 760-776-8943
Last EDR Contact: 08/01/2011
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/14/2011
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
LUST REG 1: Active Toxic Site Investigation
Del Norte, Humboldt, Lake, Mendocino, Modoc, Siskiyou, Sonoma, Trinity counties. For more current information, please refer to the State Water Resources Control Board’s LUST database.
TC6827807.2s Page GR-6
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
236 MATT GARCIA COMMUNITY PARK MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX E
Date of Government Version: 02/01/2001
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/28/2001
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/29/2001
Number of Days to Update: 29
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board North Coast (1) Telephone: 707-570-3769
Last EDR Contact: 08/01/2011
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/14/2011
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
LUST: Leaking Underground Fuel Tank Report (GEOTRACKER) Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Sites included in GeoTracker. GeoTracker is the Water Boards data management system for sites that impact, or have the potential to impact, water quality in California, with emphasis on groundwater.
Date of Government Version: 09/07/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/07/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 11/29/2021
Number of Days to Update: 83
Source: State Water Resources Control Board
Telephone: see region list
Last EDR Contact: 12/07/2021
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/21/2022
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
LUST REG 9: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Report
Orange, Riverside, San Diego counties. For more current information, please refer to the State Water Resources Control Board’s LUST database.
Date of Government Version: 03/01/2001
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/23/2001
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/21/2001
Number of Days to Update: 28
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region (9) Telephone: 858-637-5595
Last EDR Contact: 09/26/2011
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/09/2012
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
LUST REG 8: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
California Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region (8). For more current information, please refer to the State Water Resources Control Board’s LUST database.
Date of Government Version: 02/14/2005
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/15/2005
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/28/2005
Number of Days to Update: 41
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region (8) Telephone: 909-782-4496
Last EDR Contact: 08/15/2011
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/28/2011
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
LUST REG 6V: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Case Listing Leaking Underground Storage Tank locations. Inyo, Kern, Los Angeles, Mono, San Bernardino counties.
Date of Government Version: 06/07/2005
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/07/2005
Date Made Active in Reports: 06/29/2005
Number of Days to Update: 22
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Victorville Branch Office (6) Telephone: 760-241-7365
Last EDR Contact: 09/12/2011
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/26/2011
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
INDIAN LUST R5: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land Leaking underground storage tanks located on Indian Land in Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin.
Date of Government Version: 04/06/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/11/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/07/2021
Number of Days to Update: 88
Source: EPA, Region 5
Telephone: 312-886-7439
Last EDR Contact: 01/18/2022
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/02/2022
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN LUST R10: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in Alaska, Idaho, Oregon and Washington.
Date of Government Version: 04/27/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/11/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/07/2021
Number of Days to Update: 88
Source: EPA Region 10
Telephone: 206-553-2857
Last EDR Contact: 01/18/2022
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/02/2022
Data Release Frequency: Varies
TC6827807.2s Page GR-7
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
CITY OF FAIRFIELD | FUTURE FAIRFIELD FUN
Env Site Assessment
237
INDIAN LUST R9: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in Arizona, California, New Mexico and Nevada Date of Government Version: 05/27/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/11/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/07/2021
Number of Days to Update: 88
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: 415-972-3372
Last EDR Contact: 01/18/2022
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/02/2022
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN LUST R8: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming.
Date of Government Version: 05/27/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/11/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/07/2021
Number of Days to Update: 88
Source: EPA Region 8
Telephone: 303-312-6271
Last EDR Contact: 01/18/2022
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/02/2022
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN LUST R7: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in Iowa, Kansas, and Nebraska
Date of Government Version: 06/01/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/11/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/07/2021
Number of Days to Update: 88
Source: EPA Region 7
Telephone: 913-551-7003
Last EDR Contact: 01/18/2022
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/02/2022
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN LUST R1: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land A listing of leaking underground storage tank locations on Indian Land.
Date of Government Version: 04/28/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/11/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/07/2021
Number of Days to Update: 88
Source: EPA Region 1
Telephone: 617-918-1313
Last EDR Contact: 01/18/2022
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/02/2022
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN LUST R6: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in New Mexico and Oklahoma.
Date of Government Version: 05/17/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/11/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/07/2021
Number of Days to Update: 88
Source: EPA Region 6
Telephone: 214-665-6597
Last EDR Contact: 01/18/2022
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/02/2022
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN LUST R4: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land LUSTs on Indian land in Florida, Mississippi and North Carolina.
Date of Government Version: 05/28/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/22/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/20/2021
Number of Days to Update: 90
Source: EPA Region 4
Telephone: 404-562-8677
Last EDR Contact: 01/18/2022
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 05/02/2022
Data Release Frequency: Varies
CPS-SLIC: Statewide SLIC Cases (GEOTRACKER)
Cleanup Program Sites (CPS; also known as Site Cleanups [SC] and formerly known as Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups [SLIC] sites) included in GeoTracker. GeoTracker is the Water Boards data management system for sites that impact, or have the potential to impact, water quality in California, with emphasis on groundwater.
Date of Government Version: 09/07/2021
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/07/2021
Date Made Active in Reports: 11/29/2021
Number of Days to Update: 83
Source: State Water Resources Control Board
Telephone: 866-480-1028
Last EDR Contact: 12/07/2021
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/21/2022
Data Release Frequency: Varies
TC6827807.2s Page GR-8
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING