Agenda packet, special meeting, first session — King City City Council, April 18, 2022 (part 3 of 4)

Respectfully submitted,
Walter J. Van Groningen
President
WJV:wjv
21‐53 (Grocery Outlet Store, King City) 10‐20‐21 17
FIGURE 1: PROJECT SITE PLAN
21‐53 (Grocery Outlet Store, King City) 10‐20‐21 18
FIGURE 2: PROJECT SITE VICINITY AND NOISE MONITORING SITE LOCATIONS 21‐53 (Grocery Outlet Store, King City) 10‐20‐21 19
FIGURE 3: NOISE MONITORING SITE LT-1
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
0:00:001:00:002:00:003:00:004:00:005:00:006:00:007:00:008:00:009:00:00 10:00:0011:00:0012:00:0013:00:0014:00:0015:00:0016:00:0017:00:0018:00:0019:00:0020:00:0021:00:0022:00:0023:00:00 Levels, dBA
Time
Site LT‐1
October, 2021
Lmax
Leq
L90
21‐53 (Grocery Outlet Store, King City) 10‐20‐21

APPENDIX A

ACOUSTICAL TERMINOLOGY
AMBIENT NOISE LEVEL: The composite of noise from all sources near and far. In this context, the ambient noise level constitutes the normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location.

CNEL: Community Noise Equivalent Level. The average equivalent sound level during a 24‐hour day, obtained after addition of approximately five decibels to sound levels in the evening from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and ten decibels to sound levels in the night before 7:00 a.m. and after 10:00 p.m.

DECIBEL, dB: A unit for describing the amplitude of sound, equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure, which is 20 micropascals (20 micronewtons per square meter).

DNL/Ldn: Day/Night Average Sound Level. The average equivalent sound level during a 24‐hour day, obtained after addition of ten decibels to sound levels in the night after 10:00 p.m. and before 7:00 a.m.

Leq: Equivalent Sound Level. The sound level containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given sample period.

Leq is typically computed over 1, 8 and 24‐hour sample periods.

NOTE: The CNEL and DNL represent daily levels of noise exposure averaged on an annual basis, while Leq represents the average noise exposure for a shorter time period, typically one hour.

Lmax: The maximum noise level recorded during a noise event.

Ln: The sound level exceeded "n" percent of the time during a sample interval (L90, L50, L10, etc.). For example, L10 equals the level exceeded 10 percent of the time.
21‐53 (Grocery Outlet Store, King City) 10‐20‐21
A-2

ACOUSTICAL TERMINOLOGY
NOISE EXPOSURE
CONTOURS: Lines drawn about a noise source indicating constant levels of noise exposure. CNEL and DNL contours are frequently utilized to describe community exposure to noise.

NOISE LEVEL
REDUCTION (NLR): The noise reduction between indoor and outdoor environments or between two rooms that is the numerical difference, in decibels, of the average sound pressure levels in those areas or rooms. A measurement of Anoise level reduction@ combines the effect of the transmission loss performance of the structure plus the effect of acoustic absorption present in the receiving room.

SEL or SENEL: Sound Exposure Level or Single Event Noise Exposure Level. The level of noise accumulated during a single noise event, such as an aircraft overflight, with reference to a duration of one second.

More specifically, it is the time‐integrated A‐weighted squared sound pressure for a stated time interval or event, based on a reference pressure of 20 micropascals and a reference duration of one second.

SOUND LEVEL: The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using the A‐weighting filter network. The A‐weighting filter de‐emphasizes the very low and very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the response of the human ear and gives good correlation with subjective reactions to noise.

SOUND TRANSMISSION
CLASS (STC): The single‐number rating of sound transmission loss for a construction element (window, door, etc.) over a frequency range where speech intelligibility largely occurs.

APPENDIX C

TRAFFIC NOISE MODELING CALCULATIONS
WJV Acoustics, Inc
FHWA-RD-77-108Calculation Sheets
October 15, 2021
Project #: 21-53 Contour Levels (dB) 60 65 70 75Description: Existing Ldn/Cnel: LdnSite Type: SoftSegment Roadway Name Segment Description ADT %Day %Evening %Night %Med %Heavy Speed Distance Offset 1 Broadway Street west of project 10000 90 10 2 1 25 752 Broadway Street east of project 10000 90 10 2 1 25 753 Franciscan Way south of Broadway 3350 90 10 2 1 25 754 Broadway Street east of Fanciscan Way 10850 90 10 2 1 25 755 Broadway Street east of Canal Street 14900 90 10 2 1 25 756 Broadway Street west of Canal Street 12050 90 10 2 1 25 757 Canal Street south of Broadway 5350 90 10 2 1 25 758 Broadway Street west of S. Mildred Street 13650 90 10 2 1 25 759 S. Mildred Street north of Broadway 5250 90 10 2 1 25 75 10 S. Mildred Street south of Broadway 2100 90 10 2 1 25 75 WJV Acoustics, Inc
FHWA-RD-77-108Calculation Sheets
October 15, 2021
Project #: 21-53 Contour Levels (dB) 60 65 70 75Description: Existing + ProjectLdn/Cnel: LdnSite Type: SoftSegment Roadway Name Segment Description ADT %Day %Evening %Night %Med %Heavy Speed Distance Offset 1 Broadway Street west of project 10580 90 10 2 1 25 75 2 Broadway Street east of project 10480 90 10 2 1 25 75 3 Franciscan Way south of Broadway 3410 90 10 2 1 25 75 4 Broadway Street east of Fanciscan Way 11280 90 10 2 1 25 755 Broadway Street east of Canal Street 15280 90 10 2 1 25 75 6 Broadway Street west of Canal Street 12490 90 10 2 1 25 75 7 Canal Street south of Broadway 5410 90 10 2 1 25 758 Broadway Street west of S. Mildred Street 14040 90 10 2 1 25 75 9 S. Mildred Street north of Broadway 5310 90 10 2 1 25 75 10 S. Mildred Street south of Broadway 2160 90 10 2 1 25 75 WJV Acoustics, Inc
FHWA-RD-77-108Calculation Sheets
October 15, 2021
Project #: 21-53 Contour Levels (dB) 60 65 70 75Description: Cumulative Ldn/Cnel: LdnSite Type: SoftSegment Roadway Name Segment Description ADT %Day %Evening %Night %Med %Heavy Speed Distance Offset 1 Broadway Street west of project 13150 90 10 2 1 25 75 2 Broadway Street east of project 13150 90 10 2 1 25 75 3 Franciscan Way south of Broadway 3600 90 10 2 1 25 75 4 Broadway Street east of Fanciscan Way 14050 90 10 2 1 25 755 Broadway Street east of Canal Street 18250 90 10 2 1 25 75 6 Broadway Street west of Canal Street 14510 90 10 2 1 25 75 7 Canal Street south of Broadway 7020 90 10 2 1 25 758 Broadway Street west of S. Mildred Street 18360 90 10 2 1 25 75 9 S. Mildred Street north of Broadway 6810 90 10 2 1 25 75 10 S. Mildred Street south of Broadway 2620 90 10 2 1 25 75 WJV Acoustics, Inc
FHWA-RD-77-108Calculation Sheets
October 15, 2021
Project #: 21-53 Contour Levels (dB) 60 65 70 75Description: Cumulative + projectLdn/Cnel: LdnSite Type: SoftSegment Roadway Name Segment Description ADT %Day %Evening %Night %Med %Heavy Speed Distance Offset 1 Broadway Street west of project 13580 90 10 2 1 25 75 2 Broadway Street east of project 14420 90 10 2 1 25 75 3 Franciscan Way south of Broadway 3660 90 10 2 1 25 75 4 Broadway Street east of Fanciscan Way 14480 90 10 2 1 25 755 Broadway Street east of Canal Street 18630 90 10 2 1 25 75 6 Broadway Street west of Canal Street 14950 90 10 2 1 25 75 7 Canal Street south of Broadway 7080 90 10 2 1 25 758 Broadway Street west of S. Mildred Street 18750 90 10 2 1 25 75 9 S. Mildred Street north of Broadway 6870 90 10 2 1 25 75 10 S. Mildred Street south of Broadway 2680 90 10 2 1 25 75

APPENDIX F

TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS

Transportation Engineers

TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS
FOR

GROCERY OUTLET STORE
King City, California
Prepared For:

Best Development Group
2580 Sierra Blvd., Suite E
Sacramento, CA 95825
Prepared By:

KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
3853 Taylor Road, Suite G
Loomis, CA 95650
(916) 660-1555
October 1, 2021
Job No. 0951-15
King City Grocery Outlet Store

TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR

GROCERY OUTLET STORE
King City, California

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................................... 1 Project Description........................................................................................................................... 1 Scope of Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 1 Study Conclusions ........................................................................................................................... 5 EXISTING SETTING ................................................................................................................................ 7 Study Area Circulation System - Roads .......................................................................................... 7 Study Area Intersections.................................................................................................................. 8 US 101 Ramps................................................................................................................................. 8 Standards of Significance: Levels of Service – Methodology / Standards...................................... 9 Traffic Impact Fee Programs......................................................................................................... 11 Existing Traffic Volumes / Levels of Service................................................................................ 12 Peak Period Queues........................................................................................................................ 16 Traffic Signal Warrants................................................................................................................... 17 Alternative Transportation Modes................................................................................................. 17 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS .......................................................................................................... 19 Trip Generation.............................................................................................................................. 19 Vehicle Trip Distribution............................................................................................................... 20 Trip Assignment ............................................................................................................................ 20 PROJECT CEQA TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS ........................................................................... 22 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis ...................................................................................... 22 Multi-Modal Impacts..................................................................................................................... 24 Impacts to Safety on State Highways ............................................................................................ 25 PROJECT TRAFFIC OPERATIONAL EFFECTS.............................................................................. 26 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions and Levels of Service.................................................... 26 Project Impacts to Alternative Transportation Modes................................................................... 31 Site Access..................................................................................................................................... 31 CUMULATIVE TRAFFIC EFFECTS ................................................................................................... 33 Long Term Background Cumulative Conditions........................................................................... 33 IMPROVEMENT OPTIONS .................................................................................................................. 40 Project Effects / Improvement Options.......................................................................................... 40 APPENDIX................................................................................................................................................ 41 Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 1
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA

TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR

GROCERY OUTLET STORE
King City, California

INTRODUCTION
This report documents KD Anderson & Associates' analysis of the Transportation impacts associated with developing a Grocery Outlet Store in the Monterey County city of King City. This assessment of Transportation impacts has been required to evaluate the project’s impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and to confirm that the project will not result in traffic operating conditions in excess of adopted King City General Plan minimum Level of Service standards. The analysis identifies both current and future background conditions at key intersections in the vicinity of the site. To access CEQA impacts the projects effects on regional Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT), on alternative transportation modes and on safety on Caltrans facilities has been investigated. To address traffic operational effects, the characteristics of the proposed project have been determined, including estimated trip generation and the directional distribution / assignment of project generated traffic. The significance of project effects has been determined with regard to Existing Plus Project and Cumulative Plus Project conditions based on General Plan standards, and the adequacy of site access has been evaluated.

Project Description
The proposed project consists of a 18.2 ksf Grocery Outlet Store located on an approximately 1.6 acre in-fill site on the south side of Broadway Street between the US 101 interchange and Franciscan Way, as noted in Figure 1. Access to the site will be provided via two full-access driveways on Broadway Street, as shown in Figure 2. The western driveway is about 400 feet (centerline to centerline) from the Broadway Street / E. San Antonio Drive intersection, and the eastern driveway is about 300 feet to the west of Franciscan Way. Today the site is vacant.

Sidewalk exists along the site’s frontage. The project site plan identifies 72 parking spaces. The project’s truck loading is located on the south side of the building, and its orientation indicates that trucks would enter from the east driveway and exit via the western driveway.

Scope of Analysis
The impact analysis conforms to CEQA, Caltrans Transportation Study guidelines and City of King City requirements.

Existing Setting. Current roadway and intersection capacities and operating Levels of Service have been quantified. To account for COVID new peak hour traffic counts were conducted and pre-COVID cellphone-based data from StreetLight Corporation was reviewed to supplement weekday peak hour traffic data available from 2006 from the City of King City. Based on that comparison estimated Year 2021 No-COVID traffic volumes were created under the most conservative approach by applying a background growth rate based on King City population growth to the Year 2006 traffic counts.

KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 1

VICINITY MAP
0951-15 RA 10/1/2021

PROJECT

LOCATION
[MJ
jl
*•! 0 to!
El
>’ E
r
r§J
—
* v
A’ G13
' .
1 'y. 101
Bl
.
- J
A
H’ J gj
.

VICINITY MAP
figure 1
i9
u. h
I'?-’'
cf«p3

PROJECT

LOCATION
Lkl
^s;S
x **
T J
rA
"A
KDAnderson &Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
0951-15 RA 10/1/2021
figure 2

SITE PLAN
0951-15 RA 10/1/2021
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers

PROJECT SUMMARY

BUILDING AREA G) COMMERCIAL
/
rotPARKING SUMMARY Tn / REQUIRED PARKING: 72 STALLS T3 13- ft

LANDSCAPE AREA
“ZD MIN. REQUIRED 20% OF TOTAL PARCELAREA
(0
;-v j
* 421
IdOlS -
•s dOlS
A
scafei’-M' LOT HHr
zo 40
/
z
/ SP-1

SITE PLAN
0951-15 RA 10/1/2021 figure 2
I
I
AXDAnderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
I
I
I
I
I
I1
I
I
I
I
II
I
II
® VALERO

FUEL STATION

RESULTANT PARCELS
±0.70 AC
(GR/NET)
(P) MARKET RESULTANT PARCEL 1
±1.60 AC
(GR/NET)
<E DENNYS

RESTAURANT
I A
(P) LOT LINEII
I . I
I1
I
I
I

PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
RESULTANT PARCEL 1 MARCH 3, 2021

LS AREA PROVIDED
±10.496 SF <15* OFTOTAL PARCEL)
ADDS. LS AREA NEEDED:
±3.412 SF1S5O
«
I
I
I
I1
I
I
I

RESULTANT PARCELS
±2. 14 AC
(GR/NET)
pil I
I
1 i
I
*
1 0 ; An.r
III
535
533
z
I
PROPOSED PARKING: STANDARD

COMPACT
TOTAL
54 STALLS
18 STALLS
72 STALLS
±13.259 SF
±4.928 SF
±18.187 SF
NET SALES AREA REMAINING GR. FLOOR AREA

TOTAL AREA
TSP ENGINEERING, INC.
- : O! Ii
I F
i
I
I
i

PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
1023 BROADWAY STREET
RESULTANT PARCEL 1

KING CITY, CA
CD
lotuK?
& •. u F=
a
r’
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I .

I
I
I i I i
I
I
II I I
I
I
II
II i
I
I1
I
I
I ,
I
II , I
II
I , I
I
II
I
I
I
II
I
I
h/;'
I
fe
g =
h
fa
Vi
I03HL
o
(TT
0 w - £j!
7S5 Orchard Drive, Suite ^110 Folsom. CA 95630 Phone: (916) 608-0707 Fax: (916) 608-0701 Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 4
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA
The study area includes these locations identified in consultation with City staff:

1. Broadway Circle / US 101 NB ramps

2. Broadway Street / Broadway Circle / San Antonio Drive

3. Broadway Street / Franciscan Way

4. Broadway Street / Canal Street

5. Broadway Street / Mildred Street
Operating Levels of Service and roadway system performance were analyzed using methodologies that are acceptable to the City and Caltrans based on Highway Capacity Manual, 6 th Edition
methodologies using Synchro 10.0 software to calculate intersection Level of Service and identify turn lane queue lengths. SimTraffic simulation was employed at the two closely spaced intersections on Broadway Circle, and Sidra software was employed to assess planned roundabout intersections. MUTCD traffic signal warrants were assessed at unsignalized intersections. The existing setting was also described with regards to pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities.

Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). While the city of King City has not adopted guidelines for evaluating impacts to regional Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) under SB 743, the project’s impact has been discussed within the context of guidance from the California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) document Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research 2018).

Project Traffic Operational Effects. The extent to which the development of the project, by itself, affects the area street system was determined. The number of automobile trips that may be generated by the Grocery Outlet Store was estimated through application of published trip generation rates available from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE Trip Generation Manual 10th Edition). Appropriate “pass-by” trip rate assumptions were developed from the ITE Trip Generation Handbook, and the directional distribution of primary project trips was determined based on the general location of residences within the project’s probable market area and the location of regional transportation corridors.

Traffic operating conditions were re-calculated under "Existing Plus Grocery Outlet Store Project Alone" conditions. Peak Hour Levels of Service were identified, 95th percentile queue lengths were estimated. The extent to which project development results in conditions in excess of adopted General Plan policy minimum Level of Service standards was determined, and the extent to which the project exacerbates current queuing deficiencies was evaluated. The adequacy of site access was evaluated with regard to truck turning requirements and driveway throat depth, etc. Impacts to alternative transportation modes were also evaluated and the effects of the project on Caltrans off-ramps were discussed. Improvements tended to maintain minimum General Plan LOS were identified, including improvement projects identified in the City’s traffic impact fee program.

Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 5
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA
Cumulative Conditions. Long Term Year 2040 conditions were assessed based on Year 2040 traffic volume forecasts derived from the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) regional travel demand forecasting model. Resulting future cumulative “No Project” and “Plus Project” traffic volumes were created. Cumulative intersection Levels of Service and 95th percentile queue lengths, as applicable, were calculated and the significance of the project’s cumulative effects was determined based on adopted significance criteria. The extent of improvements needed to deliver conditions that satisfy the General Plan LOS policy were identified.

Study Conclusions
Trip Generation. Based on rates published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition, the Grocery Outlet Store project is expected to generate 1,244 “primary” trips made specifically to visit the site, while 46 primary trips are expected in the a.m. peak hour and 108 primary trips are expected during the p.m. peak hour.

Transportation Impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based on screening criteria identified by the Governors Office of Planning and Research, (OPR) the project’s impacts on Regional Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) can be presumed to be less than significant as a “locally serving” retail use. The Grocery Outlet Store’s most likely effect on regional travel is to slightly reduce the length of shopping trips from northern areas of King City and to offer another option for shopping trips made by residents of areas to the south and east. The effect on VMT is likely to be small, but generally VMT will be reduced by offering a closer option.

This conclusion is consistent with the OPR presumption that the VMT effects of locally serving retail uses of 50,000 sf or less may be considered to be less than significant.

The Grocery Outlet Store does not interfere with the use of any exiting or planned transit, pedestrian or bicycle facility nor does the project result in demands for these alternative transportation modes that exceed their capacity. The project’s impact to Alternative Transportation Modes is not significant.

The Grocery Outlet Store project will add traffic to US 101 and its ramps on Broadway Circle.

However, the amount of traffic added to each ramp would not result in an appreciable increase in the length of off-ramp queues, and adequate space will remain available between the end of queue and the off-ramp gore point to accommodate deceleration to a stop from the speed limit on US 101. The project would not contribute to a safety problem on state facilities. The project’s impact with regards to Safety of State facilities is not significant.

Traffic Operational Effects / Improvement Options. The Grocery Outlet Store contributes to the need for traffic signals and intersection improvements at intersections that are included in the City’s existing traffic impact fee program at these locations:
• Broadway Street / Canal Street
• Broadway Street / Mildred Street
Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 6
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA
The Grocery Outlet Store project should contribute its fair share to the cost of these improvements by paying adopted traffic impacts fees.

The Grocery Outlet Store project will contribute to the need for a traffic signal at the Broadway Street / Franciscan Way intersection under cumulative conditions. This improvement is not in the City’s traffic impact fee program. The Grocery Outlet Store should contribute its fair share to the cost a traffic signal based on its pro rate share of future traffic. Grocery Outlet Store traffic represents 18.9% of the future traffic at the intersection.

Access. Trucks turning right into the site would need to first move into the center TWLT lane and use the entire breadth of the driveway to complete the turn. The driveway would need to be wider to make the turn from the eastbound through lane and to avoid encroaching into the area used by exiting traffic. It will be necessary to confirm the design requirements at the driveway with regards to truck turning radii when final improvement plans are prepared.

Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 7
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA

EXISTING SETTING
This report section describes the facilities that are available today serving vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle traffic and transit users in King City, as well as policies that guide consideration of traffic operational effects.

Study Area Circulation System - Roads
The text which follows provides information regarding the streets and highways included in the study area.

US 101. US 101 runs north-south along western California from Los Angeles County to the Oregon border and is a primary access to King City. In the King City area US 101 is a controlled access freeway with connections to King City’s street system at Broadway Circle, Canal Street and South 1st Street. The posted speed limit is 65 mph. The most recent traffic volume data available for the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) indicates that in 2019 US 101 carried an Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) volume of 26,700 vehicles per day (vpd) south of Broadway Circle, with the daily volume rising to 36,200 AADT to the north. Trucks comprise about 14% of the daily traffic in this area.

Broadway Street. Broadway Street is an east-west route that traverses King City from the US 101 / Broadway Circle interchange easterly to South 1st Street. In the area of the project Broadway Street is a two-lane facility with continuous center Two-Way Left-Turn (TWLT) lane. The posted speed limit is 25 mph and on-street parking is prohibited.

Broadway Circle. Broadway Circle is a two-lane roadway that extends south from an intersection on Broadway Street underneath US 101 to the highway commercial area surrounding the US 101 SB ramps. The posted speed limit is 25 mph.

San Antonio Drive. San Antonio Drive is a four-lane street that extends northeasterly from the Broadway Street / Broadway Circle intersection and traverses northern King City across Metz Road to Lyons Street – Bitterwater Road. The posted speed limit is 35 mph.

Franciscan Way. Franciscan Way is a two-lane local street that extends south from Broadway Street south to the King City Center shopping center. The roadway continues through the center’s parking lot to an intersection on Canal Street about 600 feet north of the US 101 / Canal Street interchange. The posted speed limit is 25 mph.

Mildred Street. Mildred Street is a north-south street that runs through central King City from Division Street across Broadway Street to San Antonio Drive. Mildred Street lies on the east side of King City HS just north of Broadway Street. In the area of the project Mildred Street is a twolane facility with on-street parking, and the posted speed limit is 25 mph.

Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 8
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA
Study Area Intersections
The quality of traffic flow is often governed by the operation of key intersections. The following intersections have been identified for evaluation in this study in consultation with City of King City staff.

The Broadway Street / Broadway Circle / San Antonio Drive intersection is controlled by a traffic signal. The northbound Broadway Circle approach has a left turn lane, two through lanes and separate right turn lanes. Each of these lanes is very short (i.e., 50 feet) due to the proximity of the US 101 NB ramps intersection immediately to the south. The southbound San Antonio Drive approach has two through lanes and a separate left turn lane. The westbound Broadway Circle approach has separate left, through and right turn lanes. The west leg of the intersection is access to San Lorenzo County Park, and the eastbound approach has a single lane. The eastbound and westbound approaches operate with “split” signal phasing. Crosswalks exist on each leg of the intersection. The City of King City is currently pursuing a project to install a roundabout at this intersection.

The US 101 NB ramps / Broadway Circle intersection is about 125 feet from Broadway Street (centerline to centerline) and is controlled by a stop sign on the off-ramp. The southbound Broadway Circle approach has a separate right turn lane, and the northbound approach is a single combined thru + left turn lane. The off-ramp is a single lane. Crosswalks are striped across the off-ramp and on-ramp legs. The Broadway Street / Broadway Circle / San Antonio Drive roundabout project would include a median on Broadway Circle that would limit this intersection to right turns only.

The Broadway Street / Franciscan Way intersection is a “Tee” controlled by a stop sign on the Franciscan Way approach. A westbound left turn lane exists on Broadway Street, and a left turn lane is striped on Franciscan Way. The north leg is the gated access to the KCUSD bus barn.

Crosswalks are striped on south and east legs of the intersection.

The Broadway Street / Canal Street intersection is a “Tee” controlled by a stop sign on the Canal Street approach. King City High School driveways straddle the intersection. A westbound left turn lane exists on Broadway Street, and a left turn lane is striped on Canal Street. Crosswalks are striped on the western and southern intersection legs.

The Broadway Street / Mildred Street intersection is controlled by an all-way stop. Left turn lanes are striped on the Broadway Street approaches, but single lanes exist on Mildred Street.

Crosswalks are striped across all four legs of the intersection.

US 101 Ramps
The US 101 / Broadway Circle interchange is laid out with the northbound ramps in a diamond configuration in close proximity to the Broadway Circle / Broadway Street / San Antonio Drive intersection. The off-ramp extends for 875 fee from the stop bar to the ramp gore. The southbound Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 9
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA
US 101 loop ramps connect to Broadway Circle at an all-way stop controlled intersection with an auxiliary free right turn on the off-ramp. The controlled off-ramp approach extends for 90 feet from the right turn lane loop to the all-way stop.

Table 1 presents available daily traffic volume reported by Caltrans for the US 101 / Broadway Circle ramp.

TABLE 1
US 101 / BROADWAY CIRCLE INTERCHANGE DALY TRAFFIC VOLUMES Freeway Direction Ramp
Annual Average Daily Traffic
(AADT)
2012 2015 2018
Southbound On from Broadway Circle - 1,780 950
Northbound Off to Broadway Circle 1,293 1,460 780
Northbound On from Broadway Circle 4,295 4,730 6,900
Southbound Off to Broadway Circle - - -
No data reported for SB off ramp
Standards of Significance: Levels of Service – Methodology / Standards Level of Service. To assess the quality of existing traffic conditions, Levels of Service were calculated at study area intersections. "Level of Service" is a qualitative measure of traffic operating conditions whereby a letter grade "A" through "F", corresponding to progressively worsening traffic operating conditions, is assigned to an intersection or roadway segment. Table 2 presents the characteristics associated with each LOS grade. As shown in Table 2, LOS "A", "B" and "C" are considered acceptable to most motorists, while LOS "D" is marginally acceptable.

LOS "E" and "F" are associated with severe congestion and delay and are unacceptable to most motorists.

General Plan Policy. While Level of Service is no longer an impact criteria under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) with the passage of SB 743, the following King City General Plan policies are relevant to traffic and circulation:

Policy 2‐1: Through the administration of its zoning and subdivision regulations, the City shall require that each major development demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the appropriate review body, that traffic resulting from the projects will not reduce the level of service of existing City streets below a Level of Service “C”. Where LOS is estimated to fall below LOS “C”, the City shall require improvements to be in place prior to project occupancy to maintain LOS “C” conditions. Where this is not possible or reasonable because of cumulative traffic, extended development phasing, or other factors, developers shall be required to post bonds or other Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 10
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA
guarantees in a proportionate amount to assure that sufficient funding for the necessary improvements will be available within five years.

Policy 5‐2: The City shall encourage large employers (e.g. over 100 employees) to offer assistance and incentives to their employees to utilize ride‐sharing and alternate modes of transportation, where available.

Policy 6‐4: Off‐site street improvements, where required to provide access for any new residential development, shall provide adequate pedestrian as well as vehicular access to connect the new neighborhood with the community. These requirements shall include, at a minimum, concrete sidewalks on at least one side.

Minimum Standards. Local agencies and Caltrans adopt minimum Level of Service standards for their facilities.

US 101 Transportation Concept Report (2014). The Caltrans US SR 1 Transportation Concept Report (SR 1 TCR) indicates that agencies expectations for the performance of the state highway.

The SR 1 TCR is currently unavailable on the Caltrans website as that source undergoes accessibility updates.

The City of King City has established LOS C as the minimum acceptable LOS for overall intersection operations. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has established the transition between LOS C and LOS D as the minimum acceptable LOS for overall intersection operations under its jurisdiction. Generally, LOS F operation on the minor street approach is considered the threshold warranting improvements for two-way stop controlled intersections.

Methods. Levels of Service were calculated for different intersection control types using the respective methods presented in the Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition (HCM 6 Ed). Due to the proximity of the US 101 NB ramps, the Broadway Street / San Antonio Drive intersection and Broadway Circle / US 101 NB ramps intersections were evaluated using Synchro/SimTraffic simulation. Intersection Levels of Service were calculated using SYNCHRO 10.0 software at other intersections controlled by stop signs. Where side street stop signs control traffic, the reported Level of Service reflects the “worst case” movement, which is typically those motorists waiting to enter the major street. Roundabouts were evaluated using SIDRA 10.0.

Traffic Signal Warrants. The extent to which a traffic signal may be justified is determined based on many factors. From the standpoint of traffic impact analysis, signal warrant criteria contained in the California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD) are employed in order to assess the relative impact of the additional traffic accompanying a development proposal. For this analysis, Warrant 3 (Peak Hour Traffic Volume) has been employed.

Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 11
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA
TABLE 2

LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS
Level of
Service Signalized Intersection Unsignalized Intersection "A" Uncongested operations, all queues clear in a
single-signal cycle.

Ave Delay < 10 seconds per vehicle
Little or no delay.

Ave Delay < 10 sec/veh
"B" Uncongested operations, all queues clear in a
single cycle.

Delay > 10 sec/veh and < 20 sec/veh
Short traffic delays.

Delay > 10 sec/veh and
< 15 sec/veh
"C" Light congestion, occasional backups on
critical approaches.

Delay >20 sec/veh and <35 sec/veh
Average traffic delays.

Delay > 15 sec/veh and
< 25 sec/veh
"D" Significant congestions of critical approaches
but intersection functional. Cars required to
wait through more than one cycle during short
peaks. No long queues formed. Delay > 35
sec/veh and < 55 sec/veh
Long traffic delays.

Delay > 25 sec/veh and
< 35 sec/veh
"E" Severe congestion with some long standing
queues on critical approaches. Blockage of
intersection may occur if traffic signal does
not provide for protected turning movements.

Traffic queue may block nearby
intersection(s) upstream of critical
approach(es).

Delay >55 sec and < 80 sec/veh
Very long traffic delays, failure, extreme
congestion. Delay > 35 sec/veh and < 50
sec/veh
"F" Total breakdown, stop-and-go operation.

Delay > 80 sec/veh
Intersection often blocked by external
causes. Delay > 50 sec/veh
Sources: Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition, and Transportation Research Board (TRB) Special Report 209.

Traffic Impact Fee Programs
The Transportation Agency for Monterey County (TAMC) established the Regional Development Impact Fee in 2008. Regional transportation impacts of planned development across the county are analyzed through the program, eliminating the need for traffic analyses from each new development project. Cumulative traffic impacts of development are accounted for through payment of the TAMC fees. Therefore, analysis is only required as needed to address the localized, project‐specific impacts of new development on surrounding transportation infrastructure.

The City of King administers a local traffic impact fee above and beyond the TAMC fee, for the purpose of addressing street improvements within the City that are not covered by the TAMC fee.

Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 12
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA
Existing Traffic Volumes / Levels of Service
Traffic Volume Counts. This analysis addresses weekday a.m. peak hour (7:00 to 9:00 a.m.) and p.m. peak hour (4:00 to 6:00 p.m.) conditions. While standard engineering practice would require collecting new traffic volume data when available information is more than two years old, since March 2020 the effects of COVID-19 have made current traffic volumes un-representative of regular traffic conditions. As a result Caltrans has suggested that where possible available traffic counts be factored to represent regular current conditions by applying historic traffic volume growth rates with support from cellphone-based GIS data if needed.

Four sources of traffic volume data were assembled for this analysis:
• Seasonally adjusted 2006 traffic volume from the Smith-Monterey, LLC, and Silva King City developments TIA, Higgins Associates 4/2007.
• Year 2006 volume adjusted to 2021 by applying a growth factor of 1.172 derived from a King City annual population growth rate of 1.0% for 16 years. • Year 2019 average traffic volumes developed from cellphone-based GIS data provided by StreetLight Data Corporation.
• New traffic counts conducted at all intersections in July 2021 for the analysis.

Table 3 compares the total entering traffic volume at each study intersection under each of the four data sources for weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour conditions. As indicated, recently observed Year 2021 volumes remain well below the 2006 data, either because of the effects of COVID-19 or in the case of the a.m. peak hour due to the absence of school traffic. At most locations the cellphone-based forecasts for 2019 fall between the 2006 and factored 2021 traffic levels. The factored volumes derived from 2006 data are typically the highest volume and have therefor been used for this analysis to produce a conservative analysis. Because no Year 2006 data was available for the Broadway Street / Franciscan Drive intersection StreetLight cellphone-based data was employed at this interaction but the results were adjusted to approach the factored traffic volume levels at adjoining intersections.

Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 13
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA
TABLE 3

COMPARISON OF INTERSECTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES

FROM ALTERNATIVE SOURCES
Intersection
AM Peak Hour Volume (vph) PM Peak Hour Volume (vph)
2006 Growth
Factor1 20192 20213 2006 Growth Factor1 20192 20213
Broadway Cir / US 101 NB ramps 755 887 779 729 918 1,077 1,109 1,023 Broadway St / San Antonio Dr 1,007 1,181 795 714 1,212 1,420 1,289 1,292 Broadway St / Franciscan Way - - 516 353 - - 1,067 852
Broadway St / Canal St 960 1,125 844 399 1,374 1,610 1,306 967 Broadway St / Mildred St 1,037 1,217 1,052 423 1,384 1,622 1,486 1,089 1 Equals 2006 volume multiplied by 1.173.
2 estimated average volume for weekdays (Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday) during April, May, September and October of 2019 from StreetLight Data Inc.
3 traffic counts conducted on Tuesday July 13, 2021
Figure 3 illustrates the intersection turning movement count data used for this analysis at study intersections. This figure also notes the geometric layout of each intersection and the location of traffic controls. This data has been used to determine the operating Level of Service (LOS) and queue length at each intersection. Because hourly Peak Hour Factors (PHF) for each intersection were not available from the 2006 data and because the PHF’s from Year 2021 counts would not be representative, average PHF’s of 0.88 and 0.92 were applied to the a.m. and p.m. peak hour conditions, respectively.

Table 4 identifies estimated current Level of Service under regular (i.e., Non-COVID with schools in session) conditions. As indicated, two intersections deliver a peak hour Level of Service that does not satisfy the King City General Plan LOS C requirement. The Broadway Steet / Mildred Street intersection is projected to operate at LOS F. City staff report that a traffic signal is included in the City of King City traffic impact fee program for this intersection. Side street delays at the Broadway Street / Canal Street intersection are indicative of LOS D conditions in the p.m. peak hour. A traffic signal is also included in the fee program for this intersection Traffic conditions have also been evaluated assuming implementation of the City’s planned Broadway Street / San Antonio Drive roundabout project. As shown, minimum General Plan LOS will be provided.

Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 14
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA
TABLE 4
ESTIMATED YEAR 2021 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
Intersection Control
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Level of
Service
Average
Delay
(sec/veh)
Level of
Service
Average
Delay
(sec/veh)
Existing Traffic Controls
Broadway Cir / US 101 NB ramps WB Stop B 14 B 13
Broadway St / San Antonio Dr Signal B 11 B 12
Broadway St / Franciscan Way NB Stop B 14 C 24
Broadway St / Canal St NB Stop C 15 D 28
Broadway St / Mildred St AWS C 23 F 146
With Broadway Street / San Antonio Drive Roundabout
Broadway Cir / US 101 NB ramps WB right B 13 C 16
Broadway St / San Antonio Dr roundabout A 7 B 11
Bold indicates conditions in excess of adopted LOS C standard. AWS is All-Way Stop 2 1
5 7
6 4
7 S Mildred St/ Broadway St
6 Canal St/ Broadway St
5 Franciscan Way/ Broadway St
4 West Project Dwy/ Broadway St
3 East Project Dwy/ Broadway St
1 2
San Antonio Dr/
US 101/ NB Ramps
San Antonio Dr/ Broadway St
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 3

EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
0951-15 RA 10/1/2021
3 R1-1
(145) 105(350) 240
45 (365 (435)
60)
115 (115)
25 (15)
(160) 254(160) 175
(5) 1
10 (145 (235)330 (290)
10)
105 (210)
15 (15)
169 (320)
(1) 0
(15) 5
(15) 5
(460) 555
290 (540)
(460) 555
290 (540)
R1-1
35 (60)20 (100)
270 (495)
50 (95)
(435) 485
(80) 65
R1-1
45 (110 (205)
55)
390 (545)
160 (205)
(535) 390
(70) 35
R1-1
R1-1
(60) 40(55) 55
(165) 180
30 (30)80 (55)35 (25)
40 (45)
290 (500)
10 (20)
(145) 160
(505) 285
(25) 25
R1-1
R1-1
Stop Sign
Legend
AM Peak Hour Volume
R1-1
XX
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Signalized Intersection
N.T.S.
3 4 5 6 7
290 (540) <- 290 (540)
(460) 555
NORTH East Project Dwy/ Broadway St West Project Dwy/ Broadway St Franciscan Way/ Broadway St Canal St/ Broadway St S Mildred St/ Broadway St 2 KI
[> 1 K San Antonio Dr/ Broadway St
1 1-i
©J
< 5
5 V.
if
G13
y,
101 ' *
j

EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
figure 3
WJ
$
ik'
, 270 (495)
{ 50 (95)
„ 390 (545)
f 160 (205)
y
J
Legend
AM Peak Hour Volume
PM Peak Hour Volume
Stop Sign
Signalized Intersection
4 X
<
l\v
R1-1
w co w
cn O O
b3 Tn T3
cn cn O
41 4^-CL
R1-1
cn —>
o
cn .—. cn bJ
’ O
cn
^XX
(XX)
c|ri-i
o o
o s
cn bj —> cn S
<4;^
° & 8
ONJNJ — cn O
R1-140 (45)
290 (500)
10 (20)
cn o
„ cn
.O -K
cn San Antonio Dr/ US 101/ NB Ramps
MW R1-1
o cn
"S: Th 8°
I
(460) 555 -|
I
si
» * <&
I
(435) 485
(80) 65 T
(535) 390
(70) 35 T
Ch — —
cn cn o
'— T3
co cn -U- R1-1 0 0
SM
11 KDAnderson &Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
0951-15 RA 10/1/2021
*
N.T.S.
©
/
W‘
(145) 160 j
(505 ) 285
(25) 25R1-1P
105 (210)
<-15 (15) < 169 (320)
u
6)
(1) 0 .
(15) 5
(15) 5 T
•x
c|r1-1 J
4 115 (115)
I 25 (15)
Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 16
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA
Peak Period Queues
Table 5 identifies the 95th percentile queue lengths occurring at the study intersections. As noted, many of the existing intersection approaches have short left turn lanes that transition into TwoWay Left-Turn (TWLT) lanes. Thus, queues that exceed the striped left turn lane length could still be accommodated in the painted bay taper and TWLT lane. This is the case on southbound San Antonio Drive and westbound Broadway Street where the left turn lane queues exceed the available lane length.

Queue lengths are also forecast for conditions with implementation of the planned Broadway Street / San Antonio Drive roundabout using SIDRA software.

TABLE 5

EXISTING INTERSECTION QUEUES
Intersection Movement
Storage
(feet)
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Volume
(vph)
95th %
Queue (ft)
Volume
(vph)
95th %
Queue (ft)
Existing Traffic Controls
Broadway Cir / US 101 NB ramps WB 875
1 140 110 130 95
Broadway St /
San Antonio Dr
NB left 50 10 25 10 25
SB left 802 245 150 160 120
EB approach - 10 35 31 50
WB left 802 165 115 320 195
Broadway St /
Franciscan Wy
NB left 402 20 <25 100 60
WB left No lane2 50 <25 60 <25
Broadway St /
Canal St
NB left 40 45 <25 55 85
WB left 602 160 <25 205 30
Broadway St /
Mildred St
NB approach - 145 40 110 35
SB approach - 275 95 280 140
EB left 551 160 45 145 50
WB left 651 10 <25 20 <25
With Broadway Street / San Antonio Drive Roundabout3
Broadway Cir / US 101 NB ramps WB 8751 140 35 130 45
Broadway St /
San Antonio Dr
NB thru - 155 <25 245 45
NB right - 330 45 290 40
SB - 421 70 325 90
EB - 10 <25 31 <25
WB - 280 35 545 280
Highlighted values exceed available storage.
1 Distance from stop bar to ramp gore
2 lane followed by TWLT lane 3 Average / 95th percentile queue Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 17
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA
Traffic Signal Warrants
The volume of traffic occurring at unsignalized intersections was compared to peak hour traffic warrants, and the results are noted in Table 6. As shown, the estimated current volumes at the Broadway Street / Canal Street and Broadway Street / Mildred Street intersection reach the level that satisfy peak hour warrants. City staff report that traffic signals for both intersections are included in the City’s traffic impact fee program.

TABLE 6

CURRENT TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS
Intersection
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Volume (vph)
Warrant
Met?
Volume (vph)
Warrant
Major Minor Major Minor Met?
Broadway Cir / US 101 NB ramps 755 140 No 990 130 No
Broadway St / Franciscan Way 870 55 No 1,105 160 No
Broadway St / Canal St 980 155 No 1,355 260 Yes
Broadway St / Mildred St 810 275 No 1,240 280 Yes
Alternative Transportation Modes
Pedestrian Facilities. There are sidewalks on all of the streets surrounding the project site.

Crosswalks are marked at the signalized Broadway Street / Broadway Circle / San Antonio Drive intersection and across the other study area intersections on Broadway Steet.

Bicycle Facilities. The Monterey County Active Transportation Plan (2018) (MCATP) outlines the location and nature of existing bicycle facilities in the community. Bicycle facilities are categorized within four classifications:
• Class 1 – Bike Path: separate from the road
• Class 2 – Bike Lane: painted strip to the right of mixed vehicle flow lanes • Class 3 – Bike Routes: Signed shared facilities & sharrows • Class 4 – Protected Bike Lanes
There are currently no dedicated bicycle facilities in the immediate area of the Grocery Outlet Store project. Current bicycle use is low, as the peak hour traffic counts conducted for this analysis only identified three bicyclists on Broadway in the area west of Franciscan Way. The MCATP identified and prioritized recommended improvements, and facilities in the vicinity of the project are noted in Table 7. Other bicycle facilities were noted in King City but were not prioritized, and these facilities are also noted in Table 7.

Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 18
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA
TABLE 7

PLANNED KING CITY BICYCLE FACILITIES
Rank Name from to Type
1 San Antonio Dr Metz Rd Broadway St 1 mile bike path / ½ mile bike lane 4 Broadway St Mildred St San Lorenzo St bike lane
16 Broadway Cir San Antonio Dr River Rd bike route
Broadway St San Antonio Dr Mildred St Class 2 bike lanes Canal St Broadway St Division St Class 2 bike lanes
Canal St Division St Rio Vista Dr Class 3 bike route
Source: Transportation Agency of Monterey County, Monterey County Active Transportation Plan (2018) (MCATP), 2018
https://www.tamcmonterey.org/files/e0f71b142/2018-Monterey-County-Active-Transportation-Plan.pdf Transit Facilities. Monterey-Salinas Transit (MST) provides transit service to the King City and South Monterey County area. https://mst.org/maps-schedules/route-list/ Route 23 connects King City with the Salinas Transit Center and with other communities along US 101 and continues as Route 84 twice daily to Paso Robles. These routes pass the project site on Broadway Street to a designated stop on Canal Street at Mee Memorial Hospital.

One route has been suspended due to COVID-19. MST Line 86 King City – San Jose/San Jose Airport had operated with daily scheduled service between King City and San Jose/San Jose Airport with stops in Greenfield, Soledad, Gonzales, Salinas, and Gilroy. The service provided bus access from the Salinas Valley to San Jose, the Bay Area, and the Mineta San Jose International Airport with connections to Greyhound bus service, Amtrak California Capitol Corridor service, and Caltrain in San Jose.

MST also offers On-Call service. On-call is a minibus service throughout the cities of Gonzales, Greenfield, King City and Soledad outside of the fixed route service area.

Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 19
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA

PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
The impacts and traffic operating effects of developing the Grocery Outlet Store and the adequacy of site access is dependent on the physical characteristics of the adjoining street system, as well as the amount of traffic generated by the proposed project. The amount of additional traffic on a particular section of the street network is dependent upon two factors:

I. Trip Generation, the number of new trips generated by the project, and II. Trip Distribution and Assignment, the specific routes that the new traffic takes.

Trip Generation
Trip Generation Rates. This analysis considered trip generation rates derived from several sources. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) publication “Trip Generation, 10th Edition” provides information on the characteristics of various retail uses. The use most similar to a Grocery Outlet Store is “Supermarket” (Code 850). Table 8 identifies the average trip generation rates reported by ITE.

TABLE 8

TRIP GENERATION RATES
Land Use / Source Unit
Weekday
Daily
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
In Out Total In Out Total
Supermarket (code 850) ksf 106.78 60% 40% 3.82 51% 49% 9.24 Grocery Outlet Store 18.2 ksf 1,944 42 28 70 86 82 168
Pass-by Trips 36% <700> <12> <12> <24> <30> <30> <60>
Net Primary Trips 1,244 30 16 46 56 52 108
Source: ITE Trip Generation, 10th Edition
Trip Generation Forecasts. Table 8 also displays the daily, a.m. and p.m. peak hour trip generation forecasts for the project. As indicated, the project would generate 1,944 daily trips at its driveways (i.e., ½ inbound and ½ outbound). The ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition notes that 36% of the weekday trips generated by supermarkets are typically “pass-by”, and this rate has been used for all three study time periods. As noted in Table 8 on a weekday the project is expected to generate 1,244 “primary” trips made specifically to visit the site, while 46 primary trips are expected in the a.m. peak hour and 108 primary trips are expected during the p.m. peak hour.

Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 20
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA
Vehicle Trip Distribution
The distribution of project traffic was determined based on consideration of the demographic distribution of residences and competing stores in this area of Monterey County, and on the typical trade area characteristics of Grocery Outlet Stores. Grocery Outlet Stores in rural communities can attract customers from a relatively broad area that can extends beyond the limits of the community, particularly on weekends. Based on assumptions made for other traffic studies, we assumed that 20% of the trips specifically made to visit the Grocery Outlet Store (i.e., primary trips) will have origins / destination north on US 101 and 5% will be south on US 101. The balance will be oriented to the remainder of King City, with San Antonio Drive and Broadway east of Mildred Street being the key routes. Table 9 summarizes the assumed distribution of primary trips.

TABLE 9

DIRECTIONAL TRIP DISTRIBUTION (PRIMARY TRIPS)
Direction Route
Percentage of
New Trips
North
US 101 20%
San Antonio Drive 30%
Mildred Street 5%
East Broadway Street beyond Mildred Street 25%
South
US 101 5%
Franciscan Way 5%
Canal Street 5%
Mildred Street 5%
Total 100%
Pass-by trips will be drawn in equal proportion from traffic already passing on Broadway Street as part of another trips.

Trip Assignment
Using the trip generation and distribution assumptions described above, the trips generated by the proposed project were assigned to the study area street system. In this case consideration was given to the relative travel time through the site from individual parking areas. Figure 4 presents resulting peak hour volumes accompanying the Grocery Outlet project. 2 1
5 7
6 4
7 S Mildred St/ Broadway St
6 Canal St/ Broadway St
5 Franciscan Way/ Broadway St
4 West Project Dwy/ Broadway St
3 East Project Dwy/ Broadway St
1 2
San Antonio Dr/
US 101/ NB Ramps
San Antonio Dr/ Broadway St
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 4

PROJECT ONLY TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
0951-15 RA 10/1/2021
3 R1-1
R1-1
R1-1
R1-1
R1-1
R1-1
R1-1
Stop Sign
Legend
AM Peak Hour Volume
R1-1
XX
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Signalized Intersection
N.T.S.
5 (21)6 (23)
3 (5)
7 (22)
(-9) 3
(36) 14
R1-1
8 (32)9 (36)
1 (-8)
12 (33)
(-9) -1
(24) 9
R1-1
(3) 1
(10) 3
6 (11)0 (0)
2 (3)
0 (0)
(17) 9
(0) 0(0) 0
8 (14)0 (0)0 (0)
5 (16)
0 (0)
4 (13)
(0) 0
(0) 0
(0) 0
0 (0)2 (3)
12 (22)
0 (0)
(21) 6
(3) 1
0 (0)2 (3)
11 (20)
0 (0)
(18) 6
(3) 1
(0) 0(0) 0(3) 2
0 (0)0 (0)2 (3)
0 (0)
8 (14)
0 (0)
(3) 1
(13) 4
(3) 1
3 4 5 6 7
R1-1 R1-1 o co
Ch NJ
NORTH East Project Dwy/ Broadway St West Project Dwy/ Broadway St Franciscan Way/ Broadway St Canal St/ Broadway St S Mildred St/ Broadway St 2 KI
[> 1 Ki San Antonio Dr/ Broadway St
1 l-I
©J
< »
5 V.
if
G13
Legend
XX AM Peak Hour Volume
101 I

PROJECT ONLY TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
figure 4
WJ
$
i
k' PM Peak Hour Volume
Stop Sign
Signalized Intersection
GN (JI
NJ NJ
«- 1 (-8) < 12 (33)
„ 1 1 (20)
<0 (0)
«- 3 (5) < 7 (22)
, 12 (22)
^0 (0)
l\v
y
J
O GN
O
4 A
R1-1
NJ O O
UJOO
O O CO
"o o -
O ^4
o o o
<4;^
(XX)
c|r1-1
NJ O R1-1
uj "o NJ O R1-1
uj o
San Antonio Dr/ US 101/ NB Ramps
R1-10 (0) 8 (14)
0 (0)
»>**«* si
* * 3
I
(-9) 3
(36) 14
(0) 0 A
(0) 0
(0) 0
(-9) -1
(24) 9
(21) (3) 1 T
(18) 6->
(3) 1 T
<5 (16) <^0 (0) < 4 (13)
SM
L^. 11
*
N.T.S.
©
/
• W‘
KDAnderson &Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
0951-15 RA 10/1/2021
(3) 1 J
(13) 4-T
(3) 1 L
R1-1P
u
uj jo
R1-1 M ° °
6)
-/
z
i.
c|r1-1
1 2 (3)
< 0 (0)
Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 22
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA

PROJECT CEQA TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS
This report section identifies project impacts under the criteria included under current CEQA guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled, alternative transportation modes and a safety on Caltrans facilities.

Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis
VMT refers to the amount and distance of vehicle travel attributable to a project. VMT generally represents the number of vehicle trips generated by a project multiplied by the average trip length for those trips. For CEQA transportation impact assessment, VMT is to be calculated using the origin-destination VMT method, which accounts for the full distance of vehicle trips with one end from the project.

The California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) document Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research 2018) provides general direction regarding the methods to be employed and significance criteria to evaluate VMT impacts, absent polices adopted by local agencies. The directive addresses several aspects of VMT impact analysis, and is organized as follows:
• Screening Criteria: Screening criteria are intended to quickly identify when a project should be expected to cause a less-than-significant VMT impact without conducting a detailed study.
• Significance Thresholds: Significance thresholds define what constitutes an acceptable level of VMT and what could be considered a significant level of VMT requiring mitigation.
• Analysis Methodology: These are the potential procedures and tools for producing VMT forecasts to use in the VMT impact assessment.
• Mitigation: Projects that are found to have a significant VMT impact based on the County’s significance thresholds are required to implement mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less than significant level (or to the extent feasible).

Screening Criteria. Screening criteria can be used to quickly identify whether sufficient evidence exists to presume a project will have a less than significant VMT impact without conducting a detailed study. However, each project should be evaluated against the evidence supporting that screening criteria to determine if it applies. Projects meeting at least one of the criteria below can be presumed to have a less than significant VMT impact, absent substantial evidence that the project will lead to a significant impact.

The extent to which the proposed project qualifies under each criterion is noted. • Small Projects: Defined as a project that generates 110 or fewer average daily vehicle trips.

Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 23
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA
• Affordable Housing: Defined as a project consisting of deed-restricted affordable housing. • Local-Serving Non-Residential Development: The directive notes that local serving retail uses can reduce travel by offering customers more choices in closer proximity. Local serving retail uses of 50,000 square feet or less can be presumed to have a less than significant impact.
• Projects in Low VMT-Generating Area: Defined as a residential or office project that is in a VMT efficient area based on an available VMT Estimation Tool. The project must be consistent in size and land use type (i.e., density, mix of uses, transit accessibility, etc.) as the surrounding built environment.
• Proximity to High Quality Transit. The directive notes that employment and residential development located within ½ mile of a high-quality transit corridor can be presumed to have a less than significant impact.

Evaluation. The extent to which the proposed project’s VMT impacts can he presumed to be less than significant has been determined based on review of the OPR directive’s screening criteria and general guidance.

The OPR Small Project criteria is not applicable to this project. The project is projected to generate 1,244 primary daily vehicle trips. As the 110 ADT threshold for automobile trips is exceeded, the project’s VMT impacts cannot be presumed to be less than significant.

The Grocery Outlet Store is not an Affordable Housing Project, and this OPR screening criteria does not apply.

OPR provides this direction for retail projects:

Retail Projects. Generally, lead agencies should analyze the effects of a retail project by assessing the change in total VMT because retail projects typically re-route travel from other retail destinations. A retail project might lead to increases or decreases in VMT, depending on previously existing retail travel patterns.

OPR also provides guidance regarding Screening Thresholds that would allow agencies to quickly identify when a project should be expected to cause a less-than significant impact without conducting as detailed study. OPR states:

By adding retail opportunities into the urban fabric and thereby improving retail destination proximity, local-serving retail development tends to shorten trips and reduce VMT. Thus, lead agencies generally may presume such development creates a less-than-significant transportation impact. Regional-serving retail development, on the other hand, which can lead to substitution of longer trips for shorter ones, may tend to have a significant impact.

Where such development decreases VMT, lead agencies should consider the impact to be less-than-significant.

Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 24
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA
Many cities and counties define local-serving and regional-serving retail in their zoning codes.

Lead agencies may refer to those local definitions when available, but should also consider any project-specific information, such as market studies or economic impacts analyses that might bear on customers’ travel behavior. Because lead agencies will best understand their own communities and the likely travel behaviors of future project users, they are likely in the best position to decide when a project will likely be local-serving. Generally, however, retail development including stores larger than 50,000 square feet might be considered regionalserving, and so lead agencies should undertake an analysis to determine whether the project might increase or decrease VMT.

The King City Grocery Outlet Store will attract customers residing in King City and in surrounding communities. Today the closest existing Grocery Outlet Stores are in Paso Robles (51 miles from King City) and Salinas (49 miles), and the new store would provide a much closer option. The Grocery Outlet store would compete with existing the Safeway on Franciscan Street in the King City Plaza, and to lesser degree with local specialty markets such as El Pueblo Market and La Princessa Market on Broadway Street to the east. The Grocery Outlet Store’s most likely effect on regional travel is to slightly reduce the length of trips from northern areas of King City and to offer another option for shopping trips made by residents of areas to the south and east. The effect on VMT is likely to be small, but generally VMT will be reduced by offering a closer option. This conclusion is consistent with the OPR presumption that the VMT effects of locally serving retail uses of 50,000 sf or less may be considered to be less than significant. The Grocery Outlet Stores’ impact on regional VMT can be presumed to be less than significant under the OPR Locally Serving Retail criterion.

King City has not identified Low VMT Generating areas of the community, and the Grocery Outlet Stores VMT impact cannot be presumed to be less than significant under this criteria.

While MST transit service is available in King City in the vicinity of the project, current service does not meet the definition of “quality” transit service” under OPR guidelines (i.e., 15-minute headways). The project’s VMT impact cannot be presumed to be less than significant under this criteria.

Multi-Modal Impacts
The significance of the project’s Multi-Modal impacts is discussed in the text which follows.

Transit Service and Facilities. MST operates on Broadway Street in the area of the project’s proposed driveways. These driveways will be designed to King City standards, and by doing so the Grocery Outlet Store project does not physically disrupt an existing transit service or facility nor interfere with implementation of a planned transit service or facility. The traffic operational analysis indicates that the project’s traffic contribution to roads that are used by MST would increase delay at intersections slightly but would be too small to result in increased travel time for busses that adversely effect on-time performance. Some customers and employees of the Grocery Outlet Store could elect to use MST, but as the closest stop is 2,000 feet away, the project would not result in increased transit ridership demands that result in passenger loads that exceed vehicle Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 25
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA
loading standards. As the project access is not adjacent to any transit facility, the project does not result in increased potential for safety conflicts involving transit vehicles and other modes of travel.

Conclusion. The project’s impact to Transit Service and Facilities is not significant.

Bicycle Facilities. The project does not interfere with use of any existing bicycle facility. The project does not interfere with implementation of a bicycle facility identified in in the Monterey County Active Transportation Plan (2018). Some project employees and customers might elect to ride bicycles to the site, and the project includes bike racks. Those cyclists would share local roads with automobiles, and based on current observed use would not result in a significant increase in bicyclists on a facility that does not have adequate bicycle facilities, such that conflicts between bicyclists and other travel modes are likely to increase.

Conclusion. The project’s impact to Bicycle Facilities is not significant.

Pedestrian Facilities. It is possible employees or customers of this project will elect to walk to and from the site to the other businesses along Broadway or Franciscan Way or to the residential neighborhoods around the site. However, as sidewalks exist on the streets surrounding the site, and marked crossings are provide on Broadways Street, the effects of project pedestrian travel are not significant. The project does not physically disrupt an existing pedestrian facility nor interfere with implementation of a planned pedestrian facility. The project does not result in an increased presence of vehicles and/or pedestrians on a facility that does not have adequate pedestrian facilities, such that conflicts between pedestrians and other travel modes are likely to increase.

Conclusion. The project’s impact to Pedestrian Facilities is not significant.

Roadway Design and Users. The project would not substantially increase hazards to vehicle safety due to increased traffic at locations with geometric design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections). Regular site traffic and vehicles visiting the site during construction will be comprised of automobiles and trucks permitted under the California Vehicle Code (CVC) and no farm equipment is expected. The project does not introduce incompatible users (e.g., farm equipment) to a roadway or transportation facility not intended for those users.

Conclusion. The project’s impact with regards to Roadway Design and Users is not significant.

Impacts to Safety on State Highways
US 101 ramps. The Grocery Outlet Store project will add traffic to US 101 and its ramps on Broadway Circle. However, the amount of traffic added to each ramp would not result in an appreciable increase in the length of off ramps queues, and adequate space will remain available between the end of queue and the off ramp gore point to accommodate deceleration to a stop from the speed limit on US 101. The project would not contribute to a safety problem on state facilities.

Conclusion. The project’s impact with regards to State facilities is not significant.

Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 26
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA

PROJECT TRAFFIC OPERATIONAL EFFECTS
Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions and Levels of Service Figure 5 superimposes project trips onto the current background traffic volumes to create the “Existing plus Project” condition. Subsequent tables compare the “Existing” and “Existing plus Project” Levels of Service.

Project Traffic Effects on Level of Service at Intersections. As shown in Table 10, the addition of project traffic would increase the length of delays already occurring at study intersections, but the project does not change the Level of Service at any location. The Broadway Street / Mildred Street intersection would continue to operate at LOS F which exceeds the General Plan Policy minimum LOS, and the traffic signal addressed in the City’s traffic impact fee program would continue to be needed. Similarly, the northbound Canal Street approach at Broadway Street / Canal Street intersection would continue to operate at LOS D, which exceeds the LOS C minimum.

The traffic signal needed in the City’s impact fee program would be needed.

Other study intersections, including the site access on Broadway Street would continue to operate with Levels of Service that satisfy the General Plan policy LOS C minimum.

Project Effects / Impacts based on Peak Period Queue Lengths. As noted in Table 11, the project will add traffic at some locations where turn lane queues are a consideration. At the Broadway Street / Broadway Circle / San Antonio Drive intersection, the project will increase peak queue by 10 to 15 feet. but this increase would not appreciably effect safety in this area. As noted in the discussion of existing conditions, the queues will continue to extend into the transition area between the left turn lane and the adjoining TWLT lane but will not spillover into the adjoining through lane.

The project will increase the volume of traffic on US 101 / Broadways Circle off ramps. At the US 101 NB ramps the off ramp queue would remain within the distance between the intersection and the ramp gore. The distance from end of queue to the gore point (i.e., 750 feet) would satisfy Caltrans Highway Design Manual (HDM) Table 405.2B requirements for deceleration to a stop from the 6y5 mph posted speed limit. Motorists will be able to slow to a stop without interfering with the flow of traffic on NB US 101.

The project would add traffic to the US 101 SB off ramp. However, as this ramp is uncontrolled (i.e., stop sign on westbound Broadway Circle approach) this additional traffic would not result in queuing onto the mainline freeway.

Traffic Signal Warrants. The volume of traffic occurring at each intersection with development of the project was again compared to the CA MUTCD peak hour signal warrant thresholds, as noted in Table 12. The Grocery Outlet Store project does not result in any additional locations carrying traffic that satisfies peak hour traffic signal warrants. 2 1
5 7
6 4
7 S Mildred St/ Broadway St
6 Canal St/ Broadway St
5 Franciscan Way/ Broadway St
4 West Project Dwy/ Broadway St
3 East Project Dwy/ Broadway St
1 2
San Antonio Dr/
US 101/ NB Ramps
San Antonio Dr/ Broadway St
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 5

EXISTING PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS 0951-15 RA 10/1/2021
3 R1-1
R1-1
R1-1
R1-1
R1-1
R1-1
R1-1
Stop Sign
Legend
AM Peak Hour Volume
R1-1
XX
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Signalized Intersection
N.T.S.
5 (21)6 (23)
293 (545)
7 (22)
(454) 558
(36) 14
R1-1
8 (32)9 (36)
291 (532)
12 (33)
(451) 556
(24) 9
R1-1
(148) 106(360) 243
45 (371 (446)
60)
117 (118)
25 (15)
(177) 254(160) 175
(5) 1
10 (145 (235)338 (304)
10)
105 (226)
15 (15)
169 (333)
(1) 0
(15) 5
(15) 5
35 (60)22 (103)
282 (517)
50 (95)
(456) 491
(83) 66
47 (110 (205)
58)
401 (565)
160 (205)
(553) 396
(73) 36
(60) 40(55) 55
(168) 182
30 (30)80 (55)37 (28)
40 (45)
298 (514)
10 (20)
(148) 161
(518) 289
(28) 26
3 4 5 6 7
R1-1 R1-1 o co
Ch NJ
NORTH East Project Dwy/ Broadway St West Project Dwy/ Broadway St Franciscan Way/ Broadway St Canal St/ Broadway St S Mildred St/ Broadway St 2 KI
[> 1 K San Antonio Dr/ Broadway St
1 1-i
©J
< »
5 V.
if
G13
101 ' *

EXISTING PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS figure 5
WJ
$
ik'
GN (JI
NJ NJ
291 (532) < 12 (33)
, 282 ( 517)
{ 50 (95)
„ 401 (565)
f 160 (205)
293 (545) < 7 (22)
y
J
Legend
AM Peak Hour Volume
PM Peak Hour Volume
Stop Sign
Signalized Intersection
4 X
<
l\v
R1-1

LJ CX) W
"-JOO NJ Tn Tj CO (JI o
41 'XX
(XX)
c|ri-i
o "-J o
Tn -> nj —> (JI S
<4;^
R1-1 O
cn ,—. co NJ
' O
<_n
cn 80
O NJ o — WO
cn X
cn dx O co
nj ->• o &
R1-140 (45)
298 (514)
10 (20)
cnS —. O -K&
San Antonio Dr/ US 101/ NB Ramps
-5^-0-
NJ W R1-1
nj cn
"S: Tn
0 0
si
I
(456) 491
(83) 66 T
(553) 396
(73) 36 T
S) (_n O
'—
CO (Ji -U- R1-1 M <" 0
SM
(454) 558
(36) 14 T
(451) 556
(24) 9 T
11 KDAnderson &Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
0951-15 RA 10/1/2021
*
N.T.S.
©
/
W‘
(148) 161 j
(518 ) 289
(28) 26
R1-1P
105 (226)
<-15 (15) < 169 (333)
u
-
6)
(1) 0 .
(15) 5
(15) 5 T
•x
c|r1-1 J
4 117 (118)
I 25 (15)
Transportation Impact Analysis for Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA Page 28 TABLE 10
YEAR 2021 PLUS PROJECT INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
Intersection Control
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Existing Existing Plus Project Existing Existing Plus Project LOS
Average Delay
(sec/veh) LOS
Average Delay
(sec/veh) LOS
Average Delay
(sec/veh) LOS Average Delay (sec/veh)
Current Traffic Controls
Broadway Cir / US 101 NB ramps WB Stop B 14 C 17 B 13 B 15 Broadway St / San Antonio Dr Signal B 11 B 11 B 12 B 12 Broadway St / Franciscan Way NB Stop B 14 B 14 C 24 D 26 Broadway St / Canal St NB Stop C 15 C 15 D 28 D 30
Broadway St / Mildred St AWS C 23 C 24 F 146 F 160
Broadway St / West Access NB Stop B 14 C 16
Broadway St / East Access NB Stop B 14 C 17
With Broadway Street / Broadway Circle / San Antonio Drive Roundabout Broadway Cir / US 101 NB ramps WB right B 13 B 14 C 16 C 16 Broadway St / San Antonio Dr roundabout A 7 A 8 B 11 B 13 Bold indicates conditions in excess of adopted LOS C standard Transportation Impact Analysis for Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA Page 29 TABLE 11

EXISTING PLUS PROJECT INTERSECTION QUEUES
Intersection Movement
Storage
(feet)
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Existing Existing Plus Project Existing Existing Plus Project Volume
(vph)
95th %
Queue
(feet)
Volume
(vph)
95th %
Queue
(feet)
Volume
(vph)
95th %
Queue
(feet)
Volume
(vph)
95th %
Queue
(feet)
Current Traffic Controls
Broadway Cir / US 101 NB ramps WB 875
1 140 110 142 125 130 95 133 105
Broadway St /
San Antonio Dr
NB left 50 10 25 10 25 10 25 10 25
SB left 802 245 150 254 165 160 120 177 135
EB approach - 10 35 10 35 31 50 31 55
WB left 802 165 115 169 125 320 195 333 195
Broadway St /
Franciscan Wy
NB left 402 20 <25 22 <25 100 60 103 65
WB left No lane2 50 <25 50 <25 60 <25 50 <25
Broadway St /
Canal St
NB left 40 45 <25 47 <25 55 85 58 90
WB left 602 160 <25 160 <25 205 30 205 30
Broadway St /
Mildred St
NB approach - 145 40 147 40 110 35 113 35
SB approach - 275 95 277 105 280 140 283 140
EB left 553 160 45 161 50 145 50 148 50
WB left 652 10 <25 10 <25 20 <25 20 <25
Broadway St / West access NB approach - 11 <25 44 <25
Broadway St / East Access NB approach - 17 <25 67 <25
With Broadway Street / San Antonio Dr Roundabout
Broadway Cir / US 101 NB ramps WB 8751 140 35 142 35 130 45 133 45 Broadway St / San Antonio Dr /
Broadway Circle
NB thru - 155 <25 155 30 245 45 245 45
NB right - 330 45 338 45 290 40 304 45
SB - 421 70 430 80 325 90 342 105
EB - 10 <25 10 <25 31 25 31 <25
WB - 280 35 289 40 545 280 574 335
Highlighted values exceed available storage.
1 distance from stop bar to ramp gore 2
lane followed by TWLT lane
Transportation Impact Analysis for Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA Page 30 TABLE 12

EXISTING PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS
Intersection
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Volume (vph)
Warrant
Met?
Volume (vph)
Warrant
Met?
Existing Existing Plus Project Existing Existing Plus Project Major Minor Major Minor Major Minor Major Minor
Broadway Cir / US 101 NB ramps 755 140 765 142 No 990 130 1,014 133 No Broadway St / Franciscan Way 870 55 889 57 No 1,105 160 1,151 163 No Broadway St / Canal St 980 155 998 157 No 1,355 260 1,396 263 Yes Broadway St / Mildred St 810 275 824 277 No 1,240 280 1,273 183 Yes Broadway St / West Access 872 11 No 1,057 44 No
Broadway St / East Access 868 17 No 1,046 67 No
Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 31
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA
Project Impacts to Alternative Transportation Modes
Development of the proposed Grocery Outlet may incrementally add pedestrians, bicyclists and transit riders in this area of King City.

Pedestrian Impacts. It is possible employees or customers of this project will elect to walk to and from the site to the other businesses along Broadway or Franciscan Way or to the residential neighborhoods around the site. However, as sidewalks exist on the streets surrounding the site, and marked crossings are provide on Broadways Street, the effects of project pedestrian travel are not significant.

Bicycle Impacts. Some project employees and customers might elect to ride bicycles to the site, and the project includes bike racks. However, based on observed bicycle use the number of cyclists to and from the site would be low. Those cyclists would share local roads with automobiles, and would not result in a significant increase in bicyclists on a facility that does not have adequate bicycle facilities, such that conflicts between bicyclists and other travel modes are likely to increase.

Transit Impacts. Project employees or customers will be able to use MST service as it already passes the project site and stops on Canal Street roughly 2,000 feet from the project site. The project does not appreciably affect traffic flow conditions on the streets used for MST routes, nor does the introduction of site access on Broadway Street interfere with transit. The project’s impact is not significant, and mitigation is not required.

Site Access
Throat Depth. Access to the site is proposed via two full access driveways on Broadway Street.

Both driveways are 30 feet wide, and the first parking aisle is separated from the Broadway Street by about 40 feet of throat. Two waiting vehicles can queue in this area prior to blocking inbound access to that aisle or adjoining parking spaces. The HCM Level of Service calculations completed for the access indicate that under long term conditions the 95th percentile queue at each exit will be two vehicle or less during peak periods, and this queue can be accommodated. Thus, the access is adequate from this standpoint.

Truck Access / Circulation. The path of delivery trucks through the Grocery Outlet Store site is governed by the orientation of the loading dock which is located on the south side of the building and faces westerly. Trucks will enter at the western driveway on Broadway Street and drive past the dock to the southwestern corner of the site before backing in. Existing trucks would then proceed north to the same driveway. Truck deliveries typically occur twice a week during off -peak hours.

Review of the site plan reveals that the project provides the internal aisle width needed to accommodate this truck route. However to turn right to enter the site a full size truck would need to first move into the center TWLT lane and use the entire breadth of the driveway to complete the turn.

The driveway would need to be wider to make the turn from the eastbound through lane and to avoid Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 32
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA
encroaching into the area used by exiting traffic. It will be necessary to confirm the design requirements at the driveway with regards to truck turning radii when final improvement plans are prepared.

Sight Distance. The adequacy of sight distance at each driveway was reviewed from the standpoint of the minimum requirements of the Caltrans Highway Design Manual (HDM). HDM Table 201.1 notes that for a 25 mph design speed a minimum of 150 feet of sight distance is needed.

Review of the proposed driveway locations reveals that the view in both directions from each location is unobstructed, and that the minimum requirement will clearly be satisfied.

Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 33
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA

CUMULATIVE TRAFFIC EFFECTS
The traffic operational effects of the Grocery Outlet Store project have also been considered within the context of future traffic conditions in this area of King City. Long term traffic conditions have been forecast and evaluated based on available traffic volume projections from an applicable regional planning source.

Long Term Background Cumulative Conditions
Approach to Developing Traffic Volume Forecasts. Future traffic volumes were created based on Year 2040 traffic volume projects provided from the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) regional travel demand forecasting model. For this analysis daily segment traffic volume forecasts from the baseline model version and Year 2040 model were employed. Daily intersection approach volumes were identified and compared on each intersection approach, and long term growth factors were calculated. These growth factors were then applied to current peak hour traffic volumes, and the results were balanced using the “Furness” techniques from the Transportation Research Board’s (TRB) NCHRP Report 255, Highway Traffic Data for Urbanized Area Project Planning and Design. Figure 8 presents resulting cumulative conditions without the project.

Future Circulation System Improvements. This analysis identifies future traffic condition assuming implementation of the following improvements:
• Broadway Street / Broadway Circle / San Antonio Drive roundabout project. • Broadway Street / Canal Street traffic signal included in the City’s traffic impact fee program, including 2nd EB and 2nd WB through lanes and NB right turn overlap phase. • Broadway Street / Mildred Street traffic signal included in the City’s traffic impact fee program, including 2nd EB and 2nd WB through lanes and restriping NB and SB approaches to provide separate right turn lanes.

Traffic Volume Forecasts. Figure 6 identifies “Cumulative No Project” background traffic volumes created under the assumptions noted above. Figure 7 identifies Cumulative Plus Project volumes with Grocery Outlet Store that were created by superimposing project traffic onto the No Project background condition.

No Project Traffic Operating Conditions. Future conditions without the project were reviewed as noted in the text which follows.

Levels of Service. Peak hour intersection Levels of Service were recalculated for the future background condition assuming improvements as noted above. As shown in Table 13, without the Grocery Outlet Store project one intersection will operate with Levels of Service that exceed the City’s minimum LOS C standard. The northbound approach at the Broadway Street / Franciscan Way intersection is projected to operate at LOS F. A traffic signal is needed to deliver LOS C.

Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 34
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA
Peak Queues. Table 14 presents projected 95th percentile queues at study intersections under long term cumulative conditions. As indicated, peak period queues could extend back from the roundabout for an appreciable distance on Broadway Street. The peak queues at other intersections would exceed the length of existing dedicated left turn lanes.

Traffic Signal Warrants. Table 15 notes cumulative background traffic volumes and identifies the status of resulting peak hour traffic signal warrants at unsignalized intersections. As indicated, the Broadway Street / Franciscan Way intersection will carry traffic volumes that satisfy peak hour warrants during the p.m. peak hour. While a traffic signal would be needed, a signal is not yet included in the City’s traffic impact fee program.

Cumulative Plus Grocery Outlet Store Project Conditions. Cumulative conditions with the addition of Grocery Outlet Store were evaluated and the significance of project impacts was determined.

Level of Service. As noted in Table 13, the addition of project trips increases delays at study intersections but not results in any additional location operating with Level of Service that will be in excess of the LOS C minimum.

Peak Queues. As noted in Table 14, the project will incrementally lengthen peak period queues at study intersections.

Traffic Signal Warrants. Table 15 notes Cumulative Plus Project traffic volumes and identifies the status of resulting peak hour traffic signal warrants. As indicated, peak hour traffic signal warrants would remain satisfied at the same intersections identified under the background cumulative conditions (i.e., Broadway Street / Franciscan Way intersection). 2 1
5 7
6 4
7 S Mildred St/ Broadway St
6 Canal St/ Broadway St
5 Franciscan Way/ Broadway St
4 West Project Dwy/ Broadway St
3 East Project Dwy/ Broadway St
1 2
San Antonio Dr/
US 101/ NB Ramps
San Antonio Dr/ Broadway St
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 6

CUMULATIVE TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
0951-15 RA 10/1/2021
3 R1-1
(190) 145(465) 325
495 (565)
140 (130)
(175) 275(170) 190
(5) 5
10 (150 (245)405 (360)
10)
70 (80)
110 (220)
15 (15)
210 (390)
(5) 0
(15) 5
(15) 5
(550) 685
335 (625)
(550) 685
335 (625)
R1-1
50 (75)20 (105)
310 (580)
60 (105)
(535) 600
(75) 60
85 (110)190 (350)
415 (585)
215 (265)
(630) 475
(115) 60
(85) 55(80) 75
(150) 180
35 (35)70 (50)30 (20)
55 (65)
365 (615)
20 (40)
(150) 180
(705) 405
(35) 35
Stop Sign
Legend
AM Peak Hour Volume
R1-1
XX
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Signalized Intersection
N.T.S.
3 4 5 6 7
335 (625) •«- 335 (625)
(550) 685
NORTH East Project Dwy/ Broadway St West Project Dwy/ Broadway St Franciscan Way/ Broadway St Canal St/ Broadway St S Mildred St/ Broadway St 2 KI
[> 1 Ki
1 1-i
©J
< 5
t
5 V.
if
G13
y,
101 ' *
j

CUMULATIVE TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
figure 6
WJ
$
i
k'
Ch
cn O
^310 (580)
f 60 (105)
o cn
cn '—'
(630) 475
(115) 60^
415 (585)
215 (265)
O O cn NJ Tn T3
O O cn
-
O cn —' O
y
J
Legend
AM Peak Hour Volume
PM Peak Hour Volume
Stop Sign
Signalized Intersection l\v
co ->
cn o
. O
o
cn nj
(JI O Ul
41 'XX
(XX)
c|ri-i
ffl
o
cn
Tn
Ch
uj
San Antonio Dr/ US 101/ NB Ramps
nj cn r1-1
o o
S co co
'
co '-j cn O (ji in
I
(550) 685 -|
I
(150) 180 _f
(705 ) 405
(35) 35
si
O cn O O — O To O NJ T3
O'—' -N- 0
San Antonio Dr/ Broadway St
K..
1 110 (220)
4- 15 (15) * 210 (390)
(535) 600
(75) 60 T
SM
11 I 55 (65) 365 (615)
20 (40)
KDAnderson &Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
0951-15 RA 10/1/2021
*
N.T.S.
©
/
W‘
u
6)
(5) 0 ?
(15) 5
(15) 5 T
•x
J
i.
c|r1-1
140 (130)
2 1
5 7
6 4
7 S Mildred St/ Broadway St
6 Canal St/ Broadway St
5 Franciscan Way/ Broadway St
4 West Project Dwy/ Broadway St
3 East Project Dwy/ Broadway St
1 2
San Antonio Dr/
US 101/ NB Ramps
San Antonio Dr/ Broadway St
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 7

CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS 0951-15 RA 10/1/2021
3 R1-1
R1-1
Stop Sign
Legend
AM Peak Hour Volume
R1-1
XX
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Signalized Intersection
N.T.S.

R1-1 R1-1
(193) 146(475) 328
501 (576)
142 (133) 5 (21)
6 (23)
338 (630)
7 (22)
(544) 688
(36) 14
8 (32)9 (36)
471 (617)
12 (33)
(541) 684
(24) 9
(192) 285(170) 190
(5) 5
10 (150 (245)413 (374)
10)
70 (80)
115 (236)
15 (15)
214 (403)
(5) 0
(15) 5
(15) 5
50 (75)22 (108)
322 (602)
60 (105)
(556) 606
(78) 61
87 (113)190 (350)
426 (605)
215 (265)
(648) 481
(118) 61
(85) 55(80) 75
(153) 182
35 (35)70 (50)32 (23)
55 (65)
373 (629)
20 (40)
(153) 181
(718) 409
(38) 36
3 4 5 6 7
O' bJ
NORTH East Project Dwy/ Broadway St West Project Dwy/ Broadway St Franciscan Way/ Broadway St Canal St/ Broadway St S Mildred St/ Broadway St 2 KI
[> 1 K
1 1-i
©J
< 5
5 V.
if
G13
y,
101 ' *
j

CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS figure 7
WJ
$
i
, 322 (602)
{ 60 (105)
(648) 481
(118) 61
£ 426 (605)
215 (265)
n> o cn
bJLbUJ w o ui
y
J
Legend
AM Peak Hour Volume
PM Peak Hour Volume
Stop Sign
Signalized Intersection l\v
co ->
vDO
O NJ
Cn -> NJ
vD CO
(JI O Ul
t
cn
o
41 ^XX
(XX)
c|r1-1
ffl
55 (65)
£ 373 (629) < 20 (40)
cn
San Antonio Dr/ US 101/ NB Ramps
nj cn R1-1
NJ O
cn -—• —- co co co
'— £?/£!
co '-si cn NJ cn cn
8-a
(153) 181 _f
(718 ) 409 ;*
(38) 36
si
» * <&
I
115 (236)
4- 15 (15) * 214 (403)
*- 471 (617) < 12 (33)
(556 ) 606
(78) 61 i
<4
SM
*- 338 (630) < 7 (22)
11 KDAnderson &Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
0951-15 RA 10/1/2021
N.T.S.
©
/
W‘
S O cn i O —, O W
"oo o T3 T3
San Antonio Dr/ Broadway St
(544) 688
(36) 14
u
(541) 684
(24) 9
'
6)
(5) 0 ?
(15) 5
(15) 5 T
•x
J
i.

R1-1
o cn
NJ NJ
R1-1
o 00
c|r1-1
142 (133)
Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 37
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA
TABLE 13

CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
Intersection Control
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Cumulative Cumulative Plus Project Cumulative Cumulative Plus Project LOS
Average
Delay
(sec/veh) LOS
Average
Delay
(sec/veh) LOS
Average
Delay
(sec/veh)
LOS
Average
Delay
(sec/veh)
Broadway Cir / US 101 NB ramps WB Stop C 15 C 15 C 18 C 18 Broadway St / San Antonio Dr Roundabout A 9 A 9 B 16 B 18 Broadway St / Franciscan Way NB Stop C 18 C 18 D 32 E 36 Signal A 10 B 11 B 12 B 12
Broadway St / Canal St Signal B 12 B 12 B 18 B 19
Broadway St / Mildred St Signal C 23 C 24 C 21 C 21
Broadway St / West Access NB Stop C 18 C 18
Broadway St / East Access NB Stop C 18 C 20
Bold indicates conditions in excess of adopted LOS C standard Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 38
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA
TABLE 14

CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT INTERSECTION QUEUES
Intersection Movement
Storage
(feet)
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Cumulative
Cumulative
Plus Project Cumulative
Cumulative
Plus Project
Volume
(vph)
95th %
Queue
(feet)
Volume
(vph)
95th %
Queue
(feet)
Volume
(vph)
95th %
Queue
(feet)
Volume
(vph)
95th %
Queue
(feet)
Current Traffic Controls
Broadway Cir / US 101 NB ramps WB 8751 140 40 142 45 130 50 133 55 Broadway St / San Antonio Dr NB thru 230 30 230 30 335 50 335 50 NB right 405 60 413 65 360 55 374 60
SB 470 130 479 140 350 125 367 140
EB 10 <25 10 <25 35 <25 35 <25
WB 335 60 344 55 625 490 654 595
Broadway St / Franciscan Wy NB left 402 20 <25 22 <25 105 85 108 95 WB left No lane2 60 <25 60 <25 105 <25 105 <25
Broadway St / Canal St NB left 40 85 70 87 75 110 90 113 95 WB left 602 215 170 215 170 265 215 265 215
Broadway St /Mildred St NB approach - 135 115 137 115 105 100 108 100 SB approach - 310 140 312 140 315 215 318 205
EB left 553 180 200 181 205 150 190 153 200
WB left 652 20 40 20 40 40 90 40 80
Broadway St / West access NB approach - 11 <25 44 <25
Broadway St / East Access NB approach - 17 <25 68 25
Highlighted values exceed available storage.
1 distance from stop bar to ramp gore
2 lane followed by TWLT lane
Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 39
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA
TABLE 15

CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS
Intersection
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Volume (vph)
Warrant
Met?
Volume (vph)
Warrant
Met?
Cumulative Cumulative Plus Project Cumulative Cumulative Plus Project Major Minor Major Minor Major Minor Major Minor
Broadway Cir / US 101 NB ramps 965 140 975 142 No 1,220 130 1,244 133 No Broadway St / Franciscan Way 1,030 70 1049 72 No 1,295 180 1,341 183 Yes Broadway St / West Access 1,187 11 No 1,372 44 No
Broadway St / East Access 1,181 17 No 1,355 68 No
Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 40
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA

IMPROVEMENT OPTIONS
Project Effects / Improvement Options
Traffic Impact Fee Projects. The Grocery Outlet Store contributes to the need for traffic signals and intersection improvements at intersections that are included in the City’s existing traffic impact fee program at these locations:
• Broadway Street / Canal Street
• Broadway Street / Mildred Street
The Grocery Outlet Store project should contribute its fair share to the cost of these improvements by paying adopted traffic impacts fees.

Broadway Street / Franciscan Way intersection. The Grocery Outlet Store project will contribute to the need for a traffic signal at the Broadway Street / Franciscan Way intersection under cumulative conditions. This improvement is not in the City’s traffic impact fee program.

The Grocery Outlet Store should contribute its fair share to the cost a traffic signal based on its pro rate share of future traffic. Table 16 outlines the Grocery Outlet Store share of future traffic at each study location. As shown, Grocery Outlet Store traffic represents 18.9% of the future p.m. peak hour traffic growth at the Broadway Street / Franciscan Way intersection.

TABLE 16

FAIR SHARE CALCULATION
Location
Weekday PM Peak Hour Traffic (vph)
Fair
Existing Share
Cumulative Project
Only
Net Future
No Project Plus Project Growth

A B C C-B C-A (C-B)/(C-A
Broadway Circle /
US 101 NB ramps 1,120 1,350 1,377 27 257 10.5%
Broadway Street /
Broadway Circle /
San Antonio Drive
1,436 1,705 1,765 60 329 18.2%
Broadway Street /
Franciscan Way 1,265 1,475 1,524 49 259 18.9%
Broadway Street /
Canal Street 1,615 2,055 2,099 44 484 9.1%
Broadway Street /
Mildred Street 1,630 2,030 2,069 39 439 8.9%
Transportation Impact Analysis for Page 41
Grocery Outlet Store, King City, CA

APPENDIX
(Traffic Counts, Traffic Model Plots, Furness Worksheets, LOS, Queue Calculations) Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
ID: 21-090054-001 Day:

City: King City Date:

AM 76 11 16 0 AM
NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON
PM 101 28 49 0 PM

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
0 0 0 0
0 43 0 10
0 333 0 106
0 0 0 0 0 23 0 4
38 0 115 0 TEV 423 0 1089 0 0 0 0
133 0 290 0 PHF 0.87 0.93
7 0 16 0
0 0 0 0

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
PM 0 34 43 14 PM
NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON
AM 0 3 16 3 AM
0 NONE
04:15 PM - 05:15 PM 201
Mildred Ave & Broadway St
Peak Hour Turning Movement Count
Mildred Ave Tuesday
SOUTHBOUND 7/13/2021

PEAK HOURS
4:00 PM - 06:00 PM
07:15 AM - 08:15 AM 64 7:00 AM - 09:00 AM

COUNT PERIODS
NONE
353 0 152
Cars (AM) 67 HT (AM)
Broadway St

EASTBOUND

WESTBOUND
Broadway St
185 0 468

CONTROL
4-Way Stop
Pedestrians (Crosswalks)
Cars (PM) HT (PM)
0 22

NORTHBOUND
Mildred Ave
Cars (NOON) HT (NOON)

AM NOON PM
PM
AM
AM
NOON
PM
PM
NOON
AM
AM
NOON
PM
NOON

PMNOONAMAMNOONPM

PMNOONAMAMNOONPM
0 0
1 2
0 0
80 010
7 1
0 0
2 0
1 30 300 13
0 2
1 0
2 2
100
110
0 0
0 0
0 0
000
000
0 4
0 0
9 1
100
001
43 331
15 23
288
113
1002849
334214
0 0
0 0
0 0
000
000
10 102
7 4
124
37 751116
3162
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: Mildred Ave & Broadway St
City: King City Project ID:

Control: 4-Way Stop Date:

NS/EW Streets:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
7:00 AM 1 2 1 0 4 1 19 0 7 24 0 0 0 15 0 0 74
7:15 AM 0 3 1 0 5 2 18 0 11 26 4 0 1 36 2 0 109
7:30 AM 2 3 1 0 1 2 11 0 10 32 0 0 0 18 0 0 80
7:45 AM 1 4 1 0 4 2 24 0 9 41 0 0 1 22 3 0 112
8:00 AM 0 6 0 0 6 5 23 0 8 34 3 0 2 30 5 0 122
8:15 AM 3 2 1 0 2 2 17 0 6 34 3 0 2 25 2 0 99
8:30 AM 0 4 1 0 2 2 4 0 12 35 2 0 3 13 0 0 78
8:45 AM 4 2 0 0 2 4 23 0 7 37 3 0 0 26 2 0 110

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 11 26 6 0 26 20 139 0 70 263 15 0 9 185 14 0 784 APPROACH %'s : 25.58% 60.47% 13.95% 0.00% 14.05% 10.81% 75.14% 0.00% 20.11% 75.57% 4.31% 0.00% 4.33% 88.94% 6.73% 0.00% PEAK HR : 07:15 AM 38 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 3 16 3 0 16 11 76 0 38 133 7 0 4 106 10 0 423 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.375 0.667 0.750 0.000 0.667 0.550 0.792 0.000 0.864 0.811 0.438 0.000 0.500 0.736 0.500 0.000 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SBL SBT SBR SBU EBL EBT EBR EBU WBL WBT WBR WBU 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
4:00 PM 4 10 2 0 7 6 37 0 21 74 5 0 3 76 11 0 256
4:15 PM 13 12 4 0 14 7 32 0 27 76 6 0 10 83 8 0 292
4:30 PM 7 8 3 0 9 8 18 0 31 76 3 0 4 73 9 0 249
4:45 PM 5 8 5 0 15 2 31 0 29 73 3 0 3 78 14 0 266
5:00 PM 9 15 2 0 11 11 20 0 28 65 4 0 6 99 12 0 282
5:15 PM 1 8 7 0 9 9 30 0 30 61 7 0 1 70 15 0 248
5:30 PM 5 7 8 0 11 6 23 0 21 58 3 0 8 66 9 0 225
5:45 PM 3 6 4 0 12 4 25 0 37 54 1 0 6 51 13 0 216

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 47 74 35 0 88 53 216 0 224 537 32 0 41 596 91 0 2034 APPROACH %'s : 30.13% 47.44% 22.44% 0.00% 24.65% 14.85% 60.50% 0.00% 28.25% 67.72% 4.04% 0.00% 5.63% 81.87% 12.50% 0.00% PEAK HR : 04:15 PM 12:00 AM TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 34 43 14 0 49 28 101 0 115 290 16 0 23 333 43 0 1089 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.654 0.717 0.700 0.000 0.817 0.636 0.789 0.000 0.927 0.954 0.667 0.000 0.575 0.841 0.768 0.000 21-090054-001
7/13/2021
Data - Total
Mildred Ave Mildred Ave Broadway St Broadway St
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
07:15 AM - 08:15 AM

0.867 0.917 0.757 0.890 0.769
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
04:15 PM - 05:15 PM

0.932 0.784 0.840 0.957 0.853
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: Mildred Ave & Broadway St
City: King City Project ID:

Control: 4-Way Stop Date:

NS/EW Streets:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
7:00 AM 1 2 1 0 4 1 19 0 7 19 0 0 0 15 0 0 69
7:15 AM 0 3 1 0 5 2 18 0 11 25 4 0 1 35 2 0 107
7:30 AM 2 3 0 0 1 2 11 0 10 31 0 0 0 18 0 0 78
7:45 AM 1 4 1 0 4 2 23 0 9 38 0 0 1 21 3 0 107
8:00 AM 0 6 0 0 6 5 23 0 7 30 3 0 2 28 5 0 115
8:15 AM 3 2 1 0 2 2 16 0 6 31 3 0 1 25 2 0 94
8:30 AM 0 4 1 0 1 2 4 0 12 33 2 0 3 13 0 0 75
8:45 AM 4 2 0 0 2 4 23 0 7 36 3 0 0 23 2 0 106

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 11 26 5 0 25 20 137 0 69 243 15 0 8 178 14 0 751 APPROACH %'s : 26.19% 61.90% 11.90% 0.00% 13.74% 10.99% 75.27% 0.00% 21.10% 74.31% 4.59% 0.00% 4.00% 89.00% 7.00% 0.00% PEAK HR : 07:15 AM 38 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 3 16 2 0 16 11 75 0 37 124 7 0 4 102 10 0 407 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.375 0.667 0.500 0.000 0.667 0.550 0.815 0.000 0.841 0.816 0.438 0.000 0.500 0.729 0.500 0.000 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SBL SBT SBR SBU EBL EBT EBR EBU WBL WBT WBR WBU 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
4:00 PM 4 10 2 0 7 6 37 0 21 74 5 0 3 74 11 0 254
4:15 PM 12 11 4 0 14 7 32 0 27 76 6 0 10 82 8 0 289
4:30 PM 7 8 3 0 9 8 17 0 31 74 3 0 4 72 9 0 245
4:45 PM 5 8 5 0 15 2 31 0 27 73 3 0 3 78 14 0 264
5:00 PM 9 15 2 0 11 11 20 0 28 65 3 0 6 99 12 0 281
5:15 PM 1 8 7 0 9 9 30 0 30 61 7 0 1 69 15 0 247
5:30 PM 5 7 8 0 11 6 23 0 21 58 3 0 8 66 9 0 225
5:45 PM 3 6 4 0 12 4 25 0 36 54 1 0 6 50 13 0 214

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 46 73 35 0 88 53 215 0 221 535 31 0 41 590 91 0 2019 APPROACH %'s : 29.87% 47.40% 22.73% 0.00% 24.72% 14.89% 60.39% 0.00% 28.08% 67.98% 3.94% 0.00% 5.68% 81.72% 12.60% 0.00% PEAK HR : 04:15 PM 290 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 33 42 14 0 49 28 100 0 113 288 15 0 23 331 43 0 1079 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.688 0.700 0.700 0.000 0.817 0.636 0.781 0.000 0.911 0.947 0.625 0.000 0.575 0.836 0.768 0.000 21-090054-001
7/13/2021
04:15 PM - 05:15 PM

0.933 0.824 0.835 0.954 0.848
07:15 AM - 08:15 AM

0.885
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND

0.875 0.750 0.894 0.763
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
Data - Cars
Mildred Ave Mildred Ave Broadway St Broadway St
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: Mildred Ave & Broadway St
City: King City Project ID:

Control: 4-Way Stop Date:

NS/EW Streets:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 2
7:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 5
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 0 0 2 0 0 7
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 5
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 4

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 1 20 0 0 1 7 0 0 33
APPROACH %'s : 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 33.33% 0.00% 66.67% 0.00% 4.76% 95.24% 0.00% 0.00% 12.50% 87.50% 0.00% 0.00% PEAK HR : 07:15 AM 38 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 9 0 0 0 4 0 0 16
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.000 0.000 0.250 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.250 0.000 0.250 0.563 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.500 0.000 0.000 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SBL SBT SBR SBU EBL EBT EBR EBU WBL WBT WBR WBU 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
4:15 PM 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 4
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 1 0 0 6 0 0 15
APPROACH %'s : 50.00% 50.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 50.00% 33.33% 16.67% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% PEAK HR : 04:15 PM 290 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 2 1 0 0 2 0 0 10
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.250 0.250 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.250 0.000 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.000 0.000 0.500 0.000 0.000 21-090054-001
7/13/2021
04:15 PM - 05:15 PM

0.625 0.250 0.250 0.625 0.500
07:15 AM - 08:15 AM

0.571
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND

0.250 0.250 0.500 0.500
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
Data - HT
Mildred Ave Mildred Ave Broadway St Broadway St
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: Mildred Ave & Broadway St
City: King City Project ID:

Control: 4-Way Stop Date:

NS/EW Streets:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
APPROACH %'s :

PEAK HR : 07:15 AM 38 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SBL SBT SBR SBU EBL EBT EBR EBU WBL WBT WBR WBU 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
5:15 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 4
APPROACH %'s : 0.00% 50.00% 50.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% PEAK HR : 04:15 PM 290 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.000 0.250 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.250 0.000 0.000 21-090054-001
7/13/2021
04:15 PM - 05:15 PM

0.500 0.250 0.250
07:15 AM - 08:15 AM
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
Data - Bikes
Mildred Ave Mildred Ave Broadway St Broadway St
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning
Movement Count
Location: Mildred Ave & Broadway St Project ID:

City: King City Date:

NS/EW Streets:

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
7:00 AM 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2
7:15 AM 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
8:15 AM 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 4
8:30 AM 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 5 2 1 2 1 1 3 1 16
APPROACH %'s : 71.43% 28.57% 33.33% 66.67% 50.00% 50.00% 75.00% 25.00% PEAK HR : 07:15 AM 37 -1 -1 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 3 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 6
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.250
Headers NEB NWB SEB SWB ENS ESB WNB WSB

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
4:00 PM 1 3 0 2 1 0 0 1 8
4:15 PM 1 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 6
4:30 PM 1 5 1 1 0 1 0 0 9
4:45 PM 0 2 0 4 1 1 1 0 9
5:00 PM 1 3 5 2 0 0 1 0 12
5:15 PM 2 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 6
5:30 PM 2 0 7 1 0 0 2 0 12
5:45 PM 1 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 8

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 9 22 19 11 2 2 4 1 70
APPROACH %'s : 29.03% 70.97% 63.33% 36.67% 50.00% 50.00% 80.00% 20.00% PEAK HR : 04:15 PM 287 -3 -3 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 3 13 8 7 1 2 2 0 36
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.750 0.650 0.400 0.438 0.250 0.500 0.500 21-090054-001
7/13/2021

0.750 0.667 0.536 0.375 0.500
04:15 PM - 05:15 PM

0.375 0.250

PM NORTH LEG SOUTH LEG EAST LEG WEST LEG

0.250 0.250 0.250
07:15 AM - 08:15 AM

AM NORTH LEG SOUTH LEG EAST LEG WEST LEG
Data - Pedestrians (Crosswalks)
Mildred Ave Mildred Ave Broadway St Broadway St
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
ID: 21-090054-002 Day:

City: King City Date:

AM 0 0 0 0 AM
NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON
PM 0 0 0 0 PM

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 358 0 109
0 0 0 0 0 106 0 59
0 0 0 0 TEV 399 0 967 0 0 0 0
138 0 288 0 PHF 0.92 0.95
28 0 44 0
0 0 0 0

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
PM 0 47 0 124 PM
NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON
AM 0 12 0 53 AM
0 NONE
04:15 PM - 05:15 PM 0
Canal St & Broadway St
Peak Hour Turning Movement Count
Canal St Tuesday
SOUTHBOUND 7/13/2021

PEAK HOURS
4:00 PM - 06:00 PM
07:45 AM - 08:45 AM 0 7:00 AM - 09:00 AM

COUNT PERIODS
NONE
412 0 191
Cars (AM) 150 HT (AM)
Broadway St

EASTBOUND

WESTBOUND
Broadway St
121 0 405

CONTROL
1-Way Stop(NB)
Pedestrians (Crosswalks)
Cars (PM) HT (PM)
0 87

NORTHBOUND
Canal St
Cars (NOON) HT (NOON)

AM NOON PM
PM
AM
AM
NOON
PM
PM
NOON
AM
AM
NOON
PM
NOON

PMNOONAMAMNOONPM

PMNOONAMAMNOONPM
8 0
1 5
0 0
40 100
6 0
0 0
0 0
0 00 000 0
0 4
0 1
6 0
000
000
0 0
0 0
0 0
000
000
0 3
2 1
8 0
000
203
0 354
44 105
282
0 000
470124
0 0
0 0
0 0
000
000
0 106
26 58
130
0 000
10050
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: Canal St & Broadway St
City: King City Project ID:

Control: 1-Way Stop(NB) Date:

NS/EW Streets:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
7:00 AM 3 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 7 0 8 26 0 0 73
7:15 AM 3 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 3 0 11 43 0 0 100
7:30 AM 2 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 2 0 4 24 0 0 76
7:45 AM 3 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 10 0 18 28 0 0 109
8:00 AM 2 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 5 0 16 37 0 0 107
8:15 AM 3 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 9 0 15 29 0 0 99
8:30 AM 4 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 4 0 10 15 0 0 84
8:45 AM 4 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 6 0 13 35 0 0 102

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 24 0 104 0 0 0 0 0 0 244 46 0 95 237 0 0 750 APPROACH %'s : 18.75% 0.00% 81.25% 0.00% 0.00% 84.14% 15.86% 0.00% 28.61% 71.39% 0.00% 0.00% PEAK HR : 07:45 AM 40 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 12 0 53 0 0 0 0 0 0 138 28 0 59 109 0 0 399 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.750 0.000 0.779 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.863 0.700 0.000 0.819 0.736 0.000 0.000 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SBL SBT SBR SBU EBL EBT EBR EBU WBL WBT WBR WBU 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
4:00 PM 14 0 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 67 7 0 36 81 0 0 234
4:15 PM 11 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 80 7 0 29 97 0 0 254
4:30 PM 11 0 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 68 14 0 20 81 0 0 229
4:45 PM 10 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 79 13 0 28 82 0 0 237
5:00 PM 15 0 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 61 10 0 29 98 0 0 247
5:15 PM 10 0 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 65 8 0 32 71 0 0 222
5:30 PM 16 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 53 8 0 19 72 0 0 192
5:45 PM 13 0 38 0 0 0 0 0 0 53 14 0 19 60 0 0 197

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 100 0 251 0 0 0 0 0 0 526 81 0 212 642 0 0 1812 APPROACH %'s : 28.49% 0.00% 71.51% 0.00% 0.00% 86.66% 13.34% 0.00% 24.82% 75.18% 0.00% 0.00% PEAK HR : 04:15 PM 12:00 AM TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 47 0 124 0 0 0 0 0 0 288 44 0 106 358 0 0 967 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.783 0.000 0.886 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.900 0.786 0.000 0.914 0.913 0.000 0.000 21-090054-002
7/13/2021
Data - Total
Canal St Canal St Broadway St Broadway St
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
07:45 AM - 08:45 AM

0.915 0.774 0.830 0.792
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
04:15 PM - 05:15 PM

0.952 0.872 0.902 0.913
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: Canal St & Broadway St
City: King City Project ID:

Control: 1-Way Stop(NB) Date:

NS/EW Streets:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
7:00 AM 3 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 6 0 8 26 0 0 68
7:15 AM 3 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 3 0 11 42 0 0 98
7:30 AM 2 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 2 0 4 24 0 0 74
7:45 AM 2 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 39 9 0 18 27 0 0 105
8:00 AM 2 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 5 0 16 35 0 0 100
8:15 AM 3 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 9 0 14 29 0 0 95
8:30 AM 3 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 3 0 10 15 0 0 80
8:45 AM 3 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 6 0 12 33 0 0 97

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 21 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 229 43 0 93 231 0 0 717 APPROACH %'s : 17.36% 0.00% 82.64% 0.00% 0.00% 84.19% 15.81% 0.00% 28.70% 71.30% 0.00% 0.00% PEAK HR : 07:45 AM 40 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 10 0 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 130 26 0 58 106 0 0 380 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.833 0.000 0.735 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.833 0.722 0.000 0.806 0.757 0.000 0.000 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SBL SBT SBR SBU EBL EBT EBR EBU WBL WBT WBR WBU 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
4:00 PM 14 0 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 67 6 0 36 79 0 0 231
4:15 PM 11 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 80 7 0 29 95 0 0 252
4:30 PM 11 0 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 65 14 0 20 79 0 0 224
4:45 PM 10 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 77 13 0 27 82 0 0 234
5:00 PM 15 0 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 10 0 29 98 0 0 246
5:15 PM 10 0 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 65 8 0 32 70 0 0 221
5:30 PM 15 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 53 8 0 19 72 0 0 191
5:45 PM 13 0 38 0 0 0 0 0 0 52 13 0 18 60 0 0 194

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 99 0 251 0 0 0 0 0 0 519 79 0 210 635 0 0 1793 APPROACH %'s : 28.29% 0.00% 71.71% 0.00% 0.00% 86.79% 13.21% 0.00% 24.85% 75.15% 0.00% 0.00% PEAK HR : 04:15 PM 290 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 47 0 124 0 0 0 0 0 0 282 44 0 105 354 0 0 956 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.783 0.000 0.886 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.881 0.786 0.000 0.905 0.903 0.000 0.000 21-090054-002
7/13/2021
04:15 PM - 05:15 PM

0.948 0.872 0.906 0.904
07:45 AM - 08:45 AM

0.905
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND

0.750 0.813 0.804
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
Data - Cars
Canal St Canal St Broadway St Broadway St
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: Canal St & Broadway St
City: King City Project ID:

Control: 1-Way Stop(NB) Date:

NS/EW Streets:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
7:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 5
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 2
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
7:45 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 4
8:00 AM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 7
8:15 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 4
8:30 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 4
8:45 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 5

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 3 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 3 0 2 6 0 0 33
APPROACH %'s : 42.86% 0.00% 57.14% 0.00% 0.00% 83.33% 16.67% 0.00% 25.00% 75.00% 0.00% 0.00% PEAK HR : 07:45 AM 40 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 2 0 1 3 0 0 19
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.500 0.000 0.375 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.667 0.500 0.000 0.250 0.375 0.000 0.000 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SBL SBT SBR SBU EBL EBT EBR EBU WBL WBT WBR WBU 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 3
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 5
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 3
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
5:30 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 3

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 2 0 2 7 0 0 19
APPROACH %'s : 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 77.78% 22.22% 0.00% 22.22% 77.78% 0.00% 0.00% PEAK HR : 04:15 PM 290 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 1 4 0 0 11
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.500 0.000 0.000 0.250 0.500 0.000 0.000 21-090054-002
7/13/2021
04:15 PM - 05:15 PM

0.550 0.500 0.625
07:45 AM - 08:45 AM

0.679
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND

0.625 0.833 0.500
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
Data - HT
Canal St Canal St Broadway St Broadway St
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: Canal St & Broadway St
City: King City Project ID:

Control: 1-Way Stop(NB) Date:

NS/EW Streets:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
APPROACH %'s :

PEAK HR : 07:45 AM 40 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SBL SBT SBR SBU EBL EBT EBR EBU WBL WBT WBR WBU 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2
APPROACH %'s : 50.00% 50.00% 0.00% 0.00%
PEAK HR : 04:15 PM 290 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.250 0.000 0.000 21-090054-002
7/13/2021
04:15 PM - 05:15 PM

0.250 0.250
07:45 AM - 08:45 AM
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
Data - Bikes
Canal St Canal St Broadway St Broadway St
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning
Movement Count
Location: Canal St & Broadway St Project ID:

City: King City Date:

NS/EW Streets:

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
8:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 3
APPROACH %'s : 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00%
PEAK HR : 07:45 AM 39 -1 -1 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 2
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.250 0.250
Headers NEB NWB SEB SWB ENS ESB WNB WSB

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
4:00 PM 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 4
4:15 PM 0 0 2 1 0 0 1 2 6
4:30 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 4 9
4:45 PM 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 3
5:00 PM 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 2 5
5:15 PM 0 0 3 1 0 0 2 1 7
5:30 PM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2
5:45 PM 0 0 2 2 0 0 1 11 16

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 0 0 12 10 0 0 9 21 52
APPROACH %'s : 54.55% 45.45% 30.00% 70.00%
PEAK HR : 04:15 PM 287 -3 -3 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 0 0 4 6 0 0 5 8 23
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.500 0.500 0.313 0.500
21-090054-002
7/13/2021

0.639 0.833 0.406
04:15 PM - 05:15 PM

0.500

PM NORTH LEG SOUTH LEG EAST LEG WEST LEG

0.250 0.250
07:45 AM - 08:45 AM

AM NORTH LEG SOUTH LEG EAST LEG WEST LEG
Data - Pedestrians (Crosswalks)
Canal St Canal St Broadway St Broadway St
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
ID: 21-090054-003 Day:

City: King City Date:

AM 0 0 0 0 AM
NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON
PM 0 0 0 0 PM

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
0 0 0 0
0 1 0 1
0 377 0 111
0 0 0 0 0 26 0 6
3 0 0 0 TEV 353 0 852 0 0 0 1
179 0 287 0 PHF 0.82 0.89
28 0 56 0
0 0 0 0

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
PM 0 69 0 36 PM
NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON
AM 0 19 0 5 AM
0 NONE
04:15 PM - 05:15 PM 1
Franciscan Way & Broadway St
Peak Hour Turning Movement Count
Franciscan Way Tuesday
SOUTHBOUND 7/13/2021

PEAK HOURS
4:00 PM - 06:00 PM
07:30 AM - 08:30 AM 4 7:00 AM - 09:00 AM

COUNT PERIODS
NONE
323 0 185
Cars (AM) 82 HT (AM)
Broadway St

EASTBOUND

WESTBOUND
Broadway St
130 0 446

CONTROL
1-Way Stop(NB)
Pedestrians (Crosswalks)
Cars (PM) HT (PM)
0 34

NORTHBOUND
Franciscan Way
Cars (NOON) HT (NOON)

AM NOON PM
PM
AM
AM
NOON
PM
PM
NOON
AM
AM
NOON
PM
NOON

PMNOONAMAMNOONPM

PMNOONAMAMNOONPM
1 0
0 1
0 0
40 210
5 10
0 1
0 0
5 10 210 3
0 4
0 0
5 0
000
000
0 0
0 0
0 0
000
000
0 3
0 0
6 0
000
001
1 373
56 26
282
0 000
69036
0 0
0 0
0 0
000
000
1 108
28 6
173
3 000
1904
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: Franciscan Way & Broadway St
City: King City Project ID:

Control: 1-Way Stop(NB) Date:

NS/EW Streets:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
7:00 AM 6 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 5 0 0 29 1 0 69
7:15 AM 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 32 2 0 2 41 0 0 80
7:30 AM 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 4 0 0 23 0 0 67
7:45 AM 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 62 12 0 2 25 0 0 107
8:00 AM 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 41 4 0 3 34 0 1 88
8:15 AM 10 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 38 8 0 1 29 1 0 91
8:30 AM 3 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 31 9 0 0 18 0 0 64
8:45 AM 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 40 11 0 0 32 0 0 89

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 33 0 10 0 1 0 1 0 4 309 55 0 8 231 2 1 655 APPROACH %'s : 76.74% 0.00% 23.26% 0.00% 50.00% 0.00% 50.00% 0.00% 1.09% 83.97% 14.95% 0.00% 3.31% 95.45% 0.83% 0.41% PEAK HR : 07:30 AM 39 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 19 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 3 179 28 0 6 111 1 1 353 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.475 0.000 0.417 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.375 0.722 0.583 0.000 0.500 0.816 0.250 0.250 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SBL SBT SBR SBU EBL EBT EBR EBU WBL WBT WBR WBU 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
4:00 PM 20 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 75 15 0 8 85 0 0 211
4:15 PM 14 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 13 0 9 90 0 0 205
4:30 PM 16 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 81 14 0 4 94 1 0 220
4:45 PM 16 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 69 9 0 7 79 0 0 188
5:00 PM 23 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 67 20 0 6 114 0 0 239
5:15 PM 23 0 8 0 1 0 0 0 0 58 15 0 7 72 0 0 184
5:30 PM 21 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 63 16 0 11 77 0 0 195
5:45 PM 16 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 58 15 0 6 75 0 0 177

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 149 0 66 0 1 0 0 0 0 541 117 0 58 686 1 0 1619 APPROACH %'s : 69.30% 0.00% 30.70% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 82.22% 17.78% 0.00% 7.79% 92.08% 0.13% 0.00% PEAK HR : 04:15 PM 12:00 AM TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 69 0 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 287 56 0 26 377 1 0 852 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.750 0.000 0.900 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.886 0.700 0.000 0.722 0.827 0.250 0.000 21-090054-003
7/13/2021
Data - Total
Franciscan Way Franciscan Way Broadway St Broadway St
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
07:30 AM - 08:30 AM

0.825 0.462 0.709 0.783
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
04:15 PM - 05:15 PM

0.891 0.820 0.903 0.842
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: Franciscan Way & Broadway St
City: King City Project ID:

Control: 1-Way Stop(NB) Date:

NS/EW Streets:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
7:00 AM 6 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 5 0 0 28 1 0 65
7:15 AM 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 30 1 0 2 40 0 0 76
7:30 AM 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35 4 0 0 23 0 0 64
7:45 AM 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 62 12 0 2 24 0 0 106
8:00 AM 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 39 4 0 3 32 0 1 84
8:15 AM 10 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 37 8 0 1 29 1 0 89
8:30 AM 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 29 7 0 0 17 0 0 57
8:45 AM 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 40 11 0 0 31 0 0 86

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 31 0 7 0 1 0 1 0 4 296 52 0 8 224 2 1 627 APPROACH %'s : 81.58% 0.00% 18.42% 0.00% 50.00% 0.00% 50.00% 0.00% 1.14% 84.09% 14.77% 0.00% 3.40% 95.32% 0.85% 0.43% PEAK HR : 07:30 AM 39 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 19 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 3 173 28 0 6 108 1 1 343 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.475 0.000 0.500 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.375 0.698 0.583 0.000 0.500 0.844 0.250 0.250 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SBL SBT SBR SBU EBL EBT EBR EBU WBL WBT WBR WBU 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
4:00 PM 20 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 75 15 0 8 84 0 0 210
4:15 PM 14 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 13 0 9 88 0 0 203
4:30 PM 16 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 79 14 0 4 92 1 0 216
4:45 PM 16 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 67 9 0 7 79 0 0 186
5:00 PM 23 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 66 20 0 6 114 0 0 238
5:15 PM 23 0 8 0 1 0 0 0 0 58 15 0 7 71 0 0 183
5:30 PM 21 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 63 16 0 10 77 0 0 194
5:45 PM 16 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 57 15 0 6 75 0 0 175

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 149 0 65 0 1 0 0 0 0 535 117 0 57 680 1 0 1605 APPROACH %'s : 69.63% 0.00% 30.37% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 82.06% 17.94% 0.00% 7.72% 92.14% 0.14% 0.00% PEAK HR : 04:15 PM 290 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 69 0 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 282 56 0 26 373 1 0 843 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.750 0.000 0.900 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.892 0.700 0.000 0.722 0.818 0.250 0.000 21-090054-003
7/13/2021
04:15 PM - 05:15 PM

0.886 0.820 0.909 0.833
07:30 AM - 08:30 AM

0.809
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND

0.479 0.689 0.806
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
Data - Cars
Franciscan Way Franciscan Way Broadway St Broadway St
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: Franciscan Way & Broadway St
City: King City Project ID:

Control: 1-Way Stop(NB) Date:

NS/EW Streets:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 4
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 4
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 4
8:15 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
8:30 AM 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 1 0 0 7
8:45 AM 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 3 0 0 7 0 0 28
APPROACH %'s : 40.00% 0.00% 60.00% 0.00% 0.00% 81.25% 18.75% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% PEAK HR : 07:30 AM 39 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 3 0 0 10
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.000 0.000 0.250 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.500 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.375 0.000 0.000 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SBL SBT SBR SBU EBL EBT EBR EBU WBL WBT WBR WBU 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 4
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
5:45 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 1 6 0 0 14
APPROACH %'s : 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 14.29% 85.71% 0.00% 0.00% PEAK HR : 04:15 PM 290 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 4 0 0 9
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.625 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.500 0.000 0.000 21-090054-003
7/13/2021
04:15 PM - 05:15 PM

0.563 0.625 0.500
07:30 AM - 08:30 AM

0.625
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND

0.250 0.500 0.375
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
Data - HT
Franciscan Way Franciscan Way Broadway St Broadway St
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: Franciscan Way & Broadway St
City: King City Project ID:

Control: 1-Way Stop(NB) Date:

NS/EW Streets:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2
APPROACH %'s : 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% PEAK HR : 07:30 AM 39 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.250 0.000 0.000 0.000 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SBL SBT SBR SBU EBL EBT EBR EBU WBL WBT WBR WBU 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
5:45 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 7
APPROACH %'s : 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 50.00% 50.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% PEAK HR : 04:15 PM 290 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 4
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.500 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.250 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.250 0.000 21-090054-003
7/13/2021
04:15 PM - 05:15 PM

0.500 0.500 0.250 0.250
07:30 AM - 08:30 AM

0.250
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND

0.250
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
Data - Bikes
Franciscan Way Franciscan Way Broadway St Broadway St
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning
Movement Count
Location: Franciscan Way & Broadway St Project ID:

City: King City Date:

NS/EW Streets:

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
7:15 AM 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 4
7:30 AM 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2
7:45 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
8:00 AM 1 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 7
8:15 AM 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 6 2 2 1 2 5 1 0 19
APPROACH %'s : 75.00% 25.00% 66.67% 33.33% 28.57% 71.43% 100.00% 0.00% PEAK HR : 07:30 AM 38 -1 -1 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 2 1 2 1 1 5 0 0 12
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.500 0.250 0.500 0.250 0.250 0.250
Headers NEB NWB SEB SWB ENS ESB WNB WSB

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
4:00 PM 0 0 3 5 0 3 1 0 12
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 6
4:30 PM 1 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 6
4:45 PM 0 1 3 0 1 0 1 1 7
5:00 PM 0 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 6
5:15 PM 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2
5:30 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
5:45 PM 1 4 0 2 0 0 0 0 7

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 3 7 8 13 10 3 2 1 47
APPROACH %'s : 30.00% 70.00% 38.10% 61.90% 76.92% 23.08% 66.67% 33.33% PEAK HR : 04:15 PM 287 -3 -3 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 1 3 4 5 10 0 1 1 25
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.250 0.375 0.333 0.250 0.417 0.250 0.250 21-090054-003
7/13/2021

0.893 0.500 0.450 0.417 0.250
04:15 PM - 05:15 PM

0.429 0.375

PM NORTH LEG SOUTH LEG EAST LEG WEST LEG

0.375 0.250
07:30 AM - 08:30 AM

AM NORTH LEG SOUTH LEG EAST LEG WEST LEG
Data - Pedestrians (Crosswalks)
Franciscan Way Franciscan Way Broadway St Broadway St
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
ID: 21-090054-004 Day:

City: King City Date:

AM 1 213 66 0 AM
NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON
PM 8 172 138 0 PM

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
0 0 0 0
0 207 0 25
0 4 0 4
0 0 0 0 0 251 0 128
1 0 3 0 TEV 714 0 1292 0 0 0 0
2 0 7 0 PHF 0.82 0.89
8 0 12 0
0 0 0 0

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
PM 0 10 261 219 PM
NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON
AM 0 4 114 148 AM
0 NONE
04:15 PM - 05:15 PM 471
San Antonio Dr & Broadway St/San Lorenzo Park Rd
Peak Hour Turning Movement Count
San Antonio Dr Tuesday
SOUTHBOUND 7/13/2021

PEAK HOURS
4:00 PM - 06:00 PM
07:15 AM - 08:15 AM 140 7:00 AM - 09:00 AM

COUNT PERIODS
NONE
364 0 216
Cars (AM) 435 HT (AM)
Broadway St/San Lorenzo Park Rd

EASTBOUND

WESTBOUND
Broadway St/San Lorenzo Park Rd
9 0 22

CONTROL
Signalized
Pedestrians (Crosswalks)
Cars (PM) HT (PM)
0 349

NORTHBOUND
San Antonio Dr
Cars (NOON) HT (NOON)

AM NOON PM
PM
AM
AM
NOON
PM
PM
NOON
AM
AM
NOON
PM
NOON

PMNOONAMAMNOONPM

PMNOONAMAMNOONPM
0 0
3 0
0 1
00 000
0 3
0 0
0 0
0 30 110 3
0 0
0 5
0 0
021
015
0 0
0 0
0 0
000
000
0 0
1 5
0 0
050
078
207
4 12 246
7 3
8170137
10260214
0 0
0 0
0 0
000
000
25 4
7 123
2 1
120866
4107140
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: San Antonio Dr & Broadway St/San Lorenzo Park Rd City: King City Project ID:

Control: Signalized Date:

NS/EW Streets:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
7:00 AM 1 16 26 0 12 55 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 0 5 0 146
7:15 AM 0 27 29 0 9 49 1 0 0 0 3 0 45 2 5 0 170
7:30 AM 2 18 37 0 11 59 0 0 0 1 1 0 23 0 6 0 158
7:45 AM 1 40 48 0 30 56 0 0 1 0 4 0 28 2 7 0 217
8:00 AM 1 29 34 0 16 49 0 0 0 1 0 0 32 0 7 0 169
8:15 AM 3 19 39 0 9 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 1 10 0 148
8:30 AM 2 15 24 0 14 36 0 0 0 1 1 0 13 0 8 0 114
8:45 AM 5 25 39 0 18 35 1 0 0 1 2 0 24 2 6 0 158

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 15 189 276 0 119 375 2 0 1 4 11 0 227 7 54 0 1280 APPROACH %'s : 3.13% 39.38% 57.50% 0.00% 23.99% 75.60% 0.40% 0.00% 6.25% 25.00% 68.75% 0.00% 78.82% 2.43% 18.75% 0.00% PEAK HR : 07:15 AM 38 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 4 114 148 0 66 213 1 0 1 2 8 0 128 4 25 0 714 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.500 0.713 0.771 0.000 0.550 0.903 0.250 0.000 0.250 0.500 0.500 0.000 0.711 0.500 0.893 0.000 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SBL SBT SBR SBU EBL EBT EBR EBU WBL WBT WBR WBU 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
4:00 PM 3 75 52 0 36 54 1 0 0 3 5 0 59 3 45 0 336
4:15 PM 2 67 58 0 37 36 1 0 0 1 2 0 61 2 45 0 312
4:30 PM 1 77 56 0 36 40 1 0 1 2 3 0 62 0 56 0 335
4:45 PM 5 59 45 0 30 39 2 0 0 2 3 0 55 2 42 0 284
5:00 PM 2 58 60 0 35 57 4 0 2 2 4 0 73 0 64 0 361
5:15 PM 1 49 42 0 42 55 0 0 0 0 1 0 58 1 45 0 294
5:30 PM 1 78 42 0 31 28 1 0 0 3 1 0 61 3 37 0 286
5:45 PM 5 39 39 0 32 33 3 0 0 1 3 0 50 2 39 0 246

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 20 502 394 0 279 342 13 0 3 14 22 0 479 13 373 0 2454 APPROACH %'s : 2.18% 54.80% 43.01% 0.00% 44.01% 53.94% 2.05% 0.00% 7.69% 35.90% 56.41% 0.00% 55.38% 1.50% 43.12% 0.00% PEAK HR : 04:15 PM 12:00 AM TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 10 261 219 0 138 172 8 0 3 7 12 0 251 4 207 0 1292 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.500 0.847 0.913 0.000 0.932 0.754 0.500 0.000 0.375 0.875 0.750 0.000 0.860 0.500 0.809 0.000 21-090054-004
7/13/2021
Data - Total
San Antonio Dr San Antonio Dr Broadway St/San Lorenzo Park Rd Broadway St/San Lorenzo Park Rd AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
07:15 AM - 08:15 AM

0.823 0.747 0.814 0.550 0.755
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
04:15 PM - 05:15 PM

0.895 0.914 0.828 0.688 0.843
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: San Antonio Dr & Broadway St/San Lorenzo Park Rd City: King City Project ID:

Control: Signalized Date:

NS/EW Streets:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
7:00 AM 1 16 23 0 11 54 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 0 5 0 141
7:15 AM 0 26 27 0 9 48 1 0 0 0 2 0 43 2 5 0 163
7:30 AM 2 18 33 0 11 58 0 0 0 1 1 0 23 0 6 0 153
7:45 AM 1 36 48 0 30 54 0 0 1 0 4 0 28 2 7 0 211
8:00 AM 1 27 32 0 16 48 0 0 0 1 0 0 29 0 7 0 161
8:15 AM 3 19 39 0 8 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 1 10 0 146
8:30 AM 2 14 23 0 12 34 0 0 0 1 1 0 13 0 6 0 106
8:45 AM 5 23 39 0 18 33 1 0 0 1 2 0 23 2 5 0 152

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 15 179 264 0 115 364 2 0 1 4 10 0 221 7 51 0 1233 APPROACH %'s : 3.28% 39.08% 57.64% 0.00% 23.91% 75.68% 0.42% 0.00% 6.67% 26.67% 66.67% 0.00% 79.21% 2.51% 18.28% 0.00% PEAK HR : 07:15 AM 38 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 4 107 140 0 66 208 1 0 1 2 7 0 123 4 25 0 688 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.500 0.743 0.729 0.000 0.550 0.897 0.250 0.000 0.250 0.500 0.438 0.000 0.715 0.500 0.893 0.000 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SBL SBT SBR SBU EBL EBT EBR EBU WBL WBT WBR WBU 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
4:00 PM 3 74 52 0 36 54 1 0 0 3 5 0 58 3 45 0 334
4:15 PM 2 67 58 0 37 35 1 0 0 1 2 0 59 2 45 0 309
4:30 PM 1 77 54 0 35 39 1 0 1 2 3 0 60 0 56 0 329
4:45 PM 5 58 43 0 30 39 2 0 0 2 3 0 55 2 42 0 281
5:00 PM 2 58 59 0 35 57 4 0 2 2 4 0 72 0 64 0 359
5:15 PM 1 49 42 0 42 55 0 0 0 0 1 0 57 1 45 0 293
5:30 PM 1 78 42 0 31 27 1 0 0 3 1 0 61 3 37 0 285
5:45 PM 5 38 36 0 32 33 3 0 0 1 3 0 50 2 39 0 242

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 20 499 386 0 278 339 13 0 3 14 22 0 472 13 373 0 2432 APPROACH %'s : 2.21% 55.14% 42.65% 0.00% 44.13% 53.81% 2.06% 0.00% 7.69% 35.90% 56.41% 0.00% 55.01% 1.52% 43.47% 0.00% PEAK HR : 04:15 PM 290 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 10 260 214 0 137 170 8 0 3 7 12 0 246 4 207 0 1278 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.500 0.844 0.907 0.000 0.926 0.746 0.500 0.000 0.375 0.875 0.750 0.000 0.854 0.500 0.809 0.000 21-090054-004
7/13/2021
04:15 PM - 05:15 PM

0.890 0.917 0.820 0.688 0.840
07:15 AM - 08:15 AM

0.815
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND

0.738 0.818 0.500 0.760
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
Data - Cars
San Antonio Dr San Antonio Dr Broadway St/San Lorenzo Park Rd Broadway St/San Lorenzo Park Rd National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: San Antonio Dr & Broadway St/San Lorenzo Park Rd City: King City Project ID:

Control: Signalized Date:

NS/EW Streets:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
7:00 AM 0 0 3 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
7:15 AM 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 7
7:30 AM 0 0 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
7:45 AM 0 4 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
8:00 AM 0 2 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 8
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
8:30 AM 0 1 1 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 8
8:45 AM 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 6

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 0 10 12 0 4 11 0 0 0 0 1 0 6 0 3 0 47
APPROACH %'s : 0.00% 45.45% 54.55% 0.00% 26.67% 73.33% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 66.67% 0.00% 33.33% 0.00% PEAK HR : 07:15 AM 38 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 0 7 8 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 1 0 5 0 0 0 26
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.000 0.438 0.500 0.000 0.000 0.625 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.250 0.000 0.417 0.000 0.000 0.000 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SBL SBT SBR SBU EBL EBT EBR EBU WBL WBT WBR WBU 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
4:00 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 3
4:30 PM 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 6
4:45 PM 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
5:00 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
5:45 PM 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 0 3 8 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 22
APPROACH %'s : 0.00% 27.27% 72.73% 0.00% 25.00% 75.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% PEAK HR : 04:15 PM 290 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 0 1 5 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 14
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.000 0.250 0.625 0.000 0.250 0.500 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.625 0.000 0.000 0.000 21-090054-004
7/13/2021
04:15 PM - 05:15 PM

0.583 0.500 0.375 0.625
07:15 AM - 08:15 AM

0.813
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND

0.938 0.625 0.250 0.417
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
Data - HT
San Antonio Dr San Antonio Dr Broadway St/San Lorenzo Park Rd Broadway St/San Lorenzo Park Rd National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: San Antonio Dr & Broadway St/San Lorenzo Park Rd City: King City Project ID:

Control: Signalized Date:

NS/EW Streets:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
APPROACH %'s :

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
5:30 PM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
5:45 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 3

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 6
APPROACH %'s : 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 50.00% 50.00% 0.00% PEAK HR : 04:15 PM 290 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 21-090054-004
7/13/2021
04:15 PM - 05:15 PM
07:15 AM - 08:15 AM
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
Data - Bikes
San Antonio Dr San Antonio Dr Broadway St/San Lorenzo Park Rd Broadway St/San Lorenzo Park Rd National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning
Movement Count
Location: San Antonio Dr & Broadway St/San Lorenzo Park Rd Project ID:

City: King City Date:

NS/EW Streets:

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2
7:30 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
8:00 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 2

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 1 2 0 0 0 1 1 3 8
APPROACH %'s : 33.33% 66.67% 0.00% 100.00% 25.00% 75.00% PEAK HR : 07:15 AM 37 -1 -1 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 3 6
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.375
Headers NEB NWB SEB SWB ENS ESB WNB WSB

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
4:15 PM 3 2 0 0 3 0 0 0 8
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:30 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
5:45 PM 0 2 2 3 0 0 4 1 12

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 3 5 3 3 3 0 5 1 23
APPROACH %'s : 37.50% 62.50% 50.00% 50.00% 100.00% 0.00% 83.33% 16.67% PEAK HR : 04:15 PM 287 -3 -3 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 3 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 9
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.250 0.375 0.250
21-090054-004
7/13/2021

0.281 0.300 0.250
04:15 PM - 05:15 PM

0.750 0.500

PM NORTH LEG SOUTH LEG EAST LEG WEST LEG

0.500
07:15 AM - 08:15 AM

AM NORTH LEG SOUTH LEG EAST LEG WEST LEG
Data - Pedestrians (Crosswalks)
San Antonio Dr San Antonio Dr Broadway St/San Lorenzo
Park Rd
Broadway St/San Lorenzo
Park Rd
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
ID: 21-090054-005 Day:

City: King City Date:

AM 234 115 0 0 AM
NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON
PM 266 155 0 0 PM

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
0 0 0 0
0 45 0 18
0 0 0 3
0 0 0 0 0 32 0 30
0 0 0 0 TEV 729 0 1023 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 PHF 0.91 0.94
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
PM 1 72 452 0 PM
NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON
AM 0 81 248 0 AM
0 NONE
04:00 PM - 05:00 PM 497
San Antonio Dr & SR 101 NB Ramps
Peak Hour Turning Movement Count
San Antonio Dr Tuesday
SOUTHBOUND 7/13/2021

PEAK HOURS
4:00 PM - 06:00 PM
07:15 AM - 08:15 AM 266 7:00 AM - 09:00 AM

COUNT PERIODS
NONE
0 0 0
Cars (AM) 188 HT (AM)
SR 101 NB Ramps

EASTBOUND

WESTBOUND
SR 101 NB Ramps
318 0 338

CONTROL
1-Way Stop(WB)
Pedestrians (Crosswalks)
Cars (PM) HT (PM)
0 145

NORTHBOUND
San Antonio Dr
Cars (NOON) HT (NOON)

AM NOON PM
PM
AM
AM
NOON
PM
PM
NOON
AM
AM
NOON
PM
NOON

PMNOONAMAMNOONPM

PMNOONAMAMNOONPM
1 0
3 1
0 1
00 000
0 4
0 0
9 0
0 00 000 0
1 0
0 2
0 0
520
150
0 0
0 0
0 0
000
000
3 1
0 0
0 0
920
1120
44 0
0 30
0 0
2611530
714470
0 0
0 0
0 0
000
000
15 2
0 30
0 0
2251130
802360
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: San Antonio Dr & SR 101 NB Ramps
City: King City Project ID:

Control: 1-Way Stop(WB) Date:

NS/EW Streets:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
7:00 AM 22 42 0 0 0 29 57 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 1 0 160
7:15 AM 22 52 0 0 0 39 58 0 0 0 0 0 6 3 4 0 184
7:30 AM 28 54 0 0 0 22 61 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 4 0 177
7:45 AM 15 85 0 0 0 29 59 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 5 0 200
8:00 AM 16 57 0 0 0 25 56 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 5 0 168
8:15 AM 20 58 0 0 0 23 44 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 3 0 156
8:30 AM 12 38 0 0 0 8 41 0 0 0 0 0 7 1 3 0 110
8:45 AM 8 66 0 0 0 21 41 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 0 146

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 143 452 0 0 0 196 417 0 0 0 0 0 59 4 30 0 1301 APPROACH %'s : 24.03% 75.97% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 31.97% 68.03% 0.00% 63.44% 4.30% 32.26% 0.00% PEAK HR : 07:15 AM 38 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 81 248 0 0 0 115 234 0 0 0 0 0 30 3 18 0 729 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.723 0.729 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.737 0.959 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.833 0.250 0.900 0.000 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SBL SBT SBR SBU EBL EBT EBR EBU WBL WBT WBR WBU 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
4:00 PM 16 112 0 0 0 35 85 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 14 0 272
4:15 PM 10 118 0 0 0 37 60 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 10 0 243
4:30 PM 22 121 0 0 0 41 65 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 12 0 271
4:45 PM 24 101 0 1 0 42 56 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 9 0 237
5:00 PM 14 109 0 0 0 46 88 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 10 0 270
5:15 PM 18 87 0 0 0 46 66 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 8 0 228
5:30 PM 14 107 0 0 0 30 63 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 11 0 228
5:45 PM 12 76 0 0 0 31 54 0 0 0 0 0 8 1 9 0 191

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 130 831 0 1 0 308 537 0 0 0 0 0 49 1 83 0 1940 APPROACH %'s : 13.51% 86.38% 0.00% 0.10% 0.00% 36.45% 63.55% 0.00% 36.84% 0.75% 62.41% 0.00% PEAK HR : 04:00 PM 12:00 AM TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 72 452 0 1 0 155 266 0 0 0 0 0 32 0 45 0 1023 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.750 0.934 0.000 0.250 0.000 0.923 0.782 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.800 0.000 0.804 0.000 21-090054-005
7/13/2021
Data - Total
San Antonio Dr San Antonio Dr SR 101 NB Ramps SR 101 NB Ramps AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
07:15 AM - 08:15 AM

0.911 0.823 0.899 0.911
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
04:00 PM - 05:00 PM

0.940 0.918 0.877 0.802
National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: San Antonio Dr & SR 101 NB Ramps
City: King City Project ID:

Control: 1-Way Stop(WB) Date:

NS/EW Streets:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
7:00 AM 21 39 0 0 0 29 56 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 1 0 155
7:15 AM 21 50 0 0 0 37 56 0 0 0 0 0 6 2 3 0 175
7:30 AM 28 50 0 0 0 22 60 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 4 0 172
7:45 AM 15 82 0 0 0 29 57 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 4 0 194
8:00 AM 16 54 0 0 0 25 52 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 4 0 160
8:15 AM 20 58 0 0 0 23 43 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 3 0 155
8:30 AM 12 36 0 0 0 8 39 0 0 0 0 0 7 1 3 0 106
8:45 AM 8 65 0 0 0 21 38 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 4 0 141

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 141 434 0 0 0 194 401 0 0 0 0 0 59 3 26 0 1258 APPROACH %'s : 24.52% 75.48% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 32.61% 67.39% 0.00% 67.05% 3.41% 29.55% 0.00% PEAK HR : 07:15 AM 38 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 80 236 0 0 0 113 225 0 0 0 0 0 30 2 15 0 701 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.714 0.720 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.764 0.938 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.833 0.250 0.938 0.000 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SBL SBT SBR SBU EBL EBT EBR EBU WBL WBT WBR WBU 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
4:00 PM 15 111 0 0 0 34 85 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 14 0 269
4:15 PM 10 118 0 0 0 36 58 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 10 0 239
4:30 PM 22 119 0 0 0 41 62 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 12 0 265
4:45 PM 24 99 0 1 0 42 56 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 8 0 234
5:00 PM 11 108 0 0 0 46 87 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 10 0 265
5:15 PM 18 87 0 0 0 46 65 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 8 0 227
5:30 PM 14 107 0 0 0 30 62 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 11 0 227
5:45 PM 12 74 0 0 0 31 54 0 0 0 0 0 7 1 7 0 186

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 126 823 0 1 0 306 529 0 0 0 0 0 46 1 80 0 1912 APPROACH %'s : 13.26% 86.63% 0.00% 0.11% 0.00% 36.65% 63.35% 0.00% 36.22% 0.79% 62.99% 0.00% PEAK HR : 04:00 PM 289 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 71 447 0 1 0 153 261 0 0 0 0 0 30 0 44 0 1007 PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.740 0.939 0.000 0.250 0.000 0.911 0.768 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.750 0.000 0.786 0.000 21-090054-005
7/13/2021
04:00 PM - 05:00 PM

0.936 0.920 0.870 0.771
07:15 AM - 08:15 AM

0.903
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND

0.814 0.909 0.904
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
Data - Cars
San Antonio Dr San Antonio Dr SR 101 NB Ramps SR 101 NB Ramps National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: San Antonio Dr & SR 101 NB Ramps
City: King City Project ID:

Control: 1-Way Stop(WB) Date:

NS/EW Streets:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
7:00 AM 1 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
7:15 AM 1 2 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 9
7:30 AM 0 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
7:45 AM 0 3 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 6
8:00 AM 0 3 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 8
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
8:30 AM 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
8:45 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 5

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 2 18 0 0 0 2 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 43
APPROACH %'s : 10.00% 90.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 11.11% 88.89% 0.00% 0.00% 20.00% 80.00% 0.00% PEAK HR : 07:15 AM 38 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 1 12 0 0 0 2 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 28
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.250 0.750 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.250 0.563 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.250 0.750 0.000 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SBL SBT SBR SBU EBL EBT EBR EBU WBL WBT WBR WBU 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
4:00 PM 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4
4:30 PM 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 6
4:45 PM 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3
5:00 PM 3 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
5:45 PM 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 5

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 4 8 0 0 0 2 8 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 28
APPROACH %'s : 33.33% 66.67% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 20.00% 80.00% 0.00% 50.00% 0.00% 50.00% 0.00% PEAK HR : 04:00 PM 289 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 1 5 0 0 0 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 16
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.250 0.625 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.500 0.417 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.500 0.000 0.250 0.000 21-090054-005
7/13/2021
04:00 PM - 05:00 PM

0.667 0.750 0.583 0.750
07:15 AM - 08:15 AM

0.778
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND

0.813 0.688 0.500
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
Data - HT
San Antonio Dr San Antonio Dr SR 101 NB Ramps SR 101 NB Ramps National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location: San Antonio Dr & SR 101 NB Ramps
City: King City Project ID:

Control: 1-Way Stop(WB) Date:

NS/EW Streets:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
APPROACH %'s :

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:30 PM 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
5:45 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
APPROACH %'s : 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00%
PEAK HR : 04:00 PM 289 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 21-090054-005
7/13/2021
04:00 PM - 05:00 PM
07:15 AM - 08:15 AM
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
Data - Bikes
San Antonio Dr San Antonio Dr SR 101 NB Ramps SR 101 NB Ramps National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning
Movement Count
Location: San Antonio Dr & SR 101 NB Ramps Project ID:

City: King City Date:

NS/EW Streets:

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 4
APPROACH %'s : 25.00% 75.00%
PEAK HR : 07:15 AM 37 -1 -1 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 4
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.250 0.375
Headers NEB NWB SEB SWB ENS ESB WNB WSB

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 4
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 5
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 4
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 0 5
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 1 18

EB WB EB WB NB SB NB SB TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES : 0 0 0 0 6 13 20 2 41
APPROACH %'s : 31.58% 68.42% 90.91% 9.09%
PEAK HR : 04:00 PM 286 -3 -3 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 0 0 0 0 4 9 1 1 15
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.333 0.450 0.250 0.250
21-090054-005
7/13/2021

0.750 0.650 0.250
04:00 PM - 05:00 PM

0.500

PM NORTH LEG SOUTH LEG EAST LEG WEST LEG

0.500
07:15 AM - 08:15 AM

AM NORTH LEG SOUTH LEG EAST LEG WEST LEG
Data - Pedestrians (Crosswalks)
San Antonio Dr San Antonio Dr SR 101 NB Ramps SR 101 NB Ramps

Musical Department
2015 FLOW
FFA
Cafeleria
Denny’s
7101 rat
King City
Shpp
inn Near
r Liggett
9 King City Union
School District
9 9
Kings smog station Qkrkc Farrell Ian R
Monterey CountyQ
Sheriff's Department V
\
\
(A
%
cP
J*
Castro s Surf n
Turf Taco Shop
Takeout , N^A
4*
•*'••"i
tp . d> * Days'Jnn by®
Wyndham Kinta City T
\
Raymundo s Auto Sales
Used car dealer
9 King City High School©
t0Lps
0Alci> o b y T' M o b i I e
^‘V Yc^^s'°,e
Castro’s Bakery & DM/--.

Takeout
W . side Inn
^9^
/ /j,2
Silver Sad$
Radio OelRey y7'pChevron
_,..9<9 Qu-.
~
IP -*
- *rt
7 7Ele?eW
Takeout -. Del
M%&
Mee Memorial QI
Healthcare System
hospital king cityW
9”
Mee Memorial Hospital
- George L Mee.„
"x. QDollar Tree
Dollar store
8<29
405.8'v
Safeway O
Takeout - Delivery y
K? -tO
ty Mart5 Q
Musical Department
2040 FLOW
FFA
Cafeleria
'ey
Takeoul
6 7101 Tat
Castro’s Surf n
Turf Taco Shop
Takeout >
King City Union
School District
9 9
Kings smog station
Farrell Ian R
iP*
It sQkrkc
Monterey County0
Sheriff's Department V
Inn Near Radio Del
r Liggett (
9 °?16
<S^
X
«•
Reside
ftp.
-
Raymundo s Auto Sales
Used car dealer
9 4*
Safeway Q
Takeout - Delivery V
io by T'Mobile
> 7 11
Castro s Baker, V
Takeout --
King City High School^
*\nn
'v!
S,\yer Satft
<9
\
\
\
(A%
A
CP
tp —I'tTl
S\
1 Days'Jnn by(*)
Wyndham King City v
\
Mee Memorial djl
Healthcare System
hospital king cityw _9-
Mee Memorial Hospital
- George L Mee...
0 Dollar Tree
y Dollar store
S0,»
3W.34
I King City
Shpp
r y'*'^Chevron
< Q 9penny’s
i

Intersection Turning Movement Projections per NCHRP 255 (Furness Method) In Out 399 542

1.16 1.13 In 1.16 1.13 Out
240 105 0 Future Vol < Base Vol 277 121 0
322 139
Out 1.13 0 115 1.00 In Out 1.13 0 118 1.00 In
0 0 0 0
In 1.00 0 25 1.00 Out In 1.00 0 22 1.00 Out
0 0
Target Calc'ed %
45 365 0 45 425 0 Factor Factor Diff

1.10 1.15 Out 1.10 1.15 In SB In 1.16 1.16 0%
Out In 143 470 WB In 1.00 1.00 0%
NB In 1.15 1.15 0%
EB In 1.00 1.00 0%
Project KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Base Year 2017 NB Out 1.13 1.13 0% N/S Road FRANCISCAN Future Year 2040 EB Out 1.00 1.00 0% E/W Road BROADWAY Time Period AM Avg Last 2 Iterations? : N SB Out 1.10 1.10 0% WB Out 1.13 1.13 0%
Future Year
Volumes
Base Year
Volumes
10/1/2021 1 CUMULATIVE AM BROADWAY CIR_ US 101 NB.xls
Intersection Turning Movement Projections per NCHRP 255 (Furness Method) In Out 576 622

1.16 1.13 In 1.16 1.13 Out
350 145 0 399 177 0
463 130
Out 1.13 0 115 1.00 In Out 1.13 0 115 1.00 In
0 0 0 0
In 1.00 0 15 1.00 Out In 1.00 0 15 1.00 Out
0 0
Target Calc'ed %
60 435 0 65 506 0 Factor Factor Diff

1.20 1.15 Out 1.20 1.15 In SB In 1.16 1.16 0%
Out In 192 571 WB In 1.00 1.00 0%
NB In 1.15 1.15 0%
EB In 1.00 1.00 0%
Project KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Base Year 2017 NB Out 1.13 1.13 0% N/S Road FRANCISCAN Future Year 2040 EB Out 1.00 1.00 0% E/W Road BROADWAY Time Period PM Avg Last 2 Iterations? : N SB Out 1.20 1.20 0% WB Out 1.13 1.13 0%
Future Year
Volumes
Base Year
Volumes
10/1/2021 1 CUMULATIVE PM BROADWAY CIR_ US 101 NB.xls
Intersection Turning Movement Projections per NCHRP 255 (Furness Method) In Out 463 255

1.07 1.04 In 1.10 1.04 Out
1 175 245 1 189 273
26 328
Out 1.00 0 100 1.14 In Out 1.00 0 107 1.17 In
5 15 5 15
In 1.00 5 165 1.18 Out In 1.03 5 206 1.18 Out
10 684
Target Calc'ed %
10 145 330 10 148 406 Factor Factor Diff

1.16 1.13 Out 1.16 1.16 In SB In 1.07 1.10 3%
Out In 400 564 WB In 1.14 1.17 3%
NB In 1.13 1.16 3%
EB In 1.00 1.03 3%
Project KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Base Year 2017 NB Out 1.04 1.04 0% N/S Road SAN ANTONIO Future Year 2040 EB Out 1.18 1.18 0% E/W Road BROADWAY Time Period AM Avg Last 2 Iterations? : N SB Out 1.16 1.16 0% WB Out 1.00 1.00 0%
Future Year
Volumes
Base Year
Volumes
10/1/2021 02 CUMULATIVE AM BROADWAY_SAN ANTONIO.xls
Intersection Turning Movement Projections per NCHRP 255 (Furness Method) In Out 350 464

1.07 1.04 In 1.08 1.04 Out
5 160 160 Future Vol < Base Vol 4 170 176
30 626
Out 1.00 1 210 1.14 In Out 1.00 1 221 1.15 In
15 15 15 15
In 1.00 15 320 1.18 Out In 1.01 15 389 1.18 Out
31 549
Target Calc'ed %
10 235 290 10 242 357 Factor Factor Diff

1.16 1.13 Out 1.16 1.14 In SB In 1.07 1.08 1%
Out In 574 609 WB In 1.14 1.15 1%
NB In 1.13 1.14 1%
EB In 1.00 1.01 1%
Project KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Base Year 2017 NB Out 1.04 1.04 0% N/S Road SAN ANTONIO Future Year 2040 EB Out 1.18 1.18 0% E/W Road BROADWAY Time Period PM Avg Last 2 Iterations? : N SB Out 1.16 1.16 0% WB Out 1.00 1.00 0%
Future Year
Volumes
Base Year
Volumes
10/1/2021 02 CUMULATIVE PM BROADWAY_SAN ANTONIO.xls
Intersection Turning Movement Projections per NCHRP 255 (Furness Method) In Out 0 0

1.00 1.00 In 1.00 1.00 Out
0 0 0 Future Vol < Base Vol 0 0 0
331 369
Out 1.14 0 0 1.15 In Out 1.14 0 0 1.15 In
485 270 593 311
In 1.18 65 50 1.23 Out In 1.18 57 58 1.23 Out
650 640
Target Calc'ed %
20 0 35 19 0 47 Factor Factor Diff

1.00 1.20 Out 1.00 1.20 In SB In 1.00 1.00 0%
Out In 115 66 WB In 1.15 1.15 0%
NB In 1.20 1.20 0%
EB In 1.18 1.18 0%
Project KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Base Year 2017 NB Out 1.00 1.00 0% N/S Road FRANCISCAN Future Year 2040 EB Out 1.23 1.23 0% E/W Road BROADWAY Time Period AM Avg Last 2 Iterations? : N SB Out 1.00 1.00 0% WB Out 1.14 1.14 0%
Future Year
Volumes
Base Year
Volumes
10/1/2021 5 CUMULATIVE AM BROADWAY_ FRANCISCAN.xls
Intersection Turning Movement Projections per NCHRP 255 (Furness Method) In Out 0 0

1.00 1.00 In 1.00 1.00 Out
0 0 0 Future Vol < Base Vol 0 0 0
678 678
Out 1.14 0 0 1.15 In Out 1.14 0 0 1.15 In
435 495 534 577
In 1.18 80 95 1.23 Out In 1.18 73 102 1.23 Out
608 609
Target Calc'ed %
100 0 60 101 0 75 Factor Factor Diff

1.00 1.10 Out 1.00 1.10 In SB In 1.00 1.00 0%
Out In 175 176 WB In 1.15 1.15 0%
NB In 1.10 1.10 0%
EB In 1.18 1.18 0%
Project KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Base Year 2017 NB Out 1.00 1.00 0% N/S Road FRANCISCAN Future Year 2040 EB Out 1.23 1.23 0% E/W Road BROADWAY Time Period PM Avg Last 2 Iterations? : N SB Out 1.00 1.00 0% WB Out 1.14 1.14 0%
Future Year
Volumes
Base Year
Volumes
10/1/2021 5 CUMULATIVE PM BROADWAY_ FRANCISCAN.xls
Intersection Turning Movement Projections per NCHRP 255 (Furness Method) In Out 0 0

1.00 1.00 In 1.01 1.00 Out
0 0 0 0 0 0
500 628
Out 1.15 0 0 1.13 In Out 1.15 0 0 1.14 In
390 390 471 415
In 1.23 35 160 1.32 Out In 1.24 58 213 1.32 Out
529 660
Target Calc'ed %
45 0 110 85 0 189 Factor Factor Diff

1.39 1.75 Out 1.39 1.77 In SB In 1.00 1.01 1%
Out In 271 274 WB In 1.13 1.14 1%
NB In 1.75 1.77 1%
EB In 1.23 1.24 1%
Project KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Base Year 2017 NB Out 1.00 1.00 0% N/S Road CANAL Future Year 2040 EB Out 1.32 1.32 0%
E/W Road BROADWAY Time Period AM Avg Last 2 Iterations? : N SB Out 1.39 1.39 0% WB Out 1.15 1.15 0%
Future Year
Volumes
Base Year
Volumes
10/1/2021 6 CUMULATIVE AM BROADWAY_ CANAL.xls
Intersection Turning Movement Projections per NCHRP 255 (Furness Method) In Out 0 0

1.00 1.00 In 1.00 1.00 Out
0 0 0 0 0 0
690 848
Out 1.15 0 0 1.13 In Out 1.15 0 0 1.13 In
535 545 629 582
In 1.23 70 205 1.32 Out In 1.23 116 266 1.32 Out
745 977
Target Calc'ed %
55 0 205 108 0 348 Factor Factor Diff

1.39 1.75 Out 1.39 1.75 In SB In 1.00 1.00 0%
Out In 382 456 WB In 1.13 1.13 0%
NB In 1.75 1.75 0%
EB In 1.23 1.23 0%
Project KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Base Year 2017 NB Out 1.00 1.00 0% N/S Road CANAL Future Year 2040 EB Out 1.32 1.32 0%
E/W Road BROADWAY Time Period PM Avg Last 2 Iterations? : N SB Out 1.39 1.39 0% WB Out 1.15 1.15 0%
Future Year
Volumes
Base Year
Volumes
10/1/2021 6 CUMULATIVE PM BROADWAY_ CANAL.xls
Intersection Turning Movement Projections per NCHRP 255 (Furness Method) In Out 303 302

1.10 1.08 In 1.10 1.08 Out
180 55 40 Future Vol < Base Vol 177 73 53
571 435
Out 1.13 160 40 1.28 In Out 1.13 180 53 1.28 In
285 290 405 365
In 1.32 25 10 1.38 Out In 1.32 36 17 1.38 Out
621 490
Target Calc'ed %
35 80 30 29 69 33 Factor Factor Diff

1.40 0.90 Out 1.40 0.90 In SB In 1.10 1.10 0%
Out In 126 131 WB In 1.28 1.28 0%
NB In 0.90 0.90 0%
EB In 1.32 1.32 0%
Project KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Base Year 2017 NB Out 1.08 1.08 0% N/S Road MILDRED Future Year 2040 EB Out 1.38 1.38 0%
E/W Road BROADWAY Time Period AM Avg Last 2 Iterations? : N SB Out 1.40 1.40 0% WB Out 1.13 1.13 0%
Future Year
Volumes
Base Year
Volumes
10/1/2021 72 CUMULATIVE AM BROADWAY_ MILDRED.xls
Intersection Turning Movement Projections per NCHRP 255 (Furness Method) In Out 307 265

1.10 1.08 In 1.10 1.08 Out
165 55 60 Future Vol < Base Vol 146 77 85
780 721
Out 1.13 145 45 1.28 In Out 1.13 151 66 1.28 In
505 500 703 616
In 1.32 25 20 1.38 Out In 1.32 34 39 1.38 Out
888 821
Target Calc'ed %
25 55 30 18 47 34 Factor Factor Diff

1.50 0.90 Out 1.50 0.90 In SB In 1.10 1.10 0%
Out In 150 99 WB In 1.28 1.28 0%
NB In 0.90 0.90 0%
EB In 1.32 1.32 0%
Project KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Base Year 2017 NB Out 1.08 1.08 0% N/S Road MILDRED Future Year 40 EB Out 1.38 1.38 0%
E/W Road BROADWAY Time Period PM Avg Last 2 Iterations? : N SB Out 1.50 1.50 0% WB Out 1.13 1.13 0%
Future Year
Volumes
Base Year
Volumes
10/1/2021 7 CUMULATIVE PM BROADWAY_ MILDRED.xls

HCM 6th TWSC AM EXISTING
3: WEST PROJECT DWY & BROADWAY ST 09/13/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 555 0 0 290
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 555 0 0 290
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 75 75 75 75 75 75
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 0 740 0 0 387
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1127 740 0 0 740 0
Stage 1 740 -----
Stage 2 387 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 226 417 - - 867 -
Stage 1 472 -----
Stage 2 686 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 226 417 - - 867 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 353 -----
Stage 1 472 -----
Stage 2 686 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 0

HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - - 867 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio -----
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 0 0 -
HCM Lane LOS - - A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC AM EXISTING
4: BROADWAY ST & EAST PROJECT DWY 09/13/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 555 0 0 290
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 555 0 0 290
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 75 75 75 75 75 75
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 0 740 0 0 387
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1127 740 0 0 740 0
Stage 1 740 -----
Stage 2 387 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 226 417 - - 867 -
Stage 1 472 -----
Stage 2 686 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 226 417 - - 867 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 353 -----
Stage 1 472 -----
Stage 2 686 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 0

HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - - 867 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio -----
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 0 0 -
HCM Lane LOS - - A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC AM EXISTING
5: FRANCISCAN WAY & BROADWAY ST 09/13/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.4
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 20 35 485 65 50 270
Future Vol, veh/h 20 35 485 65 50 270
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 50 0 - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 75 75 75 75 75 75
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 27 47 647 87 67 360
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1185 691 0 0 734 0
Stage 1 691 -----
Stage 2 494 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 209 445 - - 871 -
Stage 1 497 -----
Stage 2 613 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 193 445 - - 871 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 329 -----
Stage 1 497 -----
Stage 2 566 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 15.1 0 1.5

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1NWLn2 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 329 445 871 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.081 0.105 0.077 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 16.9 14 9.5 -
HCM Lane LOS - - C B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.3 0.3 0.2 -
HCM 6th TWSC AM EXISTING
6: BROADWAY ST & CANAL ST 09/13/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.8
Movement NBL NBR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 45 110 390 35 160 390
Future Vol, veh/h 45 110 390 35 160 390
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 35 0 - - 60 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 75 75 75 75 75 75
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 60 147 520 47 213 520
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1490 544 0 0 567 0
Stage 1 544 -----
Stage 2 946 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 136 539 - - 1005 -
Stage 1 582 -----
Stage 2 377 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 107 539 - - 1005 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 222 -----
Stage 1 582 -----
Stage 2 297 -----
Approach NB NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 17.9 0 2.8

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NER NBLn1 NBLn2 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 222 539 1005 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.27 0.272 0.212 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 27.1 14.2 9.5 -
HCM Lane LOS - - D B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 1.1 1.1 0.8 -
HCM 6th AWSC AM EXISTING
7: MILDRED AVE & BROADWAY ST 09/13/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 5
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 49.4
Intersection LOS E
Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 35 80 30 40 55 180 160 285 25 10 290 40 Future Vol, veh/h 35 80 30 40 55 180 160 285 25 10 290 40 Peak Hour Factor 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 Heavy Vehicles, % 222222222222
Mvmt Flow 47 107 40 53 73 240 213 380 33 13 387 53
Number of Lanes 010010110110
Approach NB SB NE SW
Opposing Approach SB NB SW NE
Opposing Lanes 1122
Conflicting Approach Left NE SW SB NB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2211
Conflicting Approach Right SW NE NB SB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2211
HCM Control Delay 20.7 37.5 47.1 74.3

HCM LOS C E E F

Lane NELn1 NELn2 NBLn1 SBLn1 SWLn1 SWLn2
Vol Left, % 100% 0% 24% 15% 100% 0%
Vol Thru, % 0% 92% 55% 20% 0% 88%
Vol Right, % 0% 8% 21% 65% 0% 12%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 160 310 145 275 10 330
LT Vol 160 0 35 40 10 0
Through Vol 0 285 80 55 0 290
RT Vol 0 25 30 180 0 40
Lane Flow Rate 213 413 193 367 13 440
Geometry Grp 772277
Degree of Util (X) 0.524 0.949 0.489 0.811 0.033 1.014
Departure Headway (Hd) 8.958 8.379 9.228 8.066 8.904 8.296 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 405 434 392 451 400 436
Service Time 6.658 6.079 7.228 6.066 6.699 6.09
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.526 0.952 0.492 0.814 0.033 1.009
HCM Control Delay 21.1 60.5 20.7 37.5 12 76.2
HCM Lane LOS C F C E B F
HCM 95th-tile Q 2.9 11.1 2.6 7.5 0.1 13.2
HCM 6th TWSC PM EXISTING
3: WEST PROJECT DWY & BROADWAY ST 09/03/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 460 0 0 540
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 460 0 0 540
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 0 561 0 0 659
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1220 561 0 0 561 0
Stage 1 561 -----
Stage 2 659 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 199 527 - - 1010 -
Stage 1 571 -----
Stage 2 515 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 199 527 - - 1010 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 338 -----
Stage 1 571 -----
Stage 2 515 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 0

HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - - 1010 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio -----
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 0 0 -
HCM Lane LOS - - A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC PM EXISTING
4: BROADWAY ST & EAST PROJECT DWY 09/03/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 460 0 0 540
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 460 0 0 540
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 0 561 0 0 659
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1220 561 0 0 561 0
Stage 1 561 -----
Stage 2 659 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 199 527 - - 1010 -
Stage 1 571 -----
Stage 2 515 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 199 527 - - 1010 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 338 -----
Stage 1 571 -----
Stage 2 515 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 0

HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - - 1010 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio -----
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 0 0 -
HCM Lane LOS - - A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC PM EXISTING
5: FRANCISCAN WAY & BROADWAY ST 09/03/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.7
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 100 60 435 80 95 495
Future Vol, veh/h 100 60 435 80 95 495
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 50 0 - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 122 73 530 98 116 604
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1415 579 0 0 628 0
Stage 1 579 -----
Stage 2 836 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 151 515 - - 954 -
Stage 1 560 -----
Stage 2 425 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 133 515 - - 954 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 262 -----
Stage 1 560 -----
Stage 2 373 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 23.8 0 1.5

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1NWLn2 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 262 515 954 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.465 0.142 0.121 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 30.2 13.1 9.3 -
HCM Lane LOS - - D B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 2.3 0.5 0.4 -
HCM 6th TWSC PM EXISTING
6: BROADWAY ST & CANAL ST 09/03/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 5.9
Movement NBL NBR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 55 205 535 70 205 545
Future Vol, veh/h 55 205 535 70 205 545
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 35 0 - - 60 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 67 250 652 85 250 665
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1860 695 0 0 737 0
Stage 1 695 -----
Stage 2 1165 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 81 442 - - 869 -
Stage 1 495 -----
Stage 2 297 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 58 442 - - 869 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 156 -----
Stage 1 495 -----
Stage 2 211 -----
Approach NB NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 27.7 0 3

HCM LOS D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NER NBLn1 NBLn2 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 156 442 869 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.43 0.566 0.288 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 44.4 23.2 10.8 -
HCM Lane LOS - - E C B -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 1.9 3.4 1.2 -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon HCM 6th AWSC PM EXISTING
7: MILDRED AVE & BROADWAY ST 09/03/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 5
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 146.4
Intersection LOS F
Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 25 55 30 60 55 165 145 505 25 20 500 45 Future Vol, veh/h 25 55 30 60 55 165 145 505 25 20 500 45 Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 Heavy Vehicles, % 222222222222
Mvmt Flow 30 67 37 73 67 201 177 616 30 24 610 55
Number of Lanes 010010110110
Approach NB SB NE SW
Opposing Approach SB NB SW NE
Opposing Lanes 1122
Conflicting Approach Left NE SW SB NB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2211
Conflicting Approach Right SW NE NB SB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2211
HCM Control Delay 18.2 30.7 159.3 213.3

HCM LOS C D F F

Lane NELn1 NELn2 NBLn1 SBLn1 SWLn1 SWLn2
Vol Left, % 100% 0% 23% 21% 100% 0%
Vol Thru, % 0% 95% 50% 20% 0% 92%
Vol Right, % 0% 5% 27% 59% 0% 8%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 145 530 110 280 20 545
LT Vol 145 0 25 60 20 0
Through Vol 0 505 55 55 0 500
RT Vol 0 25 30 165 0 45
Lane Flow Rate 177 646 134 341 24 665
Geometry Grp 772277
Degree of Util (X) 0.397 1.356 0.325 0.714 0.056 1.411
Departure Headway (Hd) 8.854 8.299 10.336 8.73 8.778 8.199 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 408 446 350 417 410 452
Service Time 6.554 5.999 8.336 6.73 6.478 5.899
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.434 1.448 0.383 0.818 0.059 1.471
HCM Control Delay 17.3 198.2 18.2 30.7 12 220.7
HCM Lane LOS C F C D B F
HCM 95th-tile Q 1.9 27.4 1.4 5.5 0.2 30.2

HCM 6th TWSC AM EX PL PROJ
3: WEST PROJECT DWY & BROADWAY ST 09/13/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.3
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 5 558 14 7 293
Future Vol, veh/h 6 5 558 14 7 293
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 75 75 75 75 75 75
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 8 7 744 19 9 391
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1163 754 0 0 763 0
Stage 1 754 -----
Stage 2 409 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 215 409 - - 850 -
Stage 1 465 -----
Stage 2 671 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 213 409 - - 850 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 342 -----
Stage 1 465 -----
Stage 2 664 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 15.1 0 0.2

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 370 850 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.04 0.011 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 15.1 9.3 -
HCM Lane LOS - - C A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.1 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC AM EX PL PROJ
4: BROADWAY ST & EAST PROJECT DWY 09/13/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.4
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 9 8 556 9 12 291
Future Vol, veh/h 9 8 556 9 12 291
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 75 75 75 75 75 75
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 12 11 741 12 16 388
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1167 747 0 0 753 0
Stage 1 747 -----
Stage 2 420 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 214 413 - - 857 -
Stage 1 468 -----
Stage 2 663 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 210 413 - - 857 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 340 -----
Stage 1 468 -----
Stage 2 650 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 15.3 0 0.4

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 371 857 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.061 0.019 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 15.3 9.3 -
HCM Lane LOS - - C A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.2 0.1 -
HCM 6th TWSC AM EX PL PROJ
5: FRANCISCAN WAY & BROADWAY ST 09/13/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.4
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 22 35 491 66 50 282
Future Vol, veh/h 22 35 491 66 50 282
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 50 0 - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 75 75 75 75 75 75
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 29 47 655 88 67 376
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1209 699 0 0 743 0
Stage 1 699 -----
Stage 2 510 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 202 440 - - 864 -
Stage 1 493 -----
Stage 2 603 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 186 440 - - 864 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 323 -----
Stage 1 493 -----
Stage 2 556 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 15.4 0 1.4

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1NWLn2 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 323 440 864 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.091 0.106 0.077 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 17.3 14.2 9.5 -
HCM Lane LOS - - C B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.3 0.4 0.2 -
HCM 6th TWSC AM EX PL PROJ
6: BROADWAY ST & CANAL ST 09/13/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.8
Movement NBL NBR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 47 110 396 36 160 401
Future Vol, veh/h 47 110 396 36 160 401
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 35 0 - - 60 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 75 75 75 75 75 75
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 63 147 528 48 213 535
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1513 552 0 0 576 0
Stage 1 552 -----
Stage 2 961 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 132 533 - - 997 -
Stage 1 577 -----
Stage 2 371 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 104 533 - - 997 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 218 -----
Stage 1 577 -----
Stage 2 292 -----
Approach NB NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 18.4 0 2.7

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NER NBLn1 NBLn2 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 218 533 997 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.287 0.275 0.214 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 28 14.3 9.6 -
HCM Lane LOS - - D B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 1.1 1.1 0.8 -
HCM 6th AWSC AM EX PL PROJ
7: MILDRED AVE & BROADWAY ST 09/13/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 5
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 52.7
Intersection LOS F
Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 37 80 30 40 55 182 161 289 26 10 298 40 Future Vol, veh/h 37 80 30 40 55 182 161 289 26 10 298 40 Peak Hour Factor 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 Heavy Vehicles, % 222222222222
Mvmt Flow 49 107 40 53 73 243 215 385 35 13 397 53
Number of Lanes 010010110110
Approach NB SB NE SW
Opposing Approach SB NB SW NE
Opposing Lanes 1122
Conflicting Approach Left NE SW SB NB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2211
Conflicting Approach Right SW NE NB SB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2211
HCM Control Delay 21 37.6 47.9 84.5

HCM LOS C E E F

Lane NELn1 NELn2 NBLn1 SBLn1 SWLn1 SWLn2
Vol Left, % 100% 0% 25% 14% 100% 0%
Vol Thru, % 0% 92% 54% 20% 0% 88%
Vol Right, % 0% 8% 20% 66% 0% 12%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 161 315 147 277 10 338
LT Vol 161 0 37 40 10 0
Through Vol 0 289 80 55 0 298
RT Vol 0 26 30 182 0 40
Lane Flow Rate 215 420 196 369 13 451
Geometry Grp 772277
Degree of Util (X) 0.522 0.953 0.49 0.81 0.033 1.051
Departure Headway (Hd) 9.015 8.434 9.321 8.142 9.002 8.395 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 404 433 390 447 400 437
Service Time 6.715 6.134 7.321 6.142 6.702 6.095
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.532 0.97 0.503 0.826 0.033 1.032
HCM Control Delay 21.1 61.6 21 37.6 12 86.6
HCM Lane LOS C F C E B F
HCM 95th-tile Q 2.9 11.2 2.6 7.5 0.1 14.4
HCM 6th TWSC PM EX PL PROJ
3: WEST PROJECT DWY & BROADWAY ST 09/03/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.8
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 23 21 454 36 22 545
Future Vol, veh/h 23 21 454 36 22 545
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 28 26 554 44 27 665
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1295 576 0 0 598 0
Stage 1 576 -----
Stage 2 719 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 179 517 - - 979 -
Stage 1 562 -----
Stage 2 483 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 174 517 - - 979 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 312 -----
Stage 1 562 -----
Stage 2 469 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 15.9 0 0.3

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 385 979 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.139 0.027 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 15.9 8.8 -
HCM Lane LOS - - C A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.5 0.1 -
HCM 6th TWSC PM EX PL PROJ
4: BROADWAY ST & EAST PROJECT DWY 09/03/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.3
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 35 32 457 24 33 532
Future Vol, veh/h 35 32 457 24 33 532
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 43 39 557 29 40 649
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1301 572 0 0 586 0
Stage 1 572 -----
Stage 2 729 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 178 520 - - 989 -
Stage 1 565 -----
Stage 2 477 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 171 520 - - 989 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 308 -----
Stage 1 565 -----
Stage 2 458 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 17 0 0.5

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 382 989 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.214 0.041 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 17 8.8 -
HCM Lane LOS - - C A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.8 0.1 -
HCM 6th TWSC PM EX PL PROJ
5: FRANCISCAN WAY & BROADWAY ST 09/03/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.9
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 103 60 456 83 95 517
Future Vol, veh/h 103 60 456 83 95 517
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 50 0 - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 126 73 556 101 116 630
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1469 607 0 0 657 0
Stage 1 607 -----
Stage 2 862 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 140 496 - - 931 -
Stage 1 544 -----
Stage 2 414 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 123 496 - - 931 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 251 -----
Stage 1 544 -----
Stage 2 362 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 25.8 0 1.5

HCM LOS D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1NWLn2 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 251 496 931 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.5 0.148 0.124 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 32.9 13.5 9.4 -
HCM Lane LOS - - D B A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 2.6 0.5 0.4 -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon HCM 6th TWSC PM EX PL PROJ
6: BROADWAY ST & CANAL ST 09/03/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 6.1
Movement NBL NBR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 58 205 553 73 205 565
Future Vol, veh/h 58 205 553 73 205 565
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 35 0 - - 60 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 71 250 674 89 250 689
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1908 719 0 0 763 0
Stage 1 719 -----
Stage 2 1189 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 75 428 - - 850 -
Stage 1 483 -----
Stage 2 289 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 53 428 - - 850 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 150 -----
Stage 1 483 -----
Stage 2 204 -----
Approach NB NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 29.9 0 2.9

HCM LOS D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NER NBLn1 NBLn2 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 150 428 850 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.472 0.584 0.294 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 48.8 24.6 11 -
HCM Lane LOS - - E C B -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 2.2 3.6 1.2 -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon HCM 6th AWSC PM EX PL PROJ
7: MILDRED AVE & BROADWAY ST 09/03/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 5
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 160.3
Intersection LOS F
Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 28 55 30 60 55 168 148 518 28 20 514 45 Future Vol, veh/h 28 55 30 60 55 168 148 518 28 20 514 45 Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 Heavy Vehicles, % 222222222222
Mvmt Flow 34 67 37 73 67 205 180 632 34 24 627 55
Number of Lanes 010010110110
Approach NB SB NE SW
Opposing Approach SB NB SW NE
Opposing Lanes 1122
Conflicting Approach Left NE SW SB NB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2211
Conflicting Approach Right SW NE NB SB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2211
HCM Control Delay 18.8 31.9 176 232

HCM LOS C D F F

Lane NELn1 NELn2 NBLn1 SBLn1 SWLn1 SWLn2
Vol Left, % 100% 0% 25% 21% 100% 0%
Vol Thru, % 0% 95% 49% 19% 0% 92%
Vol Right, % 0% 5% 27% 59% 0% 8%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 148 546 113 283 20 559
LT Vol 148 0 28 60 20 0
Through Vol 0 518 55 55 0 514
RT Vol 0 28 30 168 0 45
Lane Flow Rate 180 666 138 345 24 682
Geometry Grp 772277
Degree of Util (X) 0.408 1.405 0.335 0.724 0.056 1.456
Departure Headway (Hd) 8.968 8.409 10.539 8.875 8.871 8.293 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 404 439 343 411 406 443
Service Time 6.668 6.109 8.539 6.875 6.571 5.993
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.446 1.517 0.402 0.839 0.059 1.54
HCM Control Delay 17.7 218.9 18.8 31.9 12.1 239.9
HCM Lane LOS C F C D B F
HCM 95th-tile Q 1.9 29.4 1.4 5.6 0.2 32.1

HCM 6th TWSC AM CUMULATIVE
3: WEST PROJECT DWY & BROADWAY ST 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 685 0 0 335
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 685 0 0 335
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 75 75 75 75 75 75
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 0 913 0 0 447
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1360 913 0 0 913 0
Stage 1 913 -----
Stage 2 447 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 164 331 - - 746 -
Stage 1 391 -----
Stage 2 644 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 164 331 - - 746 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 290 -----
Stage 1 391 -----
Stage 2 644 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 0

HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - - 746 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio -----
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 0 0 -
HCM Lane LOS - - A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC AM CUMULATIVE
4: BROADWAY ST & EAST PROJECT DWY 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 685 0 0 335
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 685 0 0 335
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 75 75 75 75 75 75
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 0 913 0 0 447
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1360 913 0 0 913 0
Stage 1 913 -----
Stage 2 447 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 164 331 - - 746 -
Stage 1 391 -----
Stage 2 644 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 164 331 - - 746 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 290 -----
Stage 1 391 -----
Stage 2 644 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 0

HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - - 746 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio -----
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 0 0 -
HCM Lane LOS - - A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC AM CUMULATIVE
5: FRANCISCAN WAY & BROADWAY ST 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.7
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 20 50 600 60 60 310
Future Vol, veh/h 20 50 600 60 60 310
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 50 0 - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 75 75 75 75 75 75
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 27 67 800 80 80 413
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1413 840 0 0 880 0
Stage 1 840 -----
Stage 2 573 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 152 365 - - 768 -
Stage 1 424 -----
Stage 2 564 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 136 365 - - 768 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 272 -----
Stage 1 424 -----
Stage 2 505 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 17.8 0 1.7

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1NWLn2 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 272 365 768 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.098 0.183 0.104 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 19.7 17.1 10.2 -
HCM Lane LOS - - C C B -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.3 0.7 0.3 -
Queues AM CUMULATIVE
6: BROADWAY ST & CANAL ST 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 4
Lane Group NBL NBR NET SWL SWT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 113 253 713 287 553
v/c Ratio 0.33 0.32 0.60 0.61 0.21
Control Delay 25.9 6.8 19.2 27.8 4.3
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 25.9 6.8 19.2 27.8 4.3
Queue Length 50th (ft) 35 28 101 84 30
Queue Length 95th (ft) 71 57 161 168 62
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1977 889 531
Turn Bay Length (ft) 35 60
Base Capacity (vph) 749 991 1920 698 3040
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.15 0.26 0.37 0.41 0.18
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary AM CUMULATIVE
6: BROADWAY ST & CANAL ST 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 5
Movement NBL NBR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 85 190 475 60 215 415
Future Volume (veh/h) 85 190 475 60 215 415
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
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 113 253 633 80 287 553
Peak Hour Factor 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75
Percent Heavy Veh, % 222222
Cap, veh/h 323 612 980 124 365 2187
Arrive On Green 0.18 0.18 0.31 0.31 0.20 0.62
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 3268 401 1781 3647
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 113 253 354 359 287 553
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1777 1798 1781 1777
Q Serve(g_s), s 2.5 5.3 7.8 7.8 6.9 3.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.5 5.3 7.8 7.8 6.9 3.2
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.22 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 323 612 549 555 365 2187
V/C Ratio(X) 0.35 0.41 0.64 0.65 0.79 0.25
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 807 1043 1045 1058 752 3952
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 16.2 10.1 13.5 13.5 17.0 4.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.6 0.4 1.3 1.3 3.8 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 1.0 1.5 2.8 2.8 2.8 0.6
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 16.8 10.6 14.8 14.8 20.8 4.0
LnGrp LOS BBBBCA
Approach Vol, veh/h 366 713 840
Approach Delay, s/veh 12.5 14.8 9.8
Approach LOS B B A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.8 13.9 18.6 32.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.5 19.1 26.6 50.3
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.3 8.9 9.8 5.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.0 0.6 4.2 4.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 12.1
HCM 6th LOS B
Queues AM CUMULATIVE
7: MILDRED AVE & BROADWAY ST 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 6
Lane Group NBT NBR SBT SBR NEL NET SWL SWT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 133 47 173 240 240 587 27 560
v/c Ratio 0.49 0.14 0.56 0.53 0.63 0.35 0.25 0.66
Control Delay 41.4 0.9 41.0 11.0 42.2 16.7 49.3 32.7
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 41.4 0.9 41.0 11.0 42.2 16.7 49.3 32.7
Queue Length 50th (ft) 63 0 82 8 111 83 13 131
Queue Length 95th (ft) 113 0 140 40 200 157 40 180
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1496 591 531 612
Turn Bay Length (ft) 100 100 55 70
Base Capacity (vph) 503 518 726 764 380 2863 108 2324
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.26 0.09 0.24 0.31 0.63 0.21 0.25 0.24 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary AM CUMULATIVE
7: MILDRED AVE & BROADWAY ST 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 7
Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 30 70 35 55 75 180 180 405 35 20 365 55 Future Volume (veh/h) 30 70 35 55 75 180 180 405 35 20 365 55 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
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 40 93 47 73 100 240 240 540 47 27 487 73 Peak Hour Factor 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 Percent Heavy Veh, % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 60 138 170 156 214 320 295 1227 107 53 730 109 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.17 0.37 0.37 0.03 0.24 0.24 Sat Flow, veh/h 554 1288 1585 773 1059 1585 1781 3308 287 1781 3101 463 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 133 0 47 173 0 240 240 289 298 27 278 282 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1843 0 1585 1832 0 1585 1781 1777 1819 1781 1777 1787 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.4 0.0 1.7 5.3 0.0 9.0 8.2 7.8 7.8 0.9 9.0 9.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.4 0.0 1.7 5.3 0.0 9.0 8.2 7.8 7.8 0.9 9.0 9.1 Prop In Lane 0.30 1.00 0.42 1.00 1.00 0.16 1.00 0.26
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 198 0 170 370 0 320 295 659 675 53 418 421 V/C Ratio(X) 0.67 0.00 0.28 0.47 0.00 0.75 0.81 0.44 0.44 0.51 0.66 0.67 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 648 0 557 935 0 809 491 1873 1917 140 1523 1532 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 27.2 0.0 26.1 22.3 0.0 23.8 25.5 15.0 15.0 30.3 22.0 22.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 3.9 0.0 0.9 0.9 0.0 3.5 5.5 0.5 0.5 7.3 1.8 1.9 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.1 0.0 0.7 2.2 0.0 3.5 3.7 2.9 3.0 0.5 3.7 3.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 31.2 0.0 26.9 23.2 0.0 27.4 31.0 15.5 15.5 37.6 23.8 23.9 LnGrp LOS C A C C A C C B B D C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 180 413 827 587
Approach Delay, s/veh 30.1 25.6 20.0 24.5
Approach LOS C C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.4 6.5 28.1 17.4 15.1 19.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 22.3 5.0 66.9 32.4 17.5 54.4 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.4 2.9 9.8 11.0 10.2 11.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.7 0.0 4.1 1.8 0.4 3.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 23.4
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th TWSC PM CUMULATIVE
3: WEST PROJECT DWY & BROADWAY ST 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 550 0 0 625
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 550 0 0 625
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 0 671 0 0 762
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1433 671 0 0 671 0
Stage 1 671 -----
Stage 2 762 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 148 456 - - 919 -
Stage 1 508 -----
Stage 2 461 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 148 456 - - 919 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 288 -----
Stage 1 508 -----
Stage 2 461 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 0

HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - - 919 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio -----
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 0 0 -
HCM Lane LOS - - A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC PM CUMULATIVE
4: BROADWAY ST & EAST PROJECT DWY 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 550 0 0 625
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 550 0 0 625
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 0 671 0 0 762
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1433 671 0 0 671 0
Stage 1 671 -----
Stage 2 762 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 148 456 - - 919 -
Stage 1 508 -----
Stage 2 461 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 148 456 - - 919 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 288 -----
Stage 1 508 -----
Stage 2 461 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 0

HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - - 919 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio -----
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 0 0 -
HCM Lane LOS - - A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC PM CUMULATIVE
5: FRANCISCAN WAY & BROADWAY ST 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4.6
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 105 75 535 75 105 580
Future Vol, veh/h 105 75 535 75 105 580
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 50 0 - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 128 91 652 91 128 707
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1661 698 0 0 743 0
Stage 1 698 -----
Stage 2 963 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 107 440 - - 864 -
Stage 1 494 -----
Stage 2 370 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 91 440 - - 864 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 214 -----
Stage 1 494 -----
Stage 2 315 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 32.1 0 1.5

HCM LOS D
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1NWLn2 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 214 440 864 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.598 0.208 0.148 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 44.1 15.3 9.9 -
HCM Lane LOS - - E C A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 3.4 0.8 0.5 -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon Queues PM CUMULATIVE
6: BROADWAY ST & CANAL ST 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 4
Lane Group NBL NBR NET SWL SWT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 134 427 908 323 713
v/c Ratio 0.41 0.56 0.70 0.68 0.27
Control Delay 29.6 13.1 21.6 32.3 4.5
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 29.6 13.1 21.6 32.3 4.5
Queue Length 50th (ft) 52 100 162 120 44
Queue Length 95th (ft) 90 149 239 #215 91
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1977 889 531
Turn Bay Length (ft) 35 60
Base Capacity (vph) 654 872 1639 598 2774
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.20 0.49 0.55 0.54 0.26
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary PM CUMULATIVE
6: BROADWAY ST & CANAL ST 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 5
Movement NBL NBR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 110 350 630 115 265 585
Future Volume (veh/h) 110 350 630 115 265 585
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
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 134 427 768 140 323 713
Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82
Percent Heavy Veh, % 222222
Cap, veh/h 441 730 977 178 379 2166
Arrive On Green 0.25 0.25 0.33 0.33 0.21 0.61
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 3095 547 1781 3647
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 134 427 455 453 323 713
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1777 1772 1781 1777
Q Serve(g_s), s 3.9 12.8 14.9 14.9 11.2 6.3
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.9 12.8 14.9 14.9 11.2 6.3
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.31 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 441 730 578 577 379 2166
V/C Ratio(X) 0.30 0.59 0.79 0.79 0.85 0.33
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 575 849 728 726 526 2759
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.7 12.8 19.7 19.7 24.4 6.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.8 4.5 4.5 9.5 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 1.6 4.1 6.3 6.3 5.4 1.9
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 20.1 13.6 24.2 24.2 33.9 6.2
LnGrp LOS C B C C C A
Approach Vol, veh/h 561 908 1036
Approach Delay, s/veh 15.2 24.2 14.8
Approach LOS B C B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 20.5 18.3 25.6 43.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.8 19.0 26.4 50.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 14.8 13.2 16.9 8.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.1 0.5 4.0 5.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 18.3
HCM 6th LOS B
Queues PM CUMULATIVE
7: MILDRED AVE & BROADWAY ST 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 6
Lane Group NBT NBR SBT SBR NEL NET SWL SWT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 85 43 202 183 183 903 49 829
v/c Ratio 0.38 0.15 0.60 0.46 0.60 0.52 0.46 0.69
Control Delay 47.0 1.1 47.2 18.2 48.1 19.2 63.8 30.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 47.0 1.1 47.2 18.2 48.1 19.2 63.8 30.4
Queue Length 50th (ft) 47 0 108 26 100 200 28 218
Queue Length 95th (ft) 99 0 215 89 191 272 #89 316
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1496 591 531 612
Turn Bay Length (ft) 100 100 55 70
Base Capacity (vph) 467 488 414 461 454 3037 107 2550
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 110 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.18 0.09 0.49 0.40 0.40 0.31 0.46 0.33 Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary PM CUMULATIVE
7: MILDRED AVE & BROADWAY ST 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 7
Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 20 50 35 85 80 150 150 705 35 40 615 65 Future Volume (veh/h) 20 50 35 85 80 150 150 705 35 40 615 65 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
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 24 61 43 104 98 183 183 860 43 49 750 79 Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 Percent Heavy Veh, % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 39 99 119 152 144 257 235 1450 72 82 1086 114 Arrive On Green 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.13 0.42 0.42 0.05 0.33 0.33 Sat Flow, veh/h 521 1324 1585 939 885 1585 1781 3444 172 1781 3244 342 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 85 0 43 202 0 183 183 444 459 49 411 418 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1844 0 1585 1823 0 1585 1781 1777 1839 1781 1777 1809 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.8 0.0 1.6 6.5 0.0 6.8 6.2 12.0 12.0 1.7 12.4 12.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.8 0.0 1.6 6.5 0.0 6.8 6.2 12.0 12.0 1.7 12.4 12.4 Prop In Lane 0.28 1.00 0.51 1.00 1.00 0.09 1.00 0.19
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 138 0 119 296 0 257 235 748 774 82 595 606 V/C Ratio(X) 0.62 0.00 0.36 0.68 0.00 0.71 0.78 0.59 0.59 0.60 0.69 0.69 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 635 0 545 563 0 489 619 2312 2393 146 1840 1873 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 27.9 0.0 27.4 24.5 0.0 24.7 26.1 13.9 13.9 29.1 17.9 17.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.4 0.0 1.8 2.8 0.0 3.6 5.5 0.8 0.7 6.8 1.4 1.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.3 0.0 0.6 2.9 0.0 2.7 2.8 4.4 4.5 0.8 4.8 4.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 32.3 0.0 29.2 27.3 0.0 28.3 31.6 14.6 14.6 35.9 19.3 19.3 LnGrp LOS C A C C A C C B B D B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 128 385 1086 878
Approach Delay, s/veh 31.2 27.8 17.5 20.3
Approach LOS C C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.3 7.5 30.8 14.7 12.8 25.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 21.4 5.1 80.9 19.2 21.6 64.4 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.8 3.7 14.0 8.8 8.2 14.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.5 0.0 7.2 1.3 0.4 6.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 20.8
HCM 6th LOS C

HCM 6th TWSC AM CUM PLUS PROJ
3: WEST PROJECT DWY & BROADWAY ST 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.2
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 5 688 14 7 338
Future Vol, veh/h 6 5 688 14 7 338
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 75 75 75 75 75 75
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 8 7 917 19 9 451
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1396 927 0 0 936 0
Stage 1 927 -----
Stage 2 469 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 156 325 - - 732 -
Stage 1 385 -----
Stage 2 630 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 154 325 - - 732 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 282 -----
Stage 1 385 -----
Stage 2 622 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 17.6 0 0.2

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 300 732 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.049 0.013 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 17.6 10 -
HCM Lane LOS - - C A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.2 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC AM CUM PLUS PROJ
4: BROADWAY ST & EAST PROJECT DWY 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.4
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 9 8 684 9 12 336
Future Vol, veh/h 9 8 684 9 12 336
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 75 75 75 75 75 75
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 12 11 912 12 16 448
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1398 918 0 0 924 0
Stage 1 918 -----
Stage 2 480 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 155 329 - - 739 -
Stage 1 389 -----
Stage 2 622 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 152 329 - - 739 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 281 -----
Stage 1 389 -----
Stage 2 608 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 17.9 0 0.3

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 302 739 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.075 0.022 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 17.9 10 -
HCM Lane LOS - - C A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.2 0.1 -
HCM 6th TWSC AM CUM PLUS PROJ
5: FRANCISCAN WAY & BROADWAY ST 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.7
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 22 50 606 61 60 322
Future Vol, veh/h 22 50 606 61 60 322
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 50 0 - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 75 75 75 75 75 75
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 29 67 808 81 80 429
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1438 849 0 0 889 0
Stage 1 849 -----
Stage 2 589 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 147 361 - - 762 -
Stage 1 419 -----
Stage 2 554 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 132 361 - - 762 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 267 -----
Stage 1 419 -----
Stage 2 496 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 18.1 0 1.6

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1NWLn2 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 267 361 762 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.11 0.185 0.105 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 20.1 17.2 10.3 -
HCM Lane LOS - - C C B -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.4 0.7 0.3 -
Queues AM CUM PLUS PROJ
6: BROADWAY ST & CANAL ST 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 4
Lane Group NBL NBR NET SWL SWT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 116 253 722 287 568
v/c Ratio 0.34 0.32 0.61 0.61 0.22
Control Delay 26.1 7.0 19.3 27.9 4.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 26.1 7.0 19.3 27.9 4.4
Queue Length 50th (ft) 36 29 103 85 31
Queue Length 95th (ft) 73 58 163 168 64
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1977 889 531
Turn Bay Length (ft) 35 60
Base Capacity (vph) 746 987 1911 695 3031
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.16 0.26 0.38 0.41 0.19
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary AM CUM PLUS PROJ 6: BROADWAY ST & CANAL ST 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 5
Movement NBL NBR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 87 190 481 61 215 426
Future Volume (veh/h) 87 190 481 61 215 426
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
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 116 253 641 81 287 568
Peak Hour Factor 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75
Percent Heavy Veh, % 222222
Cap, veh/h 322 611 988 125 365 2192
Arrive On Green 0.18 0.18 0.31 0.31 0.20 0.62
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 3268 401 1781 3647
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 116 253 358 364 287 568
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1777 1798 1781 1777
Q Serve(g_s), s 2.6 5.3 7.9 7.9 7.0 3.3
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.6 5.3 7.9 7.9 7.0 3.3
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.22 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 322 611 553 559 365 2192
V/C Ratio(X) 0.36 0.41 0.65 0.65 0.79 0.26
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 802 1038 1038 1051 747 3927
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 16.3 10.2 13.5 13.5 17.2 4.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.7 0.4 1.3 1.3 3.8 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 1.0 1.5 2.8 2.9 2.8 0.7
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 17.0 10.7 14.8 14.8 21.0 4.0
LnGrp LOS BBBBCA
Approach Vol, veh/h 369 722 855
Approach Delay, s/veh 12.7 14.8 9.7
Approach LOS B B A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.8 13.9 18.8 32.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.5 19.1 26.6 50.3
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.3 9.0 9.9 5.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.0 0.6 4.2 4.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 12.2
HCM 6th LOS B
Queues AM CUM PLUS PROJ
7: MILDRED AVE & BROADWAY ST 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 6
Lane Group NBT NBR SBT SBR NEL NET SWL SWT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 136 47 173 243 241 593 27 570
v/c Ratio 0.47 0.14 0.57 0.54 0.64 0.36 0.25 0.67
Control Delay 40.1 0.8 42.5 11.3 43.9 17.5 50.8 33.8
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 40.1 0.8 42.5 11.3 43.9 17.5 50.8 33.8
Queue Length 50th (ft) 65 0 82 8 113 85 13 134
Queue Length 95th (ft) 116 0 141 40 #204 159 40 184
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1496 591 531 612
Turn Bay Length (ft) 100 100 55 70
Base Capacity (vph) 494 511 714 757 374 2819 107 2288
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.28 0.09 0.24 0.32 0.64 0.21 0.25 0.25 Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary AM CUM PLUS PROJ 7: MILDRED AVE & BROADWAY ST 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 7
Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 32 70 35 55 75 182 181 409 36 20 373 55 Future Volume (veh/h) 32 70 35 55 75 182 181 409 36 20 373 55 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
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 43 93 47 73 100 243 241 545 48 27 497 73 Peak Hour Factor 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 Percent Heavy Veh, % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 63 137 173 157 215 321 295 1234 108 53 739 108 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.17 0.37 0.37 0.03 0.24 0.24 Sat Flow, veh/h 582 1259 1585 773 1059 1585 1781 3305 290 1781 3110 455 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 136 0 47 173 0 243 241 292 301 27 283 287 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1841 0 1585 1832 0 1585 1781 1777 1818 1781 1777 1788 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.6 0.0 1.8 5.4 0.0 9.3 8.4 8.0 8.0 1.0 9.3 9.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.6 0.0 1.8 5.4 0.0 9.3 8.4 8.0 8.0 1.0 9.3 9.4 Prop In Lane 0.32 1.00 0.42 1.00 1.00 0.16 1.00 0.25
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 201 0 173 372 0 321 295 663 679 53 422 425 V/C Ratio(X) 0.68 0.00 0.27 0.47 0.00 0.76 0.82 0.44 0.44 0.51 0.67 0.68 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 636 0 548 919 0 796 483 1842 1884 138 1497 1507 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 27.7 0.0 26.4 22.6 0.0 24.2 26.0 15.2 15.2 30.9 22.3 22.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.0 0.0 0.8 0.9 0.0 3.6 5.5 0.5 0.5 7.4 1.8 1.9 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.1 0.0 0.7 2.3 0.0 3.6 3.8 3.0 3.1 0.5 3.8 3.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 31.6 0.0 27.2 23.6 0.0 27.8 31.5 15.6 15.6 38.2 24.2 24.2 LnGrp LOS C A C C A C C B B D C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 183 416 834 597
Approach Delay, s/veh 30.5 26.1 20.2 24.8
Approach LOS CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.6 6.5 28.7 17.7 15.3 19.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 22.3 5.0 66.9 32.4 17.5 54.4 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.6 3.0 10.0 11.3 10.4 11.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.7 0.0 4.1 1.8 0.4 3.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 23.7
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th TWSC PM CUM PLUS PROJ
3: WEST PROJECT DWY & BROADWAY ST 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.8
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 23 21 544 36 22 630
Future Vol, veh/h 23 21 544 36 22 630
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 28 26 663 44 27 768
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1507 685 0 0 707 0
Stage 1 685 -----
Stage 2 822 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 133 448 - - 891 -
Stage 1 500 -----
Stage 2 432 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 129 448 - - 891 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 266 -----
Stage 1 500 -----
Stage 2 419 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 18 0 0.3

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 330 891 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.163 0.03 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 18 9.2 -
HCM Lane LOS - - C A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.6 0.1 -
HCM 6th TWSC PM CUM PLUS PROJ
4: BROADWAY ST & EAST PROJECT DWY 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.3
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 36 32 541 24 33 617
Future Vol, veh/h 36 32 541 24 33 617
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 44 39 660 29 40 752
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1507 675 0 0 689 0
Stage 1 675 -----
Stage 2 832 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 133 454 - - 905 -
Stage 1 506 -----
Stage 2 427 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 127 454 - - 905 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 263 -----
Stage 1 506 -----
Stage 2 408 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 19.6 0 0.5

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 328 905 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.253 0.044 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 19.6 9.2 -
HCM Lane LOS - - C A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 1 0.1 -
HCM 6th TWSC PM CUM PLUS PROJ
5: FRANCISCAN WAY & BROADWAY ST 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 5
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 108 75 556 78 105 602
Future Vol, veh/h 108 75 556 78 105 602
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 50 0 - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 132 91 678 95 128 734
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1716 726 0 0 773 0
Stage 1 726 -----
Stage 2 990 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 99 425 - - 842 -
Stage 1 479 -----
Stage 2 360 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 84 425 - - 842 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 206 -----
Stage 1 479 -----
Stage 2 305 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 35.5 0 1.5

HCM LOS E
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1NWLn2 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 206 425 842 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.639 0.215 0.152 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 49.1 15.8 10 -
HCM Lane LOS - - E C B -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 3.8 0.8 0.5 -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon Queues PM CUM PLUS PROJ
6: BROADWAY ST & CANAL ST 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 4
Lane Group NBL NBR NET SWL SWT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 138 427 934 323 738
v/c Ratio 0.43 0.56 0.72 0.68 0.28
Control Delay 30.1 13.4 22.1 32.6 4.6
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 30.1 13.4 22.1 32.6 4.6
Queue Length 50th (ft) 55 104 170 123 47
Queue Length 95th (ft) 93 152 248 #215 95
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1977 889 531
Turn Bay Length (ft) 35 60
Base Capacity (vph) 636 865 1628 593 2762
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.22 0.49 0.57 0.54 0.27
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary PM CUM PLUS PROJ 6: BROADWAY ST & CANAL ST 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 5
Movement NBL NBR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 113 350 648 118 265 605
Future Volume (veh/h) 113 350 648 118 265 605
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
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 138 427 790 144 323 738
Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82
Percent Heavy Veh, % 222222
Cap, veh/h 439 727 992 181 378 2179
Arrive On Green 0.25 0.25 0.33 0.33 0.21 0.61
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 3095 547 1781 3647
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 138 427 468 466 323 738
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1777 1772 1781 1777
Q Serve(g_s), s 4.1 13.1 15.7 15.7 11.4 6.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.1 13.1 15.7 15.7 11.4 6.6
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.31 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 439 727 587 586 378 2179
V/C Ratio(X) 0.31 0.59 0.80 0.80 0.85 0.34
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 558 833 722 720 520 2731
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 20.1 13.1 19.9 19.9 24.8 6.2
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.8 5.1 5.1 9.9 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 1.7 4.2 6.7 6.7 5.6 2.0
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 20.6 14.0 25.0 25.0 34.7 6.3
LnGrp LOS C B C C C A
Approach Vol, veh/h 565 934 1061
Approach Delay, s/veh 15.6 25.0 14.9
Approach LOS B C B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 20.7 18.5 26.2 44.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.5 19.1 26.6 50.3
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 15.1 13.4 17.7 8.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.1 0.5 4.0 6.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 18.7
HCM 6th LOS B
Queues PM CUM PLUS PROJ
7: MILDRED AVE & BROADWAY ST 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 6
Lane Group NBT NBR SBT SBR NEL NET SWL SWT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 89 43 202 187 187 922 49 846
v/c Ratio 0.40 0.15 0.61 0.47 0.60 0.53 0.43 0.70
Control Delay 46.7 1.0 47.1 17.9 47.9 19.8 60.3 30.7
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 46.7 1.0 47.1 17.9 47.9 19.8 60.3 30.7
Queue Length 50th (ft) 50 0 111 27 102 204 29 230
Queue Length 95th (ft) 100 0 205 87 197 285 #80 308
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1496 591 531 612
Turn Bay Length (ft) 100 100 55 70
Base Capacity (vph) 473 494 417 466 359 2985 115 2629
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 78 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.19 0.09 0.48 0.40 0.52 0.32 0.43 0.32 Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary PM CUM PLUS PROJ 7: MILDRED AVE & BROADWAY ST 09/23/2021
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 7
Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 23 50 35 85 80 153 153 718 38 40 629 65 Future Volume (veh/h) 23 50 35 85 80 153 153 718 38 40 629 65 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 28 61 43 104 98 187 187 876 46 49 767 79 Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 Percent Heavy Veh, % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 45 98 123 154 145 260 237 1463 77 81 1100 113 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.13 0.43 0.43 0.05 0.34 0.34 Sat Flow, veh/h 579 1262 1585 939 885 1585 1781 3434 180 1781 3252 335 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 89 0 43 202 0 187 187 453 469 49 419 427 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1841 0 1585 1823 0 1585 1781 1777 1838 1781 1777 1810 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.0 0.0 1.6 6.7 0.0 7.2 6.5 12.6 12.6 1.7 13.1 13.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.0 0.0 1.6 6.7 0.0 7.2 6.5 12.6 12.6 1.7 13.1 13.1 Prop In Lane 0.31 1.00 0.51 1.00 1.00 0.10 1.00 0.18
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 143 0 123 299 0 260 237 757 783 81 601 612 V/C Ratio(X) 0.62 0.00 0.35 0.68 0.00 0.72 0.79 0.60 0.60 0.61 0.70 0.70 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 636 0 547 561 0 488 484 2199 2275 156 1872 1907 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 28.6 0.0 28.0 25.2 0.0 25.4 26.9 14.2 14.2 30.0 18.3 18.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.4 0.0 1.7 2.7 0.0 3.7 5.8 0.8 0.7 7.1 1.5 1.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.4 0.0 0.7 2.9 0.0 2.8 3.0 4.6 4.8 0.9 5.1 5.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 33.0 0.0 29.7 27.8 0.0 29.1 32.7 14.9 14.9 37.1 19.8 19.8 LnGrp LOS C A C C A C C B B D B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 132 389 1109 895
Approach Delay, s/veh 31.9 28.5 17.9 20.7
Approach LOS C C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.6 7.5 31.8 15.1 13.1 26.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 22.1 5.6 79.2 19.7 17.4 67.4 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.0 3.7 14.6 9.2 8.5 15.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.5 0.0 7.4 1.3 0.3 6.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.3
HCM 6th LOS C

HCM 6th TWSC AM CUMULATIVE
3: WEST PROJECT DWY & BROADWAY ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 685 0 0 335
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 685 0 0 335
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 75 75 75 75 75 75
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 0 913 0 0 447
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1360 913 0 0 913 0
Stage 1 913 -----
Stage 2 447 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 164 331 - - 746 -
Stage 1 391 -----
Stage 2 644 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 164 331 - - 746 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 290 -----
Stage 1 391 -----
Stage 2 644 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 0

HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - - 746 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio -----
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 0 0 -
HCM Lane LOS - - A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC AM CUMULATIVE
4: BROADWAY ST & EAST PROJECT DWY mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 685 0 0 335
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 685 0 0 335
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 75 75 75 75 75 75
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 0 913 0 0 447
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1360 913 0 0 913 0
Stage 1 913 -----
Stage 2 447 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 164 331 - - 746 -
Stage 1 391 -----
Stage 2 644 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 164 331 - - 746 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 290 -----
Stage 1 391 -----
Stage 2 644 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 0

HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - - 746 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio -----
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 0 0 -
HCM Lane LOS - - A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0 -
Queues AM CUMULATIVE
5: FRANCISCAN WAY & BROADWAY ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 3
Lane Group NWL NWR NET SWL SWT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 27 67 880 80 413
v/c Ratio 0.11 0.24 0.70 0.34 0.28
Control Delay 30.6 11.4 13.0 37.6 2.9
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 30.6 11.4 13.0 37.6 2.9
Queue Length 50th (ft) 10 0 233 30 36
Queue Length 95th (ft) 29 24 274 #72 54
Internal Link Dist (ft) 777 189 889
Turn Bay Length (ft) 50 100
Base Capacity (vph) 805 756 1467 232 1694
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.03 0.09 0.60 0.34 0.24
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary AM CUMULATIVE
5: FRANCISCAN WAY & BROADWAY ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 4
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 20 50 600 60 60 310
Future Volume (veh/h) 20 50 600 60 60 310
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
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 27 67 800 80 80 413
Peak Hour Factor 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75
Percent Heavy Veh, % 222222
Cap, veh/h 130 116 975 97 120 1388
Arrive On Green 0.07 0.07 0.58 0.58 0.07 0.74
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 1673 167 1781 1870
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 27 67 0 880 80 413
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 0 1840 1781 1870
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.7 2.0 0.0 19.0 2.2 3.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.7 2.0 0.0 19.0 2.2 3.6
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.09 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 130 116 0 1072 120 1388
V/C Ratio(X) 0.21 0.58 0.00 0.82 0.67 0.30
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 755 672 0 1825 204 2242
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 21.7 22.3 0.0 8.3 22.7 2.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.8 4.5 0.0 1.6 6.3 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 0.3 0.8 0.0 5.3 1.0 0.4
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 22.5 26.8 0.0 9.9 29.0 2.2
LnGrp LOS C C A A C A
Approach Vol, veh/h 94 880 493
Approach Delay, s/veh 25.6 9.9 6.6
Approach LOS C A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.2 7.9 33.6 41.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 21.1 5.7 49.4 59.7
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.0 4.2 21.0 5.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 0.0 8.0 2.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 9.8
HCM 6th LOS A
Queues AM CUMULATIVE
6: BROADWAY ST & CANAL ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 5
Lane Group NBL NBR NET SWL SWT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 113 253 713 287 553
v/c Ratio 0.33 0.32 0.60 0.61 0.21
Control Delay 25.9 6.8 19.2 27.8 4.3
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 25.9 6.8 19.2 27.8 4.3
Queue Length 50th (ft) 35 28 101 84 30
Queue Length 95th (ft) 71 57 161 168 62
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1977 889 531
Turn Bay Length (ft) 35 60
Base Capacity (vph) 749 991 1920 698 3040
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.15 0.26 0.37 0.41 0.18
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary AM CUMULATIVE
6: BROADWAY ST & CANAL ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 6
Movement NBL NBR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 85 190 475 60 215 415
Future Volume (veh/h) 85 190 475 60 215 415
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
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 113 253 633 80 287 553
Peak Hour Factor 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75
Percent Heavy Veh, % 222222
Cap, veh/h 323 612 980 124 365 2187
Arrive On Green 0.18 0.18 0.31 0.31 0.20 0.62
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 3268 401 1781 3647
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 113 253 354 359 287 553
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1777 1798 1781 1777
Q Serve(g_s), s 2.5 5.3 7.8 7.8 6.9 3.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.5 5.3 7.8 7.8 6.9 3.2
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.22 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 323 612 549 555 365 2187
V/C Ratio(X) 0.35 0.41 0.64 0.65 0.79 0.25
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 807 1043 1045 1058 752 3952
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 16.2 10.1 13.5 13.5 17.0 4.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.6 0.4 1.3 1.3 3.8 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 1.0 1.5 2.8 2.8 2.8 0.6
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 16.8 10.6 14.8 14.8 20.8 4.0
LnGrp LOS BBBBCA
Approach Vol, veh/h 366 713 840
Approach Delay, s/veh 12.5 14.8 9.8
Approach LOS B B A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.8 13.9 18.6 32.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.5 19.1 26.6 50.3
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.3 8.9 9.8 5.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.0 0.6 4.2 4.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 12.1
HCM 6th LOS B
Queues AM CUMULATIVE
7: MILDRED AVE & BROADWAY ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 7
Lane Group NBT NBR SBT SBR NEL NET SWL SWT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 133 47 173 240 240 587 27 560
v/c Ratio 0.49 0.14 0.56 0.53 0.63 0.35 0.25 0.66
Control Delay 41.4 0.9 41.0 11.0 42.2 16.7 49.3 32.7
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 41.4 0.9 41.0 11.0 42.2 16.7 49.3 32.7
Queue Length 50th (ft) 63 0 82 8 111 83 13 131
Queue Length 95th (ft) 113 0 140 40 200 157 40 180
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1496 591 531 612
Turn Bay Length (ft) 100 100 55 70
Base Capacity (vph) 503 518 726 764 380 2863 108 2324
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.26 0.09 0.24 0.31 0.63 0.21 0.25 0.24 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary AM CUMULATIVE
7: MILDRED AVE & BROADWAY ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 8
Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 30 70 35 55 75 180 180 405 35 20 365 55 Future Volume (veh/h) 30 70 35 55 75 180 180 405 35 20 365 55 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
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 40 93 47 73 100 240 240 540 47 27 487 73 Peak Hour Factor 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 Percent Heavy Veh, % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 60 138 170 156 214 320 295 1227 107 53 730 109 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.17 0.37 0.37 0.03 0.24 0.24 Sat Flow, veh/h 554 1288 1585 773 1059 1585 1781 3308 287 1781 3101 463 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 133 0 47 173 0 240 240 289 298 27 278 282 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1843 0 1585 1832 0 1585 1781 1777 1819 1781 1777 1787 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.4 0.0 1.7 5.3 0.0 9.0 8.2 7.8 7.8 0.9 9.0 9.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.4 0.0 1.7 5.3 0.0 9.0 8.2 7.8 7.8 0.9 9.0 9.1 Prop In Lane 0.30 1.00 0.42 1.00 1.00 0.16 1.00 0.26
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 198 0 170 370 0 320 295 659 675 53 418 421 V/C Ratio(X) 0.67 0.00 0.28 0.47 0.00 0.75 0.81 0.44 0.44 0.51 0.66 0.67 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 648 0 557 935 0 809 491 1873 1917 140 1523 1532 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 27.2 0.0 26.1 22.3 0.0 23.8 25.5 15.0 15.0 30.3 22.0 22.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 3.9 0.0 0.9 0.9 0.0 3.5 5.5 0.5 0.5 7.3 1.8 1.9 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.1 0.0 0.7 2.2 0.0 3.5 3.7 2.9 3.0 0.5 3.7 3.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 31.2 0.0 26.9 23.2 0.0 27.4 31.0 15.5 15.5 37.6 23.8 23.9 LnGrp LOS C A C C A C C B B D C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 180 413 827 587
Approach Delay, s/veh 30.1 25.6 20.0 24.5
Approach LOS C C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.4 6.5 28.1 17.4 15.1 19.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 22.3 5.0 66.9 32.4 17.5 54.4 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.4 2.9 9.8 11.0 10.2 11.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.7 0.0 4.1 1.8 0.4 3.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 23.4
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th TWSC PM CUMULATIVE
3: WEST PROJECT DWY & BROADWAY ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 550 0 0 625
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 550 0 0 625
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 0 671 0 0 762
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1433 671 0 0 671 0
Stage 1 671 -----
Stage 2 762 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 148 456 - - 919 -
Stage 1 508 -----
Stage 2 461 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 148 456 - - 919 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 288 -----
Stage 1 508 -----
Stage 2 461 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 0

HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - - 919 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio -----
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 0 0 -
HCM Lane LOS - - A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC PM CUMULATIVE
4: BROADWAY ST & EAST PROJECT DWY mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 550 0 0 625
Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 550 0 0 625
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 0 0 671 0 0 762
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1433 671 0 0 671 0
Stage 1 671 -----
Stage 2 762 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 148 456 - - 919 -
Stage 1 508 -----
Stage 2 461 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 148 456 - - 919 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 288 -----
Stage 1 508 -----
Stage 2 461 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 0 0 0

HCM LOS A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - - 919 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio -----
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 0 0 -
HCM Lane LOS - - A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0 -
Queues PM CUMULATIVE
5: FRANCISCAN WAY & BROADWAY ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 3
Lane Group NWL NWR NET SWL SWT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 128 91 743 128 707
v/c Ratio 0.42 0.26 0.80 0.53 0.50
Control Delay 30.0 8.7 21.1 40.6 6.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 30.0 8.7 21.1 40.6 6.4
Queue Length 50th (ft) 45 0 217 48 107
Queue Length 95th (ft) 90 28 334 #120 185
Internal Link Dist (ft) 777 189 889
Turn Bay Length (ft) 50 100
Base Capacity (vph) 671 657 1228 243 1519
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.19 0.14 0.61 0.53 0.47
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary PM CUMULATIVE
5: FRANCISCAN WAY & BROADWAY ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 4
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 105 75 535 75 105 580
Future Volume (veh/h) 105 75 535 75 105 580
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
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 128 91 652 91 128 707
Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82
Percent Heavy Veh, % 222222
Cap, veh/h 206 183 803 112 165 1290
Arrive On Green 0.12 0.12 0.50 0.50 0.09 0.69
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 1606 224 1781 1870
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 128 91 0 743 128 707
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 0 1830 1781 1870
Q Serve(g_s), s 3.2 2.5 0.0 16.2 3.3 8.9
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.2 2.5 0.0 16.2 3.3 8.9
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.12 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 206 183 0 915 165 1290
V/C Ratio(X) 0.62 0.50 0.00 0.81 0.78 0.55
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 769 684 0 1487 279 1994
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.9 19.6 0.0 9.9 21.0 3.7
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 3.1 2.1 0.0 1.8 7.6 0.4
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.4 0.9 0.0 5.1 1.6 1.5
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 23.0 21.7 0.0 11.7 28.6 4.0
LnGrp LOS C C A B C A
Approach Vol, veh/h 219 743 835
Approach Delay, s/veh 22.5 11.7 7.8
Approach LOS C B A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.1 9.0 28.2 37.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.4 7.4 38.4 50.4
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.2 5.3 18.2 10.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.5 0.1 5.5 5.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 11.2
HCM 6th LOS B
Queues PM CUMULATIVE
6: BROADWAY ST & CANAL ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 5
Lane Group NBL NBR NET SWL SWT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 134 427 908 323 713
v/c Ratio 0.41 0.56 0.71 0.68 0.27
Control Delay 29.7 13.1 21.6 32.2 4.5
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 29.7 13.1 21.6 32.2 4.5
Queue Length 50th (ft) 53 100 162 120 44
Queue Length 95th (ft) 91 150 239 #215 91
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1977 889 531
Turn Bay Length (ft) 35 60
Base Capacity (vph) 645 875 1651 601 2782
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.21 0.49 0.55 0.54 0.26
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary PM CUMULATIVE
6: BROADWAY ST & CANAL ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 6
Movement NBL NBR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 110 350 630 115 265 585
Future Volume (veh/h) 110 350 630 115 265 585
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
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 134 427 768 140 323 713
Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82
Percent Heavy Veh, % 222222
Cap, veh/h 440 729 979 178 379 2168
Arrive On Green 0.25 0.25 0.33 0.33 0.21 0.61
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 3095 547 1781 3647
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 134 427 455 453 323 713
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1777 1772 1781 1777
Q Serve(g_s), s 3.9 12.8 14.9 14.9 11.2 6.3
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.9 12.8 14.9 14.9 11.2 6.3
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.31 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 440 729 579 578 379 2168
V/C Ratio(X) 0.30 0.59 0.78 0.78 0.85 0.33
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 567 841 733 731 528 2774
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.8 12.9 19.7 19.7 24.4 6.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.8 4.4 4.4 9.4 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 1.6 4.1 6.3 6.3 5.4 1.9
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 20.1 13.7 24.0 24.1 33.8 6.2
LnGrp LOS C B C C C A
Approach Vol, veh/h 561 908 1036
Approach Delay, s/veh 15.2 24.1 14.8
Approach LOS B C B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 20.5 18.3 25.6 43.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.5 19.1 26.6 50.3
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 14.8 13.2 16.9 8.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.1 0.5 4.1 5.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 18.2
HCM 6th LOS B
Queues PM CUMULATIVE
7: MILDRED AVE & BROADWAY ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 7
Lane Group NBT NBR SBT SBR NEL NET SWL SWT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 85 43 202 183 183 903 49 829
v/c Ratio 0.38 0.15 0.60 0.46 0.60 0.52 0.46 0.69
Control Delay 47.0 1.1 47.2 18.2 48.1 19.2 63.8 30.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 47.0 1.1 47.2 18.2 48.1 19.2 63.8 30.4
Queue Length 50th (ft) 47 0 108 26 100 200 28 218
Queue Length 95th (ft) 99 0 215 89 191 272 #89 316
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1496 591 531 612
Turn Bay Length (ft) 100 100 55 70
Base Capacity (vph) 467 488 414 461 454 3037 107 2550
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 110 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.18 0.09 0.49 0.40 0.40 0.31 0.46 0.33 Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary PM CUMULATIVE
7: MILDRED AVE & BROADWAY ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 8
Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 20 50 35 85 80 150 150 705 35 40 615 65 Future Volume (veh/h) 20 50 35 85 80 150 150 705 35 40 615 65 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
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 24 61 43 104 98 183 183 860 43 49 750 79 Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 Percent Heavy Veh, % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 39 99 119 152 144 257 235 1450 72 82 1086 114 Arrive On Green 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.13 0.42 0.42 0.05 0.33 0.33 Sat Flow, veh/h 521 1324 1585 939 885 1585 1781 3444 172 1781 3244 342 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 85 0 43 202 0 183 183 444 459 49 411 418 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1844 0 1585 1823 0 1585 1781 1777 1839 1781 1777 1809 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.8 0.0 1.6 6.5 0.0 6.8 6.2 12.0 12.0 1.7 12.4 12.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.8 0.0 1.6 6.5 0.0 6.8 6.2 12.0 12.0 1.7 12.4 12.4 Prop In Lane 0.28 1.00 0.51 1.00 1.00 0.09 1.00 0.19
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 138 0 119 296 0 257 235 748 774 82 595 606 V/C Ratio(X) 0.62 0.00 0.36 0.68 0.00 0.71 0.78 0.59 0.59 0.60 0.69 0.69 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 635 0 545 563 0 489 619 2312 2393 146 1840 1873 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 27.9 0.0 27.4 24.5 0.0 24.7 26.1 13.9 13.9 29.1 17.9 17.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.4 0.0 1.8 2.8 0.0 3.6 5.5 0.8 0.7 6.8 1.4 1.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.3 0.0 0.6 2.9 0.0 2.7 2.8 4.4 4.5 0.8 4.8 4.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 32.3 0.0 29.2 27.3 0.0 28.3 31.6 14.6 14.6 35.9 19.3 19.3 LnGrp LOS C A C C A C C B B D B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 128 385 1086 878
Approach Delay, s/veh 31.2 27.8 17.5 20.3
Approach LOS C C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.3 7.5 30.8 14.7 12.8 25.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 21.4 5.1 80.9 19.2 21.6 64.4 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.8 3.7 14.0 8.8 8.2 14.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.5 0.0 7.2 1.3 0.4 6.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 20.8
HCM 6th LOS C

HCM 6th TWSC AM CUM PLUS PROJ
3: WEST PROJECT DWY & BROADWAY ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.2
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 5 688 14 7 338
Future Vol, veh/h 6 5 688 14 7 338
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 75 75 75 75 75 75
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 8 7 917 19 9 451
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1396 927 0 0 936 0
Stage 1 927 -----
Stage 2 469 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 156 325 - - 732 -
Stage 1 385 -----
Stage 2 630 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 154 325 - - 732 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 282 -----
Stage 1 385 -----
Stage 2 622 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 17.6 0 0.2

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 300 732 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.049 0.013 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 17.6 10 -
HCM Lane LOS - - C A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.2 0 -
HCM 6th TWSC AM CUM PLUS PROJ
4: BROADWAY ST & EAST PROJECT DWY mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.4
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 9 8 684 9 12 336
Future Vol, veh/h 9 8 684 9 12 336
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 75 75 75 75 75 75
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 12 11 912 12 16 448
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1398 918 0 0 924 0
Stage 1 918 -----
Stage 2 480 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 155 329 - - 739 -
Stage 1 389 -----
Stage 2 622 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 152 329 - - 739 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 281 -----
Stage 1 389 -----
Stage 2 608 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 17.9 0 0.3

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 302 739 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.075 0.022 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 17.9 10 -
HCM Lane LOS - - C A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.2 0.1 -
Queues AM CUM PLUS PROJ
5: FRANCISCAN WAY & BROADWAY ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 3
Lane Group NWL NWR NET SWL SWT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 29 67 889 80 429
v/c Ratio 0.14 0.28 0.81 0.44 0.32
Control Delay 31.5 12.3 16.8 41.6 3.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 31.5 12.3 16.8 41.6 3.4
Queue Length 50th (ft) 11 0 238 30 38
Queue Length 95th (ft) 30 24 279 #72 56
Internal Link Dist (ft) 777 189 889
Turn Bay Length (ft) 50
Base Capacity (vph) 668 639 1454 180 1684
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.04 0.10 0.61 0.44 0.25
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary AM CUM PLUS PROJ 5: FRANCISCAN WAY & BROADWAY ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 4
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 22 50 606 61 60 322
Future Volume (veh/h) 22 50 606 61 60 322
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
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 29 67 808 81 80 429
Peak Hour Factor 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75
Percent Heavy Veh, % 222222
Cap, veh/h 168 150 970 97 116 1369
Arrive On Green 0.09 0.09 0.58 0.58 0.07 0.73
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 1673 168 1781 1870
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 29 67 0 889 80 429
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 0 1840 1781 1870
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.8 2.1 0.0 20.8 2.3 4.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.8 2.1 0.0 20.8 2.3 4.2
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.09 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 168 150 0 1067 116 1369
V/C Ratio(X) 0.17 0.45 0.00 0.83 0.69 0.31
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 709 631 0 1715 192 2107
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 22.1 22.7 0.0 9.0 24.2 2.5
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.5 2.1 0.0 2.0 7.0 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 0.3 0.8 0.0 6.3 1.1 0.6
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 22.6 24.8 0.0 11.0 31.3 2.6
LnGrp LOS C C A B C A
Approach Vol, veh/h 96 889 509
Approach Delay, s/veh 24.1 11.0 7.1
Approach LOS C B A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.6 8.1 35.3 43.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 21.1 5.7 49.4 59.7
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.1 4.3 22.8 6.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 0.0 7.9 3.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 10.5
HCM 6th LOS B
Queues AM CUM PLUS PROJ
6: BROADWAY ST & CANAL ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 5
Lane Group NBL NBR NET SWL SWT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 116 253 722 287 568
v/c Ratio 0.34 0.32 0.61 0.61 0.22
Control Delay 26.1 7.0 19.3 27.9 4.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 26.1 7.0 19.3 27.9 4.4
Queue Length 50th (ft) 36 29 103 85 31
Queue Length 95th (ft) 73 58 163 168 64
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1977 889 531
Turn Bay Length (ft) 35 60
Base Capacity (vph) 746 987 1911 695 3031
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.16 0.26 0.38 0.41 0.19
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary AM CUM PLUS PROJ 6: BROADWAY ST & CANAL ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 6
Movement NBL NBR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 87 190 481 61 215 426
Future Volume (veh/h) 87 190 481 61 215 426
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
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 116 253 641 81 287 568
Peak Hour Factor 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75
Percent Heavy Veh, % 222222
Cap, veh/h 322 611 988 125 365 2192
Arrive On Green 0.18 0.18 0.31 0.31 0.20 0.62
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 3268 401 1781 3647
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 116 253 358 364 287 568
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1777 1798 1781 1777
Q Serve(g_s), s 2.6 5.3 7.9 7.9 7.0 3.3
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.6 5.3 7.9 7.9 7.0 3.3
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.22 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 322 611 553 559 365 2192
V/C Ratio(X) 0.36 0.41 0.65 0.65 0.79 0.26
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 802 1038 1038 1051 747 3927
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 16.3 10.2 13.5 13.5 17.2 4.0
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.7 0.4 1.3 1.3 3.8 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 1.0 1.5 2.8 2.9 2.8 0.7
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 17.0 10.7 14.8 14.8 21.0 4.0
LnGrp LOS BBBBCA
Approach Vol, veh/h 369 722 855
Approach Delay, s/veh 12.7 14.8 9.7
Approach LOS B B A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.8 13.9 18.8 32.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.5 19.1 26.6 50.3
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.3 9.0 9.9 5.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.0 0.6 4.2 4.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 12.2
HCM 6th LOS B
Queues AM CUM PLUS PROJ
7: MILDRED AVE & BROADWAY ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 7
Lane Group NBT NBR SBT SBR NEL NET SWL SWT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 136 47 173 243 241 593 27 570
v/c Ratio 0.47 0.14 0.57 0.54 0.64 0.36 0.25 0.67
Control Delay 40.1 0.8 42.5 11.3 43.9 17.5 50.8 33.8
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 40.1 0.8 42.5 11.3 43.9 17.5 50.8 33.8
Queue Length 50th (ft) 65 0 82 8 113 85 13 134
Queue Length 95th (ft) 116 0 141 40 #204 159 40 184
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1496 591 531 612
Turn Bay Length (ft) 100 100 55 70
Base Capacity (vph) 494 511 714 757 374 2819 107 2288
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.28 0.09 0.24 0.32 0.64 0.21 0.25 0.25 Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary AM CUM PLUS PROJ 7: MILDRED AVE & BROADWAY ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 8
Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 32 70 35 55 75 182 181 409 36 20 373 55 Future Volume (veh/h) 32 70 35 55 75 182 181 409 36 20 373 55 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
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 43 93 47 73 100 243 241 545 48 27 497 73 Peak Hour Factor 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 Percent Heavy Veh, % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 63 137 173 157 215 321 295 1234 108 53 739 108 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.17 0.37 0.37 0.03 0.24 0.24 Sat Flow, veh/h 582 1259 1585 773 1059 1585 1781 3305 290 1781 3110 455 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 136 0 47 173 0 243 241 292 301 27 283 287 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1841 0 1585 1832 0 1585 1781 1777 1818 1781 1777 1788 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.6 0.0 1.8 5.4 0.0 9.3 8.4 8.0 8.0 1.0 9.3 9.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.6 0.0 1.8 5.4 0.0 9.3 8.4 8.0 8.0 1.0 9.3 9.4 Prop In Lane 0.32 1.00 0.42 1.00 1.00 0.16 1.00 0.25
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 201 0 173 372 0 321 295 663 679 53 422 425 V/C Ratio(X) 0.68 0.00 0.27 0.47 0.00 0.76 0.82 0.44 0.44 0.51 0.67 0.68 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 636 0 548 919 0 796 483 1842 1884 138 1497 1507 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 27.7 0.0 26.4 22.6 0.0 24.2 26.0 15.2 15.2 30.9 22.3 22.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.0 0.0 0.8 0.9 0.0 3.6 5.5 0.5 0.5 7.4 1.8 1.9 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.1 0.0 0.7 2.3 0.0 3.6 3.8 3.0 3.1 0.5 3.8 3.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 31.6 0.0 27.2 23.6 0.0 27.8 31.5 15.6 15.6 38.2 24.2 24.2 LnGrp LOS C A C C A C C B B D C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 183 416 834 597
Approach Delay, s/veh 30.5 26.1 20.2 24.8
Approach LOS CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.6 6.5 28.7 17.7 15.3 19.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 22.3 5.0 66.9 32.4 17.5 54.4 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.6 3.0 10.0 11.3 10.4 11.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.7 0.0 4.1 1.8 0.4 3.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 23.7
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th TWSC PM CUM PLUS PROJ
3: WEST PROJECT DWY & BROADWAY ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.8
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 23 21 544 36 22 630
Future Vol, veh/h 23 21 544 36 22 630
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 28 26 663 44 27 768
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1507 685 0 0 707 0
Stage 1 685 -----
Stage 2 822 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 133 448 - - 891 -
Stage 1 500 -----
Stage 2 432 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 129 448 - - 891 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 266 -----
Stage 1 500 -----
Stage 2 419 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 18 0 0.3

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 330 891 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.163 0.03 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 18 9.2 -
HCM Lane LOS - - C A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.6 0.1 -
HCM 6th TWSC PM CUM PLUS PROJ
4: BROADWAY ST & EAST PROJECT DWY mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.3
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 36 32 541 24 33 617
Future Vol, veh/h 36 32 541 24 33 617
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0
Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0
Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 44 39 660 29 40 752
Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1507 675 0 0 689 0
Stage 1 675 -----
Stage 2 832 -----
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 - - 4.12 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 -----
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 -----
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 - - 2.218 -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 133 454 - - 905 -
Stage 1 506 -----
Stage 2 427 -----
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 127 454 - - 905 -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 263 -----
Stage 1 506 -----
Stage 2 408 -----
Approach NW NE SW
HCM Control Delay, s 19.6 0 0.5

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NET NERNWLn1 SWL SWT
Capacity (veh/h) - - 328 905 -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.253 0.044 -
HCM Control Delay (s) - - 19.6 9.2 -
HCM Lane LOS - - C A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 1 0.1 -
Queues PM CUM PLUS PROJ
5: FRANCISCAN WAY & BROADWAY ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 3
Lane Group NWL NWR NET SWL SWT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 132 91 773 128 734
v/c Ratio 0.47 0.28 0.83 0.58 0.56
Control Delay 34.1 9.5 23.3 44.8 7.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 34.1 9.5 23.3 44.8 7.2
Queue Length 50th (ft) 51 0 248 52 120
Queue Length 95th (ft) 101 30 370 #125 201
Internal Link Dist (ft) 777 189 889
Turn Bay Length (ft) 50 100
Base Capacity (vph) 634 625 1247 227 1573
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.21 0.15 0.62 0.56 0.47
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary PM CUM PLUS PROJ 5: FRANCISCAN WAY & BROADWAY ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 4
Movement NWL NWR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 108 75 556 78 105 602
Future Volume (veh/h) 108 75 556 78 105 602
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
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 132 91 678 95 128 734
Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82
Percent Heavy Veh, % 222222
Cap, veh/h 208 185 829 116 165 1311
Arrive On Green 0.12 0.12 0.52 0.52 0.09 0.70
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 1605 225 1781 1870
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 132 91 0 773 128 734
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 0 1830 1781 1870
Q Serve(g_s), s 3.6 2.7 0.0 17.8 3.5 9.7
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.6 2.7 0.0 17.8 3.5 9.7
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.12 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 208 185 0 946 165 1311
V/C Ratio(X) 0.63 0.49 0.00 0.82 0.77 0.56
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 827 736 0 1611 297 2129
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 21.2 20.9 0.0 10.2 22.4 3.7
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 3.2 2.0 0.0 1.8 7.5 0.4
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.5 1.0 0.0 5.7 1.7 1.7
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 24.4 22.9 0.0 12.0 29.8 4.1
LnGrp LOS C C A B C A
Approach Vol, veh/h 223 773 862
Approach Delay, s/veh 23.8 12.0 7.9
Approach LOS C B A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.5 9.3 30.7 39.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 23.4 8.4 44.4 57.4
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.6 5.5 19.8 11.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.6 0.1 6.2 6.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 11.5
HCM 6th LOS B
Queues PM CUM PLUS PROJ
6: BROADWAY ST & CANAL ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 5
Lane Group NBL NBR NET SWL SWT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 138 427 934 323 738
v/c Ratio 0.43 0.56 0.72 0.68 0.28
Control Delay 30.1 13.4 22.1 32.6 4.6
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 30.1 13.4 22.1 32.6 4.6
Queue Length 50th (ft) 55 104 170 123 47
Queue Length 95th (ft) 93 152 248 #215 95
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1977 889 531
Turn Bay Length (ft) 35 60
Base Capacity (vph) 636 865 1628 593 2762
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.22 0.49 0.57 0.54 0.27
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary PM CUM PLUS PROJ 6: BROADWAY ST & CANAL ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 6
Movement NBL NBR NET NER SWL SWT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 113 350 648 118 265 605
Future Volume (veh/h) 113 350 648 118 265 605
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
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 138 427 790 144 323 738
Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82
Percent Heavy Veh, % 222222
Cap, veh/h 439 727 992 181 378 2179
Arrive On Green 0.25 0.25 0.33 0.33 0.21 0.61
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 3095 547 1781 3647
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 138 427 468 466 323 738
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1777 1772 1781 1777
Q Serve(g_s), s 4.1 13.1 15.7 15.7 11.4 6.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.1 13.1 15.7 15.7 11.4 6.6
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.31 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 439 727 587 586 378 2179
V/C Ratio(X) 0.31 0.59 0.80 0.80 0.85 0.34
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 558 833 722 720 520 2731
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 20.1 13.1 19.9 19.9 24.8 6.2
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.8 5.1 5.1 9.9 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 1.7 4.2 6.7 6.7 5.6 2.0
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 20.6 14.0 25.0 25.0 34.7 6.3
LnGrp LOS C B C C C A
Approach Vol, veh/h 565 934 1061
Approach Delay, s/veh 15.6 25.0 14.9
Approach LOS B C B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 20.7 18.5 26.2 44.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.5 19.1 26.6 50.3
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 15.1 13.4 17.7 8.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.1 0.5 4.0 6.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 18.7
HCM 6th LOS B
Queues PM CUM PLUS PROJ
7: MILDRED AVE & BROADWAY ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 7
Lane Group NBT NBR SBT SBR NEL NET SWL SWT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 89 43 202 187 187 922 49 846
v/c Ratio 0.40 0.15 0.60 0.46 0.60 0.53 0.47 0.70
Control Delay 49.3 1.1 47.2 16.1 50.0 20.1 66.1 31.5
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 49.3 1.1 47.2 16.1 50.0 20.1 66.1 31.5
Queue Length 50th (ft) 50 0 113 23 102 201 29 229
Queue Length 95th (ft) 110 0 212 80 #215 315 #97 341
Internal Link Dist (ft) 1496 591 531 612
Turn Bay Length (ft) 100 100 55 70
Base Capacity (vph) 499 515 578 601 378 2695 105 2306
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 114 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.18 0.08 0.35 0.31 0.49 0.36 0.47 0.37 Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary PM CUM PLUS PROJ 7: MILDRED AVE & BROADWAY ST mitigated
KING CITY GROCERY OUTLET Synchro 11 Report
KD ANDERSON & ASSOC Page 8
Movement NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR NEL NET NER SWL SWT SWR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 23 50 35 85 80 153 153 718 38 40 629 65 Future Volume (veh/h) 23 50 35 85 80 153 153 718 38 40 629 65 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 28 61 43 104 98 187 187 876 46 49 767 79 Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 Percent Heavy Veh, % 222222222222
Cap, veh/h 45 98 123 158 149 267 237 1456 76 81 1093 113 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.13 0.42 0.42 0.05 0.34 0.34 Sat Flow, veh/h 579 1262 1585 939 885 1585 1781 3434 180 1781 3252 335 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 89 0 43 202 0 187 187 453 469 49 419 427 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1841 0 1585 1823 0 1585 1781 1777 1838 1781 1777 1810 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.0 0.0 1.7 6.7 0.0 7.2 6.6 12.7 12.7 1.7 13.2 13.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.0 0.0 1.7 6.7 0.0 7.2 6.6 12.7 12.7 1.7 13.2 13.2 Prop In Lane 0.31 1.00 0.51 1.00 1.00 0.10 1.00 0.18
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 143 0 123 307 0 267 237 753 779 81 597 608 V/C Ratio(X) 0.62 0.00 0.35 0.66 0.00 0.70 0.79 0.60 0.60 0.61 0.70 0.70 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 667 0 575 774 0 673 508 1946 2013 141 1580 1609 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 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 28.9 0.0 28.2 25.1 0.0 25.3 27.1 14.4 14.4 30.3 18.6 18.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.4 0.0 1.7 2.4 0.0 3.3 5.8 0.8 0.8 7.2 1.5 1.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.5 0.0 0.7 2.9 0.0 2.8 3.0 4.7 4.8 0.9 5.2 5.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 33.3 0.0 29.9 27.5 0.0 28.7 32.9 15.2 15.1 37.4 20.1 20.1 LnGrp LOS C A C C A C C B B D C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 132 389 1109 895
Approach Delay, s/veh 32.2 28.1 18.1 21.1
Approach LOS C C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.6 7.5 32.0 15.5 13.2 26.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 23.4 5.1 70.7 27.4 18.4 57.4 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.0 3.7 14.7 9.2 8.6 15.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.5 0.0 7.4 1.7 0.3 6.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.4
HCM 6th LOS C
STAFF RESUME | EMC Planning Group
Janet Walther, MS

PRINCIPAL BIOLOGIST

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Ms. Walther joined the firm in 2003 and has been working in the field of biology since 2000. She is responsible for performing botanical and wildlife surveys; wetland and waters of the U.S. determinations; data analysis; and reports in support of management agreements, permits, and mitigation monitoring. She assists clients in complying with the Federal Endangered Species Act, California Endangered Species Act, Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act, California Fish and Game Code, and local (county and/or city) regulations.

Ms. Walther works with clients to design projects to avoid or minimize impacts to threatened and endangered species. Where impacts are unavoidable, she helps create mitigation strategies and the application documents necessary to obtain the required permits, including habitat conservation and land management plans.

In addition to her experience in biological survey and reporting, Ms.

Walther is responsible for preparation of environmental documents in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). She produces a variety of graphics for use in environmental and natural resources documents and routinely works with ArcGIS, AutoCAD, and Adobe Illustrator/Photoshop.

In previous positions, Ms. Walther inventoried both native and nonnative species in compliance with regulatory requirements, and assisted in preparing California Energy Commission Applications for Certification for four major power plant projects in California. She also conducted biological survey work in southern California and the High Desert and wetland and endangered species survey work in Nevada, Arizona, Georgia, and Florida.

EDUCATION
M.S. California State University Monterey Bay,
Coastal Watershed Science and Policy,
2014
B.S. California Polytechnic State University at
San Luis Obispo, Ecology and Systematic
Biology, 2000 - Concentration:

Environmental Management

CERTIFICATES AND TRAINING
Biology and Management of California Tiger
Salamander Workshop, Elkhorn Slough
Coastal Training Program, 2007
Biology and Management of California Redlegged Frog Workshop, Elkhorn Slough Coastal Training Program, 2007
OSHA 40-hr HAZWOPER Certificate, 2001
and 8-hr Refresher Training, 2002-2007
California Pesticide Application Certification,
2003/2004
Army Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Training, 2002

PROFESSIONAL ACHIEVEMENT
Contributor, Environmental Mitigation
Handbook, California’s Coalition for
Adequate School Housing, February 2009
Exhibit 5
STAFF RESUME | EMC Planning Group
Patrick Furtado, MS

SENIOR BIOLOGIST / REGULATORY

SPECIALIST

EDUCATION
M.S. San Francisco State University; Conservation Biology, 2012 B.S. University of California, Berkeley; Forestry and Natural Resource Management, 2007

CERTIFICATES AND TRAINING
Society of Wetland Scientists – Certified as Professional Wetland Scientist, PWS #3041, 2018
Morphology and Identification of Flowering Plants Workshop, Jepson Herbarium, 2006
Rare Plants of Eastern San Luis Obispo County Workshop, California Native Plant Society, 2010
Basic Wetland Delineation, San Francisco State University, Romberg Tiburon Center’s Wetland Science Series, 2010
Classification of Vernal Pool Plant Communities Workshop, California Native Plant Society, 2010
Plant Taxonomy Training, California Native Plant Society, 2010 Phylogeny, Taxonomy, and Name Changes in the California Flora Workshop, Jepson Herbarium, 2011
Measuring and Monitoring Plant Populations and Vegetation, California Native Plant Society, 2012
Wetland Hydrology Workshop, San Francisco State University, Romberg Tiburon Center’s Wetland Science Series, 2012
Grassland Ecology, Identification, and Monitoring Workshop, California Native Grasslands Association, 2012
California Natural Diversity Database Training, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2013
Wetland Indicator Plants Workshop, San Francisco State University, Romberg Tiburon Center’s Wetland Science Series, 2013
Amphibians of the San Francisco Bay Area Workshop, Laguna de Santa Rosa Foundation, 2014
Tidal Wetland Restoration and the Horizontal Levee Workshop, San Francisco Bay, National Estuarine Research Reserve, 2014 California Tiger Salamander Ecology Workshop, Laguna de Santa Rosa Foundation, 2015
Rare Pond Species Survey Techniques Workshop, Laguna de Santa Rosa Foundation, 2015
Field Practices: Hands-On Restoration Implementation and Maintenance, California Native Grasslands Association, 2015

PROFESSIONAL AND ACADEMIC ASSOCIATIONS
The Wildlife Society – Western Section
California Native Plant Society

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Mr. Furtado joined the firm in 2020 and has been
working in the fields of biology and regulatory
compliance since 2008. He has extensive experience
conducting field surveys in central California, in
particular with special‐status species such as burrowing owl, northern spotted owl, western snowy plover, bank
swallow, Swainsonʹs hawk, Ridgway’s rail, coho salmon,
mission blue butterfly, vernal pool branchiopods, giant garter snake, San Francisco garter snake, San Francisco dusky‐footed woodrat, salt marsh harvest mouse, San
Joaquin kit fox, and Tidestrom’s lupine.

He has been approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service as a qualified biologist for several projects
involving California red‐legged frog and California tiger salamander. He conducts nesting bird surveys, focused
botanical inventories, and large‐scale vegetation
mapping. He is a plant and wildlife biologist with
experience across a wide diversity of California habitats.

He helped design, implement, and monitor a variety of
wetland and riparian restoration projects. He has also
conducted regulatory agency coordination for wetland
issues with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Regional Water Quality Control Board, and California Coastal Commission.

Mr. Furtado specializes in biological fieldwork, resource management, regulatory permitting, planning, and
preparation of technical reports. His expertise extends across a wide range of California ecosystems including
fresh and salt water marsh, riparian woodland, vernal
pool, grassland, chaparral, oak woodland, coastal scrub, and coniferous forest. He integrates multiple disciplines including wildlife surveys, remote sensing and GIS
analysis, riparian and wetland hydrology, plant
systematics and taxonomy, vegetation mapping and
classification, fluvial geomorphology, habitat assessment, soil classification, wetland delineation, historical ecology, and invasive species management.

Transportation Engineers
JONATHAN FLECKER, P.E.

Transportation Engineer
Jonathan Flecker, P.E. is a Senior Transportation Engineer with KD Anderson & Associates, Inc. He is responsible for Project Management and Project Engineering for a variety of Traffic and Civil Engineering applications, including CEQA traffic studies, traffic signal design, signal timing, street lighting design, traffic calming, roundabout design, integration of bicycle facilities in the roadway network and preparation of traffic impact studies. He is also responsible for the satisfactory completion of all final project design and approval, client liaison and project presentation. Mr. Flecker was formerly the Traffic Engineer for the City of Davis where he worked closely with University of California staff in developing circulation plans between the two agencies.

EDUCATION: San Jose State University
B.S., Civil Engineering / M.S. Civil Engineering
REGISTRATION: Civil Engineer: California, Nevada, and Oregon Traffic Engineer: California
AFFILIATIONS: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE):

Board of Registration for Professional Engineers:

Subject Matter Expert for Traffic Engineering Examination EXPERIENCE: Over the past 38 years Mr. Flecker has been directly responsible for a wide range of transportation related projects. These include roadway and traffic engineering design, street lighting design and traffic impact analysis projects in California, Nevada and Oregon. Mr. Flecker’s background is comprised of both public sector and private industry experience.

His background includes preparation of various types of Traffic Impact Analyses including a variety of land uses, including land fill and material recovery facility sites to shopping centers and public works facilities. The projects have covered “standard” aspects of analysis, including intersection level of service, roadway level of service and queuing analyses. In addition, he has prepared analyses that include speed zone studies, and parking and truck turning assessments. He routinely uses Synchro / SimTraffic and SIDRA in preparing traffic studies as well as AutoTurn to verify turning movements at constrained locations.

Sample landfill, material recovery facility and solid waste facility projects include:
 Hay Road Landfill Environmental Impact Report, Solano County  MCWMA SR 59 Landfill Environmental Impact Report, Merced County  John Smith Road Landfill Environmental Impact Report, San Benito County  Resource Recovery Park Environmental Impact Report, San Benito County  East Stockton Transfer & Recycling Station Traffic Assessment, Stockton  Throwita Road MRF Expansion Project, El Dorado County  Keifer Landfill Special Planning Area, Sacramento County  Sacramento GreenCycle Solid Waste Facility Truck Turning Analysis, Sacramento County Mr. Flecker has a diverse background in the preparation of Traffic Signal and Traffic Calming and Roundabout facilities. This includes the preparation of Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) reports on State facilities.

His background includes various types of Roadway Improvement Projects including the integration of bicycle facilities in roadway networks. He has also been responsible for designing and implementing bicycle facility improvements and development of Traffic Calming and Roundabout facilities including the use of speed humps, chokers, traffic circles and roundabouts to accommodate multi-modal street usage including bicyclists and pedestrians.

Transportation Engineers
KENNETH D. ANDERSON, P.E.

President
Kenneth D. Anderson, P.E. is the President of KD Anderson & Associates, Inc. Since establishing the company in 1990, he has overseen the completion of traffic impact analyses, traffic operations / safety studies and circulation infrastructure design projects. He is directly responsible for the satisfactory completion of all final project design and approval, client liaison and project presentation.

EDUCATION: California Polytechnic State University, S.L.O.

B.S., Transportation Engineering, 1978
REGISTRATION: Civil Engineer: California
Traffic Engineer: California
AFFILIATIONS: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE): Past President of No. California Section National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE)
Council for Educational Facility Planners International (CEFPI) EXPERIENCE: Over more than 40 years Mr. Anderson has been directly responsible for the completion of a wide variety of Transportation Engineering and Planning projects throughout the Western United States.

Mr. Anderson has completed many Regional Circulation Studies for cities and counties, including General Plan Updates and Community / Specific Plans for cities throughout central and northern California. He has been involved in GPU’s for the cities of Coalinga, Hanford, Riverbank, Waterford, Colusa, Newman, Hughson, Grass Valley, Orland, Gridley and Live Oak. He has also completed traffic studies for numerous Specific / Community Plans, including Rio D’Oro SP in Butte County, Crossroads West and Whitmore Ranch SP’s in Stanislaus County and the Winton, Hilmar, Planada and Delhi Community Plan Updates in Merced County.

He has been responsible for preparing the Traffic Studies for IS/MND / EIR’s completed under CEQA and NEPA guidelines for projects ranging from Ski Resort and Hotel Casino Expansions in the Lake Tahoe Basin to residential and commercial developments throughout the Western United States. He is currently responsible for the Transportation Section of the Yolo County Cannabis Ordinance EIR and the Placer County Winery and Rural Brewery Ordinance EIR. He has overseen numerous studies for industrial area projects such as the SE Industrial Area Specific Plan in Oakdale and has completed traffic studies in Fresno and Clovis under applicable agency guidelines. Mr. Anderson regularly works with Caltrans District 6 staff to address their requirements.

In the area of Traffic Operations and Design, Mr. Anderson has overseen the design of Traffic Signal and Safety Lighting Systems for more than 150 intersections in California. He has directed the preparation of Signing and Striping plans for highway improvements and developed Construction Traffic Control Plans under Caltrans and MUTCD guidelines. He has conducted Traffic Safety / Operational Studies for many cities and school districts.

Mr. Anderson has been involved in the planning and evaluation of many Public Facilities throughout California ranging from landfills to airports. He has prepared CEQA traffic studies for courthouses, government centers and administration centers such as Caltrans District 3 Headquarters. He also prepared traffic studies for the City of Auburn and Yuba County Airport Master Plan EIR’s.

Mr. Anderson has been involved in the planning and traffic impact assessment for Educational Facilities throughout Northern California. He has prepared impact analyses for community college campuses in the State Center, Kern, Sierra and Yosemite Community College Districts. He has assisted in the design of schools for the Rocklin, Dry Creek, Center, Modesto City, Ceres Unified, Stockton, Merced High School and Madera Union School Districts. He has also evaluated traffic conditions and recommended improvements at CSU-Chico and CSU–Humboldt.

STAFF RESUME | EMC Planning Group
Sally Rideout, EMPA

PRINCIPAL

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Ms. Rideout joined EMC Planning Group in October 2006, and has been working in the planning field since 1996. Her professional experience includes project management in the municipal and private sectors, and non-profit organizations.

She is a past President and former Director of the Monterey Bay-Silicon Valley Chapter of the Association of Environmental Professionals. Prior to joining the company, she was a planner for the City of Pacific Grove, California.

With 24 years of municipal and private sector planning and project management experience, Ms. Rideout has successfully coordinated CEQA and NEPA review and documentation for a variety of projects and programs. She is experienced in providing senior staff support to public agency commissions, boards and committees, including architectural design review and historic resource committees. Ms. Rideout prepares and manages CEQA and NEPA documentation and provides current- and long-range planning assistance for large and small planning projects including general plans, specific plans, public facility and infrastructure projects, subdivisions, public works management plans and programs, site acquisition, private development, and alterations to significant historic resources. She provides ongoing municipal planning assistance, and representation at public meetings. She prepares, reviews and presents staff reports, findings and conditions of approval, prepares and manages agendas and meeting minutes, and is experienced in providing administrative oversight and management duties at all levels of public administration.

As a senior-level project manager, Ms. Rideout prepares and oversees budgets, schedules, and document preparation, and manages work-flow, subconsultants, and team assignments. Her areas of expertise include land use, visual impact assessment, air quality and greenhouse gas modeling and emissions assessments using CalEEMod, RoadMod, and EMFAC. She has prepared NEPA documentation for projects funded by the US Department of Veterans Affairs, the US Department of Housing and Urban Development, the US Department of Agriculture, the US Department of Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Federal Highway Administration (Caltrans). Ms. Rideout represents, or has represented, many of the firm’s public sector clients including the City of Gilroy, City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, City of Pacific Grove, City of East Palo Alto, City of Soledad, City of Hollister, City of Los Banos, City of Patterson, City of King City, County of Monterey Public Works Department, Soledad Unified School District, and other agencies in Monterey County, San Benito County, Santa Cruz County, Santa Clara County, Merced County, and San Mateo County, and the City and County of San Francisco.

EDUCATION
E.M.P.A. Golden Gate University
at Monterey, Executive
Master of Public
Administration, 2012
B.S. San Jose State University,
Environmental Studies -
Economics Emphasis, 1996

PROFESSIONAL

ASSOCIATIONS
 Past President, Monterey BaySilicon Valley Chapter,
Association of Environmental
Professionals
(Past Chapter Director:
2012-2013, Past Secretary:
2010-2012; 2016-2017).

STAFF RESUME | EMC Planning Group
Teri Wissler Adam

VICE PRESIDENT/SENIOR PRINCIPAL

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Ms. Wissler Adam joined the firm in 1991 and has been a principal since 2001. Her area of expertise is in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance.

Ms. Wissler Adam directs the CEQA and NEPA compliance projects for the firm. She has been responsible for a large variety of private projects, including residential, commercial, industrial, mixed-use, and large specific plan and general plan projects. She has also managed several projects for public facilities, such as recycled water projects, roadway projects, bikeway projects, bridge projects, elementary schools, high schools, and college campuses, and other public facilities, such as health clinics, landfills, child development centers, and federal research facilities. She has represented public clients throughout Monterey County, San Benito County, Santa Clara County, Merced County, San Luis Obispo County, San Mateo County, Santa Cruz County, and as far south as Los Angeles County.

EDUCATION
B.S. California Polytechnic State University
at San Luis Obispo, Business
Administration, Concentration in
Environmental Management, 1991

PROFESSIONAL ACHIEVEMENTS
 Presenter, CEQA Seminar, Lorman
Education Services
 Presenter, CEQA Workshop, Association
of Environmental Professionals
 Member, Association of Environmental
Professionals
 Contributor, Environmental Mitigation
Handbook, California’s Coalition for
Adequate School Housing, February 2009
 Past Director/President/Newsletter Editor,
Monterey Bay Area Chapter, Association
of Environmental Professionals

PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
 Member, Association of Environmental
Professionals
WALTER J. VAN GRONINGEN
President
WJV Acoustics, Inc.

Experience:

Mr. Van Groningen is the founding consultant of WJV Acoustics, Inc. His technical skills include the prediction and analysis of aircraft, traffic, railroad and construction noise and the evaluation of community noise problems and litigation support. He has prepared technical noise studies for a variety of projects requiring CEQA or NEPA documentation and has developed noise level criteria and implementation programs for addressing noise‐related conflicts and long‐range noise compatibility planning. Mr. Van Groningen has particular expertise in preparing traffic noise assessments for federally funded roadway improvement projects using the Caltrans Protocol. Mr. Van Groningen has also prepared general plan noise elements and noise element updates for several California jurisdictions.

Mr. Van Groningen became involved in community noise control in 2005, when he joined the consulting staff at Brown‐Buntin Associates, Inc. Since that time, he has conducted short‐ and long‐term aircraft noise monitoring and acoustical testing for federally funded aircraft sound insulation programs and conducted and/or managed numerous environmental noise analyses, including the following:
 Environmental noise assessments addressing aircraft, traffic, rail, commercial, industrial and construction sources for projects requiring CEQA/NEPA documentation. Many of these studies have involved controversial projects and significant public interest in the agency review process.  Aircraft noise analysis and preparation of noise exposure maps and summary reports for Las Vegas McCarran and Reno‐Tahoe International Airports.
 Federally funded school and/or residential sound insulation programs for Los Angeles, Reno‐Tahoe, Phoenix Sky Harbor and Anchorage Ted Stevens International Airports.  General Plan Noise Elements for numerous California jurisdictions.  Acoustical analyses and noise monitoring for numerous mining operations and construction projects.

Professional Affiliations:
 Member, Institute of Noise Control Engineering.
 Member, Acoustical Society of America.

Software Skills and Certifications:
 FHWA Traffic Noise Model Certified
 FAA Integrated Noise Model (INM)
 Aviation Environmental Design Tool (AEDT2B)
 Larson Davis Laboratories, AutoCAD, Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel, SoundPLAN  SoundPLAN Software & Noise Modeling Seminar
Education:
 B.A. Physical/Environmental Geography, Humboldt State University, 1999.  Post Graduate studies in Hydrology, California State University Chico, 1999‐2002.

Resume
Christopher Letter November 2021
- 1 -
Christopher J. Letter, B.A. Staff Archaeologist
EDUCATION: B.A. Anthropology with a Minor in Geography, Northern Arizona University, 1994.

EXPERIENCE: Mr. Letter has over 16 years of experience as an archaeologist and cultural resource management professional, with more than eleven years in the state of California. At Padre Associates, Inc. (Padre), Mr. Letter serves as a staff archaeologist for prehistoric and historic archaeological investigations. Mr. Letter’s responsibilities include completing all phases of archaeological survey and testing, site mapping and documentation, assisting with archaeological records searches and archival research, artifact processing, lithic analysis and cataloging, Native American coordination, archaeological monitoring, and the preparation of technical reports. He frequently conducts Phase I pedestrian surveys and monitors construction projects in Kern, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Fresno, and Ventura counties.

Representative projects Mr. Letter has assisted with include:

Phase I Archaeological Study and Extended Phase I Testing, Modoc Road Bike Path Alignment Project, Santa Barbara County, California. Mr. Letter acted as Field Director in support of the construction of a new bike path in unincorporated Santa Barbara County. Mr. Letter has conducted a pre-construction intensive pedestrian survey of the proposed alignment. Because the records search identified a previously recorded cultural resource within the Project site, recommendations were made to minimize project impacts. Mr. Letter conducted shovel test probes to establish presence/absence of subsurface cultural deposits present within the Project site. Because the Project took place within a culturally sensitive area, coordination with a Native American monitor was necessary. The necessary DPR 523 form updating the site record was completed. Mr. Letter also assisted with the preparation of the technical report.

Phase I Archaeological Study for Laguna County Sanitary District Wastewater Reclamation Plan EIR, Santa Barbara County, California. Mr.

Letter acting as Field Director in support of plans for a conservation easement assisted with a Phase I pedestrian survey of approximately 186 acres along Orcutt creek. He identified and documented four prehistoric-aged resources, including a large habitation site. Mr. Letter also assisted with preparation of the technical report and site records.

Phase II Archaeology Study, Calleguas Municipal Water District Simi Valley Reservoir Project, Ventura County, California. Mr. Letter acted as Field Director during Phase II testing of site CA-SLO-550 in support of the proposed construction of a water storage tank and related infrastructure. Prior to testing, Mr. Letter completed a pedestrian survey of the Project site. Shovel tests and one test unit were excavated to evaluate the site’s significance and determine integrity. The necessary DPR 523 forms updating the site record were completed. Mr. Letter Resume
Christopher Letter November 2021
- 2 -
assisted with artifact processing and cataloging. Mr. Letter also assisted with the preparation of the technical report
Phase I Archaeological Study, Spanish Vineyards Development Project, Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County, California. Mr. Letter acting as Field Director has completed Phase I Archaeological study for a new residential construction project in Arroyo Grande. Acting as Field Director Mr. Letter has conducted a pre-construction intensive pedestrian survey at a private residence in Arroyo Grande. Because the records search and Phase I survey did identify cultural resources within the Project Area, recommendations were made to minimize project impacts. Mr. Letter also assisted with the preparation of the technical report.

Extended Phase I Testing, Morro Bay Power Plant Battery Energy Storage System Project, San Luis Obispo County, California. Mr. Letter acted as Field Director and managed a Geoprobe testing rig in support of the construction of structures to house battery storage equipment. The purpose of testing was to establish the extent of cultural deposits present within the Project site. Because the Project took place within a culturally sensitive area, coordination with a Native American monitor was necessary. The subsurface testing consisted of visual inspection of the soil cores for cultural materials as well as the collection of soil samples for chemical signature testing. Mr. Letter also assisted with the preparation of the technical report.

Phase I Archaeological Study, City of Paso Robles Phase I Airport Area Infrastructure Improvement and Dry Creek Road Realignment Projects, San Luis Obispo County, California. In support of an airport infrastructure improvement project Mr. Letter acting as Field Director completed a Phase I pedestrian survey. This project consisted of existing utility line relocations and a roadway alteration for the City of Paso Robles. An historical isolate that was not previously recorded was identified. The necessary DPR 523 forms recording this isolate were completed. Mr. Letter also assisted with the preparation of the technical report.

Phase II Testing: Beachwalk Inn Hotel Project, 150 Hinds Avenue and 147 Stimson Avenue, Pismo Beach, San Luis Obispo County, California. At the request of Nexus Development Corporation, Padre and Cultural Resources Services (Rebecca Anastasio) conducted Phase II testing for a proposed hotel development located at 150 Hinds Avenue and 147 Stimson Avenue in the City of Pismo Beach. The Project site was once the location of several historic structures from the early 20th century. In accordance with CEQA mandates and planning directives from the city of Pismo Beach, Padre archaeologists directed the excavation of a series of backhoe trenches to determine the presence or absence of subsurface archaeological deposits within the APE. Although historic materials were found during the Phase II testing, they were not significant and the Project was recommended to proceed as planned, provided that an archaeological monitor would supervise all future ground-disturbing activity. Acting as a Project Archaeologist Mr. Letter directed backhoe trenching and additional responsibilities include recording features and artifact processing.

Resume
Rachael Letter January 2022
- 1 -
Rachael J. Letter, RPA
Senior Archaeologist/Project Manager
EDUCATION: M.S. Industrial Archaeology, Michigan Technological University, 2005.

B.A. Archaeology, University of Evansville, 2003.

REGISTRATIONS: Registered Professional Archaeologist (ID# 989275) EXPERIENCE: Ms. Letter has 16 years of experience as an archaeologist and cultural resource management professional, with more than eleven years in the state of California.

She joined Padre Associates, Inc. (Padre) in 2014 and serves as senior archaeologist and project manager for prehistoric and historic archaeological investigations. Ms. Letter’s responsibilities include day-to-day project management for all phases of archaeological survey and testing, completing archaeological records searches and archival research, Native American consultation and coordination, and preparing technical reports and site records. Ms. Letter has directed and conducted archaeological projects in San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Ventura, Monterey, Kern, Los Angeles, Fresno, and San Joaquin counties.

Representative archaeological projects she has managed include:

Santa Rosa Creek Road Repair and Alignment, Cambria. Ms. Letter acted as Senior Archaeologist for this Project, which included repairs and a realignment of a portion of Santa Rosa Creek Road that was washed-out during the 2016 rainy season. A records search completed at the Central Coast Information Center, identified one prehistoric habitation site within the southwest corner of the Project site. Ms. Letter directed the Phase I pedestrian survey, which relocated the prehistoric habitation site and significantly expanded the site’s boundaries to the north and east. She then reported the records search and survey results in a technical report to the County and recommended Phase II subsurface testing and evaluation within the portions of the Project that will impact the archaeological site.

Archaeological Monitoring, Avila Ranch Development Project, City of San Luis Obispo. Ms. Letter is currently Senior Archaeologist and coordinates archaeological and tribal monitors in support of the Avila Ranch Development Project in the southern part of the City of San Luis Obispo. In compliance with the mitigation measures included in the Project Environmental Impact Report, one Padre archaeologist and one member of the local Chumash tribe monitor all Project-related ground disturbance for the presence of significant cultural materials and features. Prior to ground disturbance, the Padre archaeologist provides cultural resource awareness training for all construction personnel. Once all ground disturbance is complete, Ms.

Letter will prepare a cultural resource completion report summarizing all encountered finds. Cultural concerns associated with this project have required frequent communication with the yak tityu tityu Northern Chumash tribe.

Extended Phase I Testing, Morro Bay Power Battery Energy Storage System Project, Morro Bay. At the request of EMC Planning Group, Inc., on behalf of the Morro Bay Power Company, Padre completed extended Phase I archaeological Resume
Rachael Letter January 2022
- 2 -
testing in support of the Morro Bay Power Plant Battery Energy Storage System Project. Ms. Letter acted as Senior Archaeologist and directed geoprobe testing to better determine whether intact subsurface cultural deposits related to previously recorded cultural resources were present within the Project site. Using soil borings and geoarchaeological analysis, Padre identified five areas of cultural sensitivity that indicated the presence of prehistoric habitation and cooking areas.

Ms. Letter summarized the results in a technical report and concluded that the five cultural areas have the potential to yield important information about California prehistory. The recommended mitigation measures included Project redesign or data recovery excavations if redesign was not feasible.

Archaeological Monitoring, Morro Bay Power Plant Marine Terminal Decommissioning Project, Morro Bay. At the request of Associated Pacific Constructors, Inc., on behalf of Dynegy Morro Bay, LLC, Padre provided cultural resources monitoring in accordance with mitigation measures from the Dynegy Morro Bay Power Plant Marine Terminal Decommissioning Project Mitigated Negative Declaration and the California Coastal Commission Coastal Development Permit. For this project, Ms. Letter acted as Senior Archaeologist, coordinating with Native American tribal representatives and directing cultural resource monitoring.

Cultural resource monitoring was conducted under a Cultural Resources Monitoring and Treatment Plan prepared by Padre, which allowed for the identification, evaluation, treatment, and protection of cultural resources that may be affected by ground disturbing activities as specified by the Project MND. Ms.

Letter later authored a technical report documenting the results of the cultural resources monitoring for submittal to the client and the county.

Railroad Safety Trail – Taft to Pepper, City of San Luis Obispo. On behalf of the City of San Luis Obispo Public Work Department, Ms. Letter acted as Senior Archaeologist for the extension of the Railroad Safety Trail from its current terminus at Taft Street to Pepper Street in the City of San Luis Obispo. Ms. Letter consulted with the Caltrans District 5 archaeologist to define the Project APE and conducted the Phase I pedestrian survey. She also reviewed the records search results and consulted with local Native American tribes about the Project. Once completed, she reported all findings in the ASR and HPSR and assisted the City with AB 52 consultation.

Bonita School Road Bridge Replacement, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo Counties. Ms. Letter acted as Senior Archaeologist for the replacement of the Bonita School Road bridge that spans between Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties. Ms. Letter completed the records search, which did not identify any cultural resources within the Project site and directed the Phase I pedestrian survey. She consulted with the Caltrans District 5 archaeologist and County engineer to define the Project APE and prepared the necessary ASR and HPSR. 01222.0005/782084.1 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-4868

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF KING CITY COUNCIL DENYING THE APPEAL OF, AND AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF, THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 210-091,
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW PERMIT CASE NO. AR – P21-000-005,
LANDSCAPING PERMIT CASE NO. LPR L21-000-001, AND SIGN DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT CASE NO. SN2-100-001 FOR A GROCERY OUTLET PROJECT AT 1023 S. BROADWAY STREET, AND APPROVING A CLASS 32 EXEMPTION (IN-FILL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS) UNDER THE CALIFORNIA

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
WHEREAS, on April 7, 2021, Terry Johnson, on behalf of the Best Development Group, LLC (Best), filed with the City of King Community Development Department applications for a conditional use permit, architectural review, and a landscaping permit for a proposed 18,187 square foot Grocery Outlet store (the Project) to be located at 1023 S. Broadway Street in the City of King (City); and WHEREAS, Best is seeking approval of Conditional Use Permit Case No. 210- 091, Architectural Review Permit Case No. AR – P21-000-005, Landscaping Permit Case No. LPR L21-000-001, and Sign Design Review Permit Case No. SN2-100-001 (“Entitlements”) for the Project; and
WHEREAS, on or about January 6, 2022, the EMC Planning Group (EMC), on behalf of Best, submitted to the City’s Community Development Department an Environmental Assessment (EA) consisting of a detailed checklist with analyses addressing the potential environmental impacts of the Project; and WHEREAS, the EA included five appendices, consisting of the following technical materials: Project Plans prepared by Scott Gibson, Architect, Inc., and TSD Engineering, Inc. (Appendix A); a technical memorandum prepared by Sally Rideout of EMC laying out the methods and assumptions used for, and the results from, an air quality analysis prepared using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2020.4 software (Appendix B); a Geotechnical Engineering Investigation prepared by the Salem Engineering Group, Inc. (Salem) (Appendix C); a NaturallyOccurring Asbestos Soil Assessment prepared by Salem (Appendix D); an Acoustical Analysis prepared by WJV Acoustics, Inc. (Appendix E); and a Transportation Impact Exhibit 6
01222.0005/782084.1 2
Analysis prepared by KD Anderson & Associates, Inc. (Appendix F); and WHEREAS, EMC, as the primary author of the EA, recommended that the City, in considering whether to approve the Project, rely on the Class 32 categorical exemption under the Guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.) for “in-fill development projects,” as set forth in CEQA Guidelines section 15332; and
WHEREAS, for a project to qualify for this categorical exemption for infill projects, the project must meet the following criteria:
(a) The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations;
(b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses; (c) The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species;
(d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality; and
(e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services; and
WHEREAS, any categorical exemption is potentially subject to one of the “exceptions” set forth in CEQA Guidelines section 15300.2, including the exception that applies where “the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant” and the exception that applies where “there is a reasonable possibility that the [Project] will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances” (see CEQA Guidelines, § 15300.2, subds. (b) & (c)); and
WHEREAS, the EA also recommended, with supporting reasoning and evidence, that the City should additionally find that there were no grounds for concluding that the Project would be subject to either one of these two exceptions to 01222.0005/782084.1 3
the use of the infill categorical exemption, or any other exception; and WHEREAS, City staff from the Community Development Department, the Public Works Department, and the City Attorney’s office have thoroughly reviewed the EA, agree with its conclusions, and find the technical and scientific material submitted with the EA to be sound; and
WHEREAS, the EA therefore reflects the City’s independent judgment (see Pub. Resources Code, § 21082.1, subd. (c)(2); CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15063, subd. (a)(4), 15084, subd. (e), 15090, subd. (a)(3); Friends of La Vina v. County of Los Angeles (1991) 232 Cal.App.3d 1446, 1452-1458); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of King held a duly-noticed public hearing on the Project on March 15, 2022, during which it received a staff presentation and heard testimony from members of the public; and WHEREAS, after reviewing the Staff Report for the Project, the EA and its supporting technical materials, public testimony, and other relevant information, the Planning Commission determined that (i) the Project is subject to the Class 32 categorical exemption and (ii) the conditional use permit, architectural review, and landscaping permit needed for the Project are all worthy of approval; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted a Class 32 categorical exemption for the Project, and approved Conditional Use Permit Case No. 210-091, Architectural Review Permit Case No. AR – P21-000-005, Landscaping Permit Case No. LPR L21-000-001, and Sign Design Review Permit Case No. SN2-100-001 for the Project; and
WHEREAS, on March 30, 2022, an appeal of the Planning Commission decision was submitted by Efrain Aguilera on behalf of UFCW Local 5 (“Appeal”); and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of King held a duly-noticed public hearing on the Project on April 18, 2022, during which it received a staff presentation and heard testimony from members of the public; and
WHEREAS, after reviewing the Staff Report for the Project, the EA and its supporting technical materials, public testimony, and other relevant information, 01222.0005/782084.1 4
including the correspondence from James G. Moose to the City Council dated April 12, 2022, and its attachments, the City Council has determined that (i) the Appeal is without basis; (ii) the Project is subject to the Class 32 categorical exemption; and (iii) the conditional use permit, architectural review, and landscaping permit needed for the Project are all worthy of approval; and
WHEREAS, the City Council now desires to deny the Appeal, adopt a Class 32 categorical exemption for the Project, and approve Conditional Use Permit Case No. 210-091, Architectural Review Permit Case No. AR – P21-000-005, Landscaping Permit Case No. LPR L21-000-001, and Sign Design Review Permit Case No. SN2- 100-001 for the Project.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of King as follows:

1. Recitals. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are included herein by reference as findings.

2. CEQA. The City has performed a preliminary environmental assessment of this Project. Based on the Environmental Assessment and other evidence in the administrative record, the City Council finds and determines that the Project falls within the categorical exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines section 15332, which exempts in-fill development projects, as this Project meets all of the standards for this categorical exemption as summarized below and as further described in the Environmental Assessment. Furthermore, none of the exceptions to categorical exemptions set forth in the CEQA Guidelines, section 15300.2 apply to this Project, and the Project is not subject to either the “cumulative impact” exception or the “unusual circumstance” exception, as further described in the Environmental Assessment and as summarized below. Additionally, the City Council finds and determines that there is substantial evidence in the administrative record to support the Planning Commission determination that the project has been adequately environmentally assessed as required by CEQA per the EA. Further, the City Council also finds and determines that in light of the entire administrative record and the substantial evidence before it, the Project has 01222.0005/782084.1 5
been adequately environmentally assessed as required by CEQA per the EA. As such, the City Council adopts a Categorical Exemption per CEQA Guidelines section 15332 for this Project. In this regard, the City Council further finds and determines as follows:
a. Finding: The Project is consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and all applicable General Plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.

Basis for Finding: The Project site has a King City General Plan Consolidated Plan Document (General Plan) land use designation of HSC (Highway Service Commercial) and a zoning designation of H‐S (Highway Service District).

Pursuant to the General Plan, the HSC zoning designation shall accommodate a mix of retailing, wholesaling, dining and entertainment, professional and business services, and shopping center developments. The H-S zoning district permits a grocery store subject to a conditional use permit. This zoning district allows heights up to 30 feet, which the Project does not exceed. Development of the Project site with a grocery store is consistent with the City’s commercial land use goal, which encourages the City to provide adequate area for commercial land uses to meet the service needs of residents, business, and visitors, and to encourage development of retail commercial, service commercial, and highway-related uses that are compatible with surrounding land uses. Pursuant to the General Plan Policy 3.1.1, the City shall promote the availability of commercial sites within this land use category to accommodate a mix of retailing, wholesaling, dining and entertainment, professional and business services, and shopping center developments. The Project is consistent with this policy. (EA, pp. 1, 3.) As such, the Project is consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and all applicable General Plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.
b. Finding: The Project will be built within City limits on a site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.
01222.0005/782084.1 6
Basis for Finding: The 1.57-acre vacant Project site is located within the municipal boundaries of King City at 1023 S. Broadway Street on assessor’s parcel number (APN) 026‐391‐025, and is significantly less than five acres in size. Although the cemetery property across Broadway Street from the Project site could be considered open space, the cemetery occurs within the limits of Kings City and is not in a natural condition. The vacant land to the southeast of the Project site is disturbed and has long been planned for eventual development. The close proximity of U.S. Highway 101 to the Project site also contributes to the highly developed, urban character of the setting. (EA, pp. 1-

2.) As such, the Project will be built within City limits on a site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.
c. Finding: The Project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.

Basis for Finding: There are no Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Community Conservation Plans, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans applicable to the Project site. The Project site has comparatively little value for any biological resources. The site was previously used as a car sales lot and is surrounded in all directions by previously developed open space and current development, including commercial buildings, parking lots, the King City Cemetery, the Monterey County Sheriff’s Department, and U.S. Highway 101. The Project site contains developed (paved) and disturbed (gravel) areas, as well as some areas supporting lowquality habitats supportive of common species such as raccoons, skunks, and opossums. The only trees on the site are on its margins, and are non-native and ornamental in character. Most special-status plant and animal species known to occur in the region are not expected to occur on the Project site due to lack of suitable habitats. Out of an abundance of caution, and to comply with legal provisions protecting nesting birds, conditions of approval/project features address the possibility of a loss of nesting birds and roosting special-status bats. However, no potentially significant effects on biological resources have been identified. In particular, there are no potential adverse effects on species 01222.0005/782084.1 7
formally listed as endangered, rare, or threatened under either the federal Endangered Species Act, the California Endangered Species Act, or the California Native Plant Protection Act. (EA, p. 43.) As such, the Project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. d. Finding: Approval of the Project will not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.

Basis for Finding:
i) Traffic: As of July 2020, “vehicle miles traveled [VMT] is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts.” (CEQA Guidelines, § 15064.3, subd. (a).) VMT “refers to the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project.” (Ibid.) Level of service (LOS) is no longer a permitted metric for assessing the significance of traffic impacts under CEQA. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21099, subd. (b)(2).) The California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) has published a document entitled, Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research 2018). This document provides what is currently the most authoritative general direction regarding the methods to be employed and significance criteria to evaluate VMT impacts. Because retail projects typically re-route travel from other retail destinations, OPR recommends that lead agencies should analyze VMT effects for retail projects by assessing the change in total VMT. As the OPR technical advisory states, “[b]y adding retail opportunities into the urban fabric and thereby improving retail destination proximity, local-serving retail development tends to shorten trips and reduce VMT. Thus, lead agencies generally may presume such development creates a lessthan-significant transportation impact.” Here, the Project will attract customers residing in King City and in surrounding communities. Today the closest existing Grocery Outlet stores are in Paso Robles (51 miles south) and Salinas (49 miles north), and the new store will provide a much closer option. The Grocery Outlet store will compete with the 01222.0005/782084.1 8
existing Safeway on Franciscan Street in the King City Plaza, and to lesser degree with local specialty markets such as El Pueblo Market and La Princessa Market on Broadway Street to the east. The Grocery Outlet store’s most likely effect on regional travel will be to slightly reduce the length of trips from northern areas of King City and to offer another option for shopping trips made by residents of areas to the south and east. The effect on VMT is likely to be small, but generally VMT will be reduced by offering a closer option. This conclusion is consistent with the OPR presumption that the VMT effects of locally serving retail uses of 50,000 square feet or less may be considered to be less than significant. The Project will consist of 18,187 square foot of interior space. The Project’s impact on regional VMT can be presumed to be less than significant under the OPR Locally Serving Retail criteria. (EA, pp. 74, 79-80.) As such, approval of the Project will not result in any significant effects relating to traffic.
ii) Temporary Construction Noise: Construction noise will occur at various locations within the Project site through the construction period. Existing sensitive receptors (residences) are located as close as 350 feet from construction activities. Construction noise is not considered to be a significant impact if construction is limited to daytime hours and construction equipment is adequately maintained and muffled. King City does not specifically provide limits on hours of construction; however, when construction is to occur near sensitive receptor locations, it is common practice to limit hours of construction to occur only between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. (or other specific time limitations). These limitations are used because construction noise impacts could result in annoyance or sleep disruption for nearby residents if nighttime operations were to occur at night. The Project applicant has proposed and agreed to limit noise-related construction activities to 8 am to 5 pm, Monday through Saturday, with no construction on Sundays or holidays, which is the industry standard, which has been included as a condition 01222.0005/782084.1 9
of approval. As such, approval of the Project will not result in any significant effects relating to temporary construction noise. iii) Operational Noise: The environmental impact report (EIR) prepared for the General Plan concluded that buildout under the General Plan would not result in a significant noise impact. Because the Project is an infill development consistent with the General Plan, the Project can be presumed to not result in a significant operational noise impact. The noise report prepared for the Project addressed a number of operational noise-generating activities. With respect to traffic-generated noise, the report concluded that the Project will not result in noise levels at any sensitive receptor locations that exceed any King City noise level standards or result in a substantial increase over existing (without Project) ambient noise levels. With respect to slow-moving trucks on site, the noise report concluded that ambient noise levels measured in the vicinity of the residential land uses north of the site already exceed the applicable King City noise level standards, and that noise levels associated with on-site truck movements will not exceed existing ambient noise levels and will generally not be audible at the residential land uses. With respect to loading docks, the noise report found that noise levels at the loading docks will not exceed any applicable King City noise level standards and will not exceed existing (without Project) ambient noise levels measured at the noise measurement sites near the residential land uses. With respect to noise from mechanical equipment, the noise report found that noise levels will not exceed any King City noise level standard or exceed existing (without Project) ambient noise levels. (EA, pp. 69-70.) As such, approval of the Project will not result in any significant effects relating to operational noise.
iv) Construction-related air quality: Table 5-2 (Construction Activity with Potentially Significant Impacts) of the CEQA Guidelines issued by the Monterey Bay Area Resources District (Air District) identifies the level of construction activity that could result in significant temporary fugitive 01222.0005/782084.1 10
dust impacts if not mitigated. Construction activities with grading and excavation that disturb more than 2.2 acres per day and construction activities with minimal earthmoving that disturb more than 8.1 acres per day are assumed to be above the 82 pounds of particulate matter per day threshold of significance. Because the Project is located on a 1.57- acre site and thus cannot result in grading of more than 2.2 acres per day, the Project will not result in significant fugitive dust impacts as a result of construction activity. Nevertheless, EMC estimated the criteria air pollutant emissions that will be generated during construction using CalEEMod version 2020.4.0. The model results confirm that the Project’s construction emissions (fugitive dust and equipment exhaust) will not exceed the Air District’s criteria air pollutants emissions thresholds for ambient air quality. Therefore, the Project will not result in significant impacts to localized air quality during construction; and construction emissions will be less than cumulatively considerable on a regional basis. (EA, pp. 33-34, including Table 3.) Nor will Project construction generate emissions of toxic air contaminants (TACs) generate TAC concentrations that will exceed the Air District’s health risk threshold at the locations of sensitive receptors north of the Project site. Additionally, due to the presence of prevailing winds from the north and northwest, there is little likelihood that Project emissions will drift to the apartment buildings west of San Antonio Drive or toward the King City High school facility north of Broadway Street. Although it is possible that receptors at the mobile home park could be exposed to Project construction emissions, the mobile home park is not located downwind from the Project site; and existing development on the parcel between much of the Project site and Franciscan Way creates a barrier to airborne particulates. Therefore, the health risk impacts associated with exposures to construction TAC emissions are less than significant. (EA, p. 35.) As such, approval of the Project will not result in any significant effects relating to construction-related air quality.
01222.0005/782084.1 11
v) Operational air quality: Table 5-4 of the Air District’s CEQA Guidelines indicates that a supermarket of less than 69,000 square feet would typically not be expected to exceed the Air District’s threshold for operational ozone emissions. Therefore, long-term operations of the proposed 18,871 square foot supermarket will not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of ozone precursors.

Nevertheless, EMC estimated the criteria air pollutant emissions that will be generated during Project operation using CalEEMod version 2020.4.0. The model results confirm that the Project emissions will not exceed the Air District’s criteria air pollutants emissions thresholds for ambient air quality. Therefore, the Project will not result in significant impacts to localized air quality, and the Project’s contribution to regional air quality will be less than cumulatively considerable. (EA, pp. 32-33, including Table 2.) As such, approval of the Project will not result in any significant effects relating to operational air quality. vi) Water Quality: The Project will result in the development of a 18,187 square foot grocery store; therefore, the Project will create more than 15,000 square feet of impervious surfaces. The Project is therefore required to comply with the Stormwater Technical Guide for Low Impact Development – Compliance with Stormwater Post-Construction Requirements in King City (City of King City 2015) (“stormwater technical guide”). This regulatory document requires that projects creating or replacing 15,000 square feet or more of impervious surfaces must (i) treat runoff with an approved and appropriately sized Low Impact Development (LID) treatment system prior to discharge from the site and (ii) prevent offsite discharge from events up to the 95th percentile rainfall event using Stormwater Control Measures. The Project will also be subject to the “Post-Construction Requirements” that apply to projects (such as the Grocery Outlet Project) that are located within the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit boundaries defined by the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control 01222.0005/782084.1 12
Board. The Project includes a Preliminary Stormwater Control Plan that demonstrates adequate low-impact development features and facilities that can be accommodated within the Project site and landscape design.

The Project’s Preliminary Stormwater Control Plan includes 11 drainage management areas throughout the Project site, which direct the stormwater to these areas and connect to the proposed storm drain systems that join the existing City storm drain system in Broadway Street. Finally, the Project is required to comply with the requirements of the City of King City Municipal Code Section 17.56.100, Stormwater Pollution Prevention; and the Project’s Preliminary Stormwater Control Plan is subject to the review and approval of the City of King City Community Development Department. All of these requirements ensure that the Project will result in less than significant impacts related to water quality standards and waste discharge requirements. As such, approval of the Project will not result in any significant effects relating to water quality.
e. Finding: The Project site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

Basis for Finding:
i. Water: The Project will be served by California Water Services Company (California Water Service), which relies on the Salinas Valley Groundwater Basin recharged by the Salinas River. The Project will require approximately 100,000 gallons of water per month (or 3.7 acrefeet of water per year) to operate. California Water Service’s “2020 Urban Water Management Plan – King City District” states that the City’s commercial uses consumed 432 acre-feet of water in 2020 and are projected to use 433 acre-feet of water in 2025 (p. 35). The Project will make up 0.85 percent of the commercial water use total projected for 2025 ([3.7 acre-feet per year / 433 acre-feet per year] x 100). The Project’s water use needs will be met without requiring the construction of new or expanded water facilities. (EA, p. 87.) The sole source of water 01222.0005/782084.1 13
supply for the City is groundwater. While long-term impacts of Groundwater Sustainability Plan implementation in the Salinas Valley Basin remain uncertain, the groundwater supply is expected, based on all available information, to be sufficient to support the City’s projected water demand through 2045. (See California Water Service. June 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan – King City [California Water Service 2021], p. 16). “Because of the demonstrated ability of the King City District to meet historical demands from the underlying basin that are even greater than the projected demands, the available groundwater supplies are considered to be equal to projected District demands under all conditions (i.e., current and projected, and for normal, single dry, and multiple dry years including a five-year drought period)” (California Water Service 2021, p. 74). (EA, pp. 88-89.) As such, the Project site can be adequately served by water utilities and public services ii. Wastewater: According to the King City Wastewater Treatment Facilities Plan – Final (2017), retail uses require approximately 750 gallons per day per acre. With a square footage of 18,187, the Project will generate about 314 gallons per day, or 0.0003 million gallons per day (mgd). The facilities plan indicates that the treatment facility has a design capacity of 1.2 mgd, with new commercial development within the City anticipated to generate a total of 0.03 mgd of wastewater. The Project will generate a minimal amount of this commercial use total, with 0.0297 mgd of wastewater remaining for the other anticipated commercial uses in the City. The Project will use only approximately 0.025 percent of the total design capacity. (EA, p. 88.) As such, the Project site can be adequately served by all required wastewater utilities and public services. iii. Storm Water: The Project will connect to the City’s existing drainage system on Broadway Street. According to the City’s Collection System Master Plan - Final, the City’s existing collection system has sufficient capacity to convey current peak wet weather flows (p. 6-1). (EA, p. 88.) As such, the Project site can be adequately served by all required 01222.0005/782084.1 14
stormwater utilities and public services.
iv. Electric Power/Gas/Telecommunications: Pacific Gas and Electric provides electricity and natural gas to the Project vicinity. Wireless internet service and cable television in the Project vicinity are provided by companies such as AT&T and Xfinity. The Project will not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded facilities. (EA, p. 88.) As such, the Project site can be adequately served by all required electric, gas, and telecommunications utilities and public services. v. Solid Waste: Solid waste from King City is currently transported to the Johnson Canyon Landfill facility east of the City of Gonzales. According to CalRecycle, the landfill has a remaining capacity of 6.9 million tons and is expected to serve until 2055. (CalRecycle. “SWIS Facility /Site Activity Details – Johnson Canyon Sanitary Landfill (27-AA-0005).”) The Project will result in the addition of approximately 30 employees, and is expected to generate the equivalent of 31.1 pounds of solid waste per employee per day. (CalRecycle. “Disposal Rate Calculator – King City” Accessed on September 14, 2021b.) This number of employees will cause the Project to generate approximately 933 pounds of solid waste each day (30 employees x 31.1 pounds per employee per day), or 170 tons of solid waste generated each year. These amounts will consume only a small portion of the capacity remaining at the landfill, which has sufficient capacity to accept solid waste generated by the Project. No physical changes would be required at the landfill. (EA, p. 89.) As such, the Project site can be adequately served by all required solid waste services.
vi. Police and Fire: The City’s police and fire services can adequately serve the Project without the need for any new or physically altered facilities. (EA, pp. 72, 87-89.) As such, the Project site can be adequately served by all required police and fire services.
f. Finding: The Project is not subject to the exception to the use of categorical 01222.0005/782084.1 15
exception that exists when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant.

Basis for Finding: Notably, the physical universe under consideration for this exception is smaller than the physical universe of potential cumulative impacts that is implicated where an agency has prepared a mitigated negative declaration or environmental impact report. (See, e.g., San Francisco Beautiful v. City and County of San Francisco (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 1012, 1030 [in considering a proposal to install 726 metal utility boxes housing telecommunications equipment on sidewalks in order to expand its fiber-optic network, the City and County of San Francisco was not required to consider similar projects throughout the entire City because, if there were such a requirement, “the exception would swallow the rule, and the utility of the … exemption would be vitiated”], citing Robinson v. City and County of San Francisco (2012) 208 Cal.App.4th 950, 958; see also Association for Protection etc. Values v. City of Ukiah (1991) 2 Cal.App.4th 720, 733 [in upholding the use of a categorical exemption for the construction of a single home, court rejects the petitioner’s invocation of the cumulative impact exception, stating that “[n]o serious argument or evidence was presented to the City that more than one house could be constructed on the lot or that as the last house to be constructed in this otherwise fully developed neighborhood, any sort of cumulative impact could be anticipated”].) Here, there is no indication or substantial evidence that successive projects of the same type in the same place will result in cumulative impacts. Indeed, no successive projects of the same type in the same place are contemplated in the vicinity of the Project or within King City. (EA, p. 95.) In addition, the absence any significant cumulative impacts associated with the Project is evident both from the discussions in the EA of individual impact categories and of the discussion of cumulative impacts. For example, the air quality analysis in the EA concluded that because the Project’s pollutants are projected to be significantly below the Air District’s thresholds (for both construction and operational emissions), the Project will not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in criteria pollutants. (EA, p. 92.) Nor 01222.0005/782084.1 16
will the Project’s biological resource impacts be cumulatively considerable. (EA, p. 92.) For the reasons set forth in the portion of the EA dealing with cumulative impacts (pp. 92-93), the same is true with respect to the Project’s impacts relating to cultural resources, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, noise, and transportation. As such, the Project is not subject to the exception to the use of categorical exception that exists when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant. g. Finding: The Project is not subject to the exception to the use of categorical exception that exists where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances.

Basis for Finding: Case law makes clear that application of this exception must proceed in two steps. The first is to determine whether a proposed project involves “unusual circumstances.” If the answer to that question is in the affirmative, the second step is to consider whether those unusual circumstances will give rise to potentially significant environmental effects. (Berkeley Hillside Preservation v. City of Berkeley (2015) 60 Cal.4th 1086, 1097-1105).) As explained below, the Project does not involve any unusual circumstances with respect to its location, size, environmental setting, physical attributes, surrounding land uses, or planning context – factors considered relevant under case law. (See Berkeley Hillside, supra, 60 Cal.4th at pp. 1118– 1119; San Lorenzo Valley Community Advocates for Responsible Education v.

San Lorenzo Valley Unified School Dist. (2006) 139 Cal.App.4th 1356, 1381; McQueen v. Bd. of Directors (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 1136, 1149; Lewis v.

Seventeenth Dist. Agricultural Assn. (1985) 165 Cal.App.3d 823, 828–829; City of Pasadena v. State of California (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 810, 826–827; Bloom v. McGurk (1994) 26 Cal.App.4th 1307, 1315–1316; and Voices for Rural Living v. El Dorado Irrigation Dist. (2012) 209 Cal.App.4th 1096, 1109.) The Project is consistent with the King City General Plan land use designation of Highway Service Commercial (HSC), and the City’s zoning designation of Highway Service District (H-S). The Project site is a highly disturbed flat parcel surrounded by urban development within the city core of King City. There is 01222.0005/782084.1 17
nothing unusual about the Project site as a typical infill parcel and there is similarly nothing unusual about the Project as a typical infill project. The Project features (grocery store and associated parking) are typical project features that do not differ from other similar projects subject to the Class 32 categorical exemption for infill projects. The closest residential uses are approximately 350 feet away behind a wall, and will not experience significant noise impacts from the Project. There are no conditions in the immediate vicinity of the Project site that indicate unusual circumstances. The Project site and immediate vicinity are flat, and the Project site is surrounded by urban development within the city core of King City. Therefore, there are no unusual circumstances regarding conditions of the Project site or in the immediate vicinity. As such, the Project is not subject to the exception to the use of categorical exception that exists where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances. h. Finding: The Project is not subject to any other exceptions to the use of categorical exception per CEQA Guidelines section 15300.2.

Basis for Finding:
i. Location: The location exception only applies to categorical exemption classes 3, 4, 5, 6 and 11. The Project qualifies for a Class 32 exemption, which is not one of the specified classes of exemptions to which this exception applies. As such, the locational exception does not apply to this Project.
ii. Scenic Highways: This exception only applies to projects that may result in damage to scenic resources “within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway.” The Project site is located more than eight miles north of the nearest eligible state scenic highway, Highway 198 (California Department of Transportation 2021). Therefore, development of the Project would not substantially damage scenic resources, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway. As such, the scenic highway exception does not apply to this Project. 01222.0005/782084.1 18
iii. Hazardous Waste Sites: This exception only applies to projects that are located on a site including on any list complied pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5. As the Project site is not on any such list (i.e., not a designated hazardous waste site), the hazardous waste site exception does not apply to the Project.
iv. Historical Resources: This exception only applies to projects that may cause a substantial, adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. As discussed in the EA, there are no above-ground structures located on the Project site, and there is no evidence in the record or from a surface reconnaissance that there are historical resources of an archaeological nature located on the Project site. Therefore, the Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, and the historical resource exception does not apply to the Project.

3. General Plan Consistency. The City Council finds and determines that there is substantial evidence in the administrative record to support the Planning Commission determination that Conditional Use Permit Case No. 210-091, Architectural Review Permit Case No. AR – P21-000-005, Landscaping Permit Case No. LPR L21-000-001, and Sign Design Review Permit Case No. SN2-100- 001 (“Entitlements”) are consistent with the adopted General Plan's objectives, policies and programs. Additionally, the City Council also finds and determines that there is substantial evidence in the entire administrative record that the Entitlements are consistent with the adopted General Plan's objectives, policies and programs. The City Council further approves, accepts as its own, incorporates as if set forth in full herein, and makes each and every one of the findings, based on the evidence in the record, as follows:
a. The Project site has a General Plan land use designation of HSC (Highway Service Commercial) and a zoning designation of H‐S (Highway Service District). Pursuant to the General Plan, the HSC land use is intended to accommodate a mix of retailing, wholesaling, dining and entertainment, professional and business services, and shopping center developments. The 01222.0005/782084.1 19
H-S zoning district permits a grocery store subject to a conditional use permit. b. This zoning district allows heights up to 30 feet, which the Project does not exceed. Development of the Project site with a grocery store is consistent with the City’s commercial land use goal, which encourages the City to provide adequate area for commercial land uses to meet the service needs of residents, business, and visitors, and to encourage development of retail commercial, service commercial, and highway-related uses that are compatible with surrounding land uses.
c. Pursuant to the General Plan Policy 3.1.1, the City shall promote the availability of commercial sites within this land use category to accommodate a mix of retailing, wholesaling, dining and entertainment, professional and business services, and shopping center developments. The Project is consistent with this policy.

4. Public Health, Safety and Welfare: The City Council finds and determines that there is substantial evidence in the administrative record to support the Planning Commission determination that the Project and the associated Entitlements will not adversely affect public health, safety or welfare. Additionally, the City Council also finds and determines that there is substantial evidence in the entire administrative record that the Project and associated Entitlements will not adversely affect public health, safety or welfare. The City Council further approves, accepts as its own, incorporates as if set forth in full herein, and makes each and every one of the findings, based on the evidence in the record, as follows:
a. There is no substantial evidence in the record that the design of the Project will cause serious public health problems. As discussed in Section 2.d above, the Project will not cause any significant noise, air quality, or water quality effects. Nor will the Project cause any significant effects related to the use of hazardous materials or create any environmental effects that will result in substantial adverse effects on human beings. (EA, p. 94.) The Project will be connected to City water, sewer, and storm drainage systems, which will minimize public health concerns. b. The Project will provide an infusion of new investment needed to stimulate the 01222.0005/782084.1 20
local economy.
c. The Project will provide food at comparatively low costs, which will benefit community residents with limited or fixed incomes, who otherwise would have to purchase more expensive food from other grocery stores. By saving money on food, these residents will have more money to spend on their other needs. d. Land use patterns influence transportation needs, and motor vehicles are the primary source of air pollution. California is a substantial contributor of GHGs, emitting over 400 million tons of carbon dioxide (“CO2”) a year. The fact that the Project will lead to a net reduction in vehicle miles traveled, as described in section 2.d.i above, indicates that the Project will contribute to a land use pattern that reduces dependency on motor vehicles in terms of the length of trips that drivers must take in order to satisfy their basic needs. The Project will therefore assist the State of California in meeting its climate objectives under Senate Bill 32, which requires that State reduce its total GHG emissions by 2030 to a point where they are forty percent below 1990 emissions levels (see Health & Saf.

Code, § 38566).
e. The Project site is an example of infill development, and will not convert any agricultural land or sensitive wildlife habitat, and thus represents a desirable alternative to new development on the periphery of the urban area.

5. Additional Conditional Use Permit Findings: In addition to the findings previously made, the City Council finds and determines there is substantial evidence in the administrative record to support the Planning Commission determination that all findings for approval of Conditional Use Permit Case No. 210-091 (“CUP”) can be made.

Additionally, the City Council also finds and determines that there is substantial evidence in the entire administrative record that all findings for approval of CUP can be made.

The City Council further approves, accepts as its own, incorporates as if set forth in full herein, and makes each and every one of the findings, based on the evidence in the record, as follows:
a. The Project, including the CUP, is consistent with the goals, policies and objectives 01222.0005/782084.1 21
of the City of King General Plan for reasons discussed in Section 3 above. b. The design location, operating characteristics and size of the use proposed by the CUP would be compatible with the existing and future land uses in the vicinity in terms of aesthetics, value, character, scale, and view protection.

6. Additional Architectural Review Findings. In addition to the findings previously made, the City Council finds and determines there is substantial evidence in the administrative record to support the Planning Commission determination that all findings required for approval of Architectural Review Case No. AR – P21-000-005 (“AR”) can be made. Additionally, the City Council also finds and determines that there is substantial evidence in the entire administrative record that all findings for approval of the AR can be made. The City Council further approves, accepts as its own, incorporates as if set forth in full herein, and makes each and every one of the findings, based on the evidence in the record, as follows:
a. The design is consistent with Municipal Code requirements including because it proposes high quality structures.
b. The Project has a uniform and coherent design that creates a desirable environment for the customers, visitors, and the general community. c. The design is of high aesthetic quality, using high quality, integrated materials and appropriate construction techniques with incorporation of textures, colors and other details.
d. The landscape design complements and enhances the building design and its surroundings, is appropriate to the site’s functions, and uses regional droughtresistant plant materials that can be appropriately maintained consistent with Municipal Code Chapter 15.50, subject to conditions of approval. e. The Project incorporates design principles that achieve sustainability in areas related to energy efficiency, water conservation, and site planning.

7. Additional Landscaping Permit Findings. In addition to the findings previously 01222.0005/782084.1 22
made, the City Council finds and determines there is substantial evidence in the administrative record to support the Planning Commission determination that all findings required for approval of Landscaping Permit (LP) Case No. LPR L21-000-001 can be made. Additionally, the City Council also finds and determines that there is substantial evidence in the entire administrative record that all findings for approval of the LP can be made. The City Council further approves, accepts as its own, incorporates as if set forth in full herein, and makes each and every one of the findings, based on the evidence in the record, as follows:
a. A conceptional specific landscaping plan has been provided that shows the proposed landscaping plan for the Project, including proposed planting areas, bushes, trees, etc. It is a requirement of the LP that a detailed specific landscaping plan be provided that shall show the proposed landscaping plan for the project, including proposed planting areas, bushes, trees, and irrigation systems to serve these areas, consistent with the approved conceptional specific landscaping plan. It is also a requirement of the LP that the landscaping be maintained, and the property shall be inspected by the City on an annual basis to assure compliance.

8. Additional Sign Design Review Permit Findings. In addition to the findings previously made, the City Council finds and determines there is substantial evidence in the administrative record to support the Planning Commission determination that all findings required for approval of Sign Design Review Permit Case No. SN2-100-001 can be made. Additionally, the City Council also finds and determines that there is substantial evidence in the entire administrative record that all findings for approval of Sign Design Review Permit Case No. SN2-100-001 can be made. The City Council further approves, accepts as its own, incorporates as if set forth in full herein, and makes each and every one of the findings, based on the evidence in the record, as follows:
a. Proposed signage is consistent with the Sign Regulations, including those set forth in King City Municipal Code Chapter 17.55, and are otherwise consistent with the requirements of the King City Municipal Code. The proposed signage complies with the City sign regulations 01222.0005/782084.1 23
and do not exceed the standards set forth within Sections 17.55.090 (Table 1) and 17.55.100 (Standards for specific sign types) of the King City Municipal Code. Additionally, the proposed signage is of the minimum size and height necessary to enable pedestrians and motorists to readily identify the facility or site from a sufficient distance to safely and conveniently access the facility or site.
b. The colors, design and placement of the signage on the site is appropriate for the location and architectural style of the building; c. The signage does not unreasonably impair the visibility of existing signs on adjacent properties;
d. The placement and size of the signage will not impair pedestrian, bicyclist or vehicular safety;
e. The signage is constructed of durable materials and shall be required to be maintained in good condition by the sign applicant or landowner; f. The signage is not located in the Historic Downtown area; and g. The signage is not for a freestanding freeway-oriented pole, public mural, kiosk, banner, flag, feather sign, or for a minor sign variance or sign variance.

9. Appeal Denied. For all the foregoing reasons, and each of them, the City Council finds that there was no persuasive evidence submitted into the administrative record that would warrant denial of the Entitlements, and there is substantial evidence in the administrative record to approve the Class 32 Exemption for the project. As such, the appeal is denied in its entirety.

10.Approval of Entitlements. Given the forgoing findings and determinations, the City Council also independently approves Conditional Use Permit Case No. 210-091, Architectural Review Permit Case No. AR – P21-000-005, Landscaping Permit Case No. LPR L21-000-001, and Sign Design Review Permit Case No. SN2-100-001 as 01222.0005/782084.1 24
conditioned and set forth in Exhibit A, for the Grocery Outlet Project at 1023 S. Broadway Street.

11.Filing of Notice of Exemption. Staff of the City’s Community Development Department is hereby directed to file with the County Clerk of the County of Monterey a Notice of Exemption pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21152, subdivision (b), and CEQA Guidelines section 15062, subdivision (a), in a form substantially consistent with the one found in Appendix E to the CEQA Guidelines. Such a filing should occur as soon as possible, but in no event in more than five days following the approval of this Resolution.

12.Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon passage.

This Resolution was passed, approved and adopted by the City Council on the 18 th day of April,
2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

By: __________________________
Mike LeBarre, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Steve Adams, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By:

Roy C. Santos, City Attorney
Aleshire & Wynder, LLP
01222.0005/782084.1 25
Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval
01222.0005/782084.1 26
Exhibit A
Conditions Of Approval
01222.0005/783425.1

EXHIBIT A

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005, LP Case No. L21-000-001, SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
AS REVISED AND UPDATED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON APRIL 18, 2022 In accordance with the provisions of Government Code Section 66020(d)(1), the imposition of fees, dedication, reservations or exactions for this project are subject to protest by the project applicant at the time of approval or conditional approval of the development or within 90 days after the date of imposition of fees, dedications, reservation, or exactions imposed on the development project.

This notice does not apply to those fees, dedications, reservations, or exactions which were previously imposed and duly noticed; or, where no notice was previously required under the provisions of Government Code Section 66020(d)(1) in effect before January 1, 1997.

PART A – GENERAL CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS
The City has performed a preliminary environmental assessment of this Project. Based on the Environmental Assessment and other evidence in the administrative record, the Planning Commission and City Council both have found and determined finds and determines that the Project falls within the categorical exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines section 15332, which exempts in-fill development projects, as this Project meets all of the standards for this categorical exemption as summarized below and as further described in the Environmental Assessment.

Furthermore, none of the exceptions to categorical exemptions set forth in the CEQA Guidelines, section 15300.2 apply to this Project, and the Project is not subject to either the “cumulative impact” exception or the “unusual circumstance” exception, as further described in the Environmental Assessment for the project.

IMPORTANT: PLEASE READ CAREFULLY
Please note that this project may be subject to a variety of discretionary conditions of approval. These include conditions based on adopted City plans and policies, those determined through site plan review and environmental assessment essential to mitigate adverse effects on the environment including the health, safety, and welfare of the community, and recommended conditions for development that are not essential to health, safety, and welfare, but would on the whole enhance the project and its relationship to the neighborhood and environment.

While discretionary conditions of approval may be appealed, all requirements of the City of King Municipal Code mandatory and may only be modified by variance, provided the findings required

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; LP CASE NO. L21-000-001; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
PAGE 2 OF 26
01222.0005/783425.1
by law can be made. All discretionary conditions of approval will ultimately be deemed mandatory unless timely appealed.

In the event you wish to appeal the Planning Commission’s decision or discretionary conditions of approval, you may do so by filing a written appeal with the Clerk. The appeal shall include a statement of your interest in or relationship to the subject property, the decision or action appealed and specific reasons why you believe the decision or action appealed should not be upheld. Your appeal must be filed within 15 days of the Planning Commission’s decision.

Approval of CUP Case No. CUP-210-091, ARC Case No. P21-000-005, LP Case No. L21-000- 001), and SP Case No. SN2-100-001 (collectively “Approvals”); shall be considered null and void in the event of failure by the applicant and/or the authorized representative, architect, engineer, or designer to disclose and delineate all facts and information relating to the subject property and the proposed development including, but not limited to, the following:

1. All existing and proposed improvements including but not limited to buildings and structures, signs and their uses, trees, walls, driveways, outdoor storage, and open land use areas on the subject property and all of the preceding which are located on adjoining property and may encroach on the subject property;

2. All public and private easements, rights-of-way and any actual or potential prescriptive easements or uses of the subject property; and,

3. Existing and proposed grade differentials between the subject property and adjoining property zoned or planned for residential use.

Approval of the Approvals may become null and void in the event that development is not completed in accordance with all the conditions and requirements imposed on this use permit and the Zoning Ordinance. The Approvals are granted, and the conditions imposed, based upon the Applicant Package provided by the applicant. The Applicant Package is material to the issuance of the Approvals. Unless the conditions of approval specifically require operation inconsistent with the Applicant Package, a new or revised use permit or other permit Approvals are required if the operation of this establishment changes or becomes inconsistent with the Applicant Package. Failure to operate in accordance with the conditions and requirements imposed may result in revocation of the Approvals or any other enforcement remedy available under the law. The City shall not assume responsibility for any deletions or omissions resulting from the Approval review process or for additions or alterations to construction plans not specifically submitted and reviewed and approved pursuant to this use permit or subsequent amendments or revisions. (Include this note on the Site Plan.)
No uses of land, buildings, or structures other than those specifically approved pursuant to the approved site plan shall be permitted. (Include this note on the Site Plan.)

1. To complete the back-check process for building permits relative to planning and zoning issues, submit three copies of this corrected final site plan, together with two copies of the

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; LP CASE NO. L21-000-001; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
PAGE 3 OF 26
01222.0005/783425.1
elevations, landscape and irrigation plans, any fees and title reports for required covenants and any required studies or analyses to Octavio Hurtado in the for final review and approval, fifteen (15) days before applying for building permits. It may be necessary to resubmit these “corrected exhibits” a second time if not all the conditions have been met or are not properly depicted. Upon approval of the “corrected exhibits,” you must place these exhibits in the plan check set and the Development Services Division, along with Traffic Planning, will sign and stamp these exhibits. Please bring one additional copy of the site plan exhibit(s) to this appointment so that both the Development Services Division and Traffic Planning have a final signed-off copy.

2. Copies of the final approved site plan, elevations, landscape and irrigation plans stamped by the Development Services Division must be substituted for unstamped copies of the same in each of the sets of construction plans submitted for plan check prior to issuance of building permits. The final approved site plan must also include all corrections identified in the plan check process.

3. Be advised that on-site inspections will not be authorized unless the final stamped approved site.

PART B – SPECIFIC CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS
Community Development Department Conditions (The applicant should contact Maricruz Aguilar, Planner, at (831) 386-5916, if there is are questions on the following conditions of approval “COA”.)

1. Project Description:
• Conditional Use Permit Case No., CUP-210-091, as shown on the Site Plan marked Exhibit 2, permits a project described as:

A Grocery Outlet store. A 30-foot high single story, 18,187 square foot grocery store with 72 parking spaces and 13,908 feet of landscaping on approximately 1.6 acres. The proposed project would operate seven days a week between the hours of 9:00 AM and 10:00 PM, with approximately 20-30 full-time employees, in two shifts. No food preparation is proposed on site. Semi-trailer deliveries would occur twice per week at the loading dock prior to the opening of the store. There would also be four to five smaller trucks delivering bread, beverages, etc. that also deliver products to the store each day.

A monument sign is proposed to be constructed along Broadway Street. Demolition of the existing driveway facing Broadway Street and the reconstruction of the existing curb, gutter, and sidewalk will be required. Construction is estimated to commence in the Spring of 2022 with completion in the Fall 2022.
• Architectural Review Permit Case No. P21-000-005, which is for the construction of a grocery store in accordance with approved architectural elevations, renderings, site plan, and colors and materials, as shown on Exhibit 2.

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; LP CASE NO. L21-000-001; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
PAGE 4 OF 26
01222.0005/783425.1
• Landscape Plan Review Permit Case No. L21-000-001, which approves the installation of landscaping and fencing in accordance with COA No. 10. • Sign Permit for Monument Sign Case No. SN2-100-001, which approves a monument sign, as shown on Exhibit 2.
(APPLICABLE TO CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005, LP CASE NO. L21-000-001, SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001 as noted)

2. Approval Periods:
• CUP: The approval period for the CUP shall be in accordance with the approved drawings and sketches and shall be valid for two (2) years from the date of approval. If a building permit has not been issued within this time period, the CUP expires. Extensions may be granted in 12-month increments and may not exceed a total of three years from the original date of expiration unless otherwise permitted by law. The request for an extension application must be submitted to the City prior the expiration date. (See Municipal Code section 17.64.30.)
• Architectural Review: If construction in accordance with the permit has not commenced within one year after the date of the approval, then the approval shall immediately expire and any building permit issued in reliance thereon shall be deemed canceled and revoked.

The permit may be extended for up to six months if application for an extension is (1) made before the expiration of the initial one-year approval, (2) approved by the Pplanning Ccommission or committee, and (3) approved by the Council. (See Municipal Code sections 17.50.050 and 17.50.060.)
• LPR: If construction in accordance with the landscape plan has not commenced within one year after the date of the approval, then the approval shall immediately expire and any building permit issued in reliance thereon shall be deemed canceled and revoked.

The LP may be extended for up to six months if application for an extension is (1) made before the expiration of the initial one-year approval, (2) approved by the pPlanning Ccommission or committee, and (3) approved by the Council. (See Municipal Code sections 17.50.17, 17.50.050, and 17.50.060.)
• Sign Permit: The approval of the sign permit shall expire 12 months from the date of approval. The applicant may apply for an extension, and prior to the expiration date, and request an additional 12 months. (See Municipal Code section 17.55.40(j)(1).)

3. Application Fees: All development review applications are based on times and materials per City Fee Schedule. The applicant shall contact the Finance Department for clearing the remaining balance owed for processing the original CUP.

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; LP CASE NO. L21-000-001; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
PAGE 5 OF 26
01222.0005/783425.1
(APPLICABLE TO CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005, LP CASE NO. L21-000-001, SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001)

4. Hold Harmless Clause: Defend, Hold Harmless, and Indemnify: To the furthest extent allowed by law, Applicant shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend City and each of its officers, officials, employees, consultants, agents and volunteers from any and all loss, liability, fines, penalties, forfeitures, damages and costs (including attorney's fees, litigation expenses and administrative record preparation costs) arising from, resulting from, or in connection with any Third Party Action (as hereinafter defined). The term “Third Party Action” collectively means any legal action or other proceeding instituted by (i) a third party or parties, or (ii) a governmental body, agency or official other than the City, that: (a) challenges or contests any or all of these Conditions of Approval or any approval associated with entitlements associated with the project (including Case Number: CUP Case No. CUP-210- 091, ARC Case No. P21-000-005, LP Case No. L21-000-001, SP Case No. SN2-100-001) (collectively “Approvals”); or (b) claims or alleges a violation of CEQA or another law in connection with the Approvals by the City, or the grant, issuance or approval by the City of any or all Approvals. Applicant’s obligations under this paragraph shall apply regardless of whether City or any of its officers, officials, employees, consultants, agents or volunteers are actively or passively negligent, but shall not apply to any loss, liability, fines, penalties forfeitures, costs or damages caused solely by the active negligence or willful misconduct of the City or any of its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers. The provisions of this section shall survive any termination, revocation, overturn, or expiration of an approval.

Nothing in this section shall obligate the City to defend any claim and the City shall not be required to pay or perform any settlement arising from any such claim not defended by the City, unless the City approves the settlement in writing. Nor shall the City be prohibited from independently defending any claim, and if the City does decide to independently defend a claim, the applicant shall be responsible for City’s attorneys’ fees, expenses of litigation, and costs for that independent defense, including the costs of preparing any required administrative record. Applicant shall submit all documents filed in the Third Party Action for review and approval of the City Attorney prior to filing of said documents on behalf of the City.

The City may, at any time, require the applicant to reimburse the City for costs that have been, or which the City reasonably anticipates will be, incurred by the City during the course of processing or defending any Third Party Actions. The City shall provide Applicant with an invoice detailing all reasonable costs incurred. Applicant shall tender to the City payment-infull of all reasonable and necessary costs within thirty (30) days from the date upon the invoice. Applicant shall contact the City within a reasonable time to arrange any extension of the thirty (30) day time period for payment-in-full of the invoiced amount. Applicant further acknowledges and agrees, failure to timely tender payment-in-full to the City shall be considered a breach and non-compliance with the Conditions of Approval for the project. Applicant shall also be required, upon request of the City, to deposit two month’s estimated costs anticipated by the City to be incurred, which may be used by the City as a

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; LP CASE NO. L21-000-001; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
PAGE 6 OF 26
01222.0005/783425.1
draw down account to maintain a positive balance pending tender of payment by Applicant as noted herein.
(APPLICABLE TO CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005, LP CASE NO. L21-000-001, SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001)

5. Change of Use: Improvements as submitted include the installation of slats along the perimeter fence for screening, new sidewalk, new driveway approach, informational sign and enhancing the existing landscaped area shall be in substantial conformance with the plans, and COA presented to and approved by the Planning Commission, and City Council on appeal, in connection with the Project. Minor changes, which are determined by the Community Development Director to be substantially in conformity with the plans, layout, building design, landscaping and architecture, including architectural features and colors approved by the Planning Commission, and City Council on appeal, may be granted by the Community Development Director.
a. Screening material to be reviewed by Staff, prior to installation. Screening material and fencing shall be maintained in good condition throughout the duration of the use. b. The site shall not be used for private vehicle storage nor shall it be used as a shared parking lot with other neighboring properties without further review and analysis and possibility of amendment of this conditional use permit. (APPLICABLE TO CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005, LP CASE NO. L21-000-001, SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001)

6. Other County, State and Federal Permits: Prior to initiation of the proposed use, the applicant shall provide copies of any required County, State and Federal permits or written verification of a waiver of permit requirement.
(APPLICABLE TO CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005, LP CASE NO. L21-000-001, SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001)

7. Alcohol Beverage Control (“ABC”) License: In areas that are over concentrated with any specific ABC Liquor License. The ABC will require a Public Convenience and Necessity (“PCN”) determination by the local agency. This is a separate process and not part of this CUP. An Actual Cost Application based on actual cost to process the request will be required to be filed with the City Clerk for review and consideration by the City Council. (APPLICABLE TO CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091)

8. Monterey County Clerk Fees: Pursuant to State law and the State Department of Fish and Game, the applicant shall deliver to the City Clerk a cashier's check, money order, or other acceptable form of payment made payable to the Monterey County Clerk, in the amount of $50 for the Notice of Exemption ("NOE") filing fee. The applicant shall pay any additional

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; LP CASE NO. L21-000-001; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
PAGE 7 OF 26
01222.0005/783425.1
fees that may be attributed to the required filing of environmental documents. If within a 24- hour period, the applicant has not delivered to the City Clerk the check as required above, the approval for the project granted may be void by reason of failure of condition (Fish and Game Code §711. 4 (c)).
(APPLICABLE TO CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005, LP CASE NO. L21-000-001, SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001)

9. Signage
• Wall Signage: This CUP does not constitute a Sign Permit for the building wall signage. Before installing any building wall signs or other signage on the property, the applicant shall make a separate application and obtain an approved sign permit by the Community Development Department. Contact the Community Development Department regarding application procedures for Sign Permit(s). All signs should be compatible with the structure and site design relative to color, material, and placement. The signs shall conform to the requirements of Municipal Code Chapter 17.55 including the maximum sign area based on the primary and secondary lineal frontages of the building. Window coverage should be limited to the standards as described in Municipal Code Chapter 17.55.
• Monument Sign: At the time of building permit submittal, a final sign site plan shall be submitted for the monument sign. This shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer for sight distance analysis and shall be placed a minimum of ten (10) feet away from the public right-of-way. The sign shall also contain and illustrate the street address with minimum address numbers of six (6”) inches in height.

• Installation of Signage: Prior to installing any signs on the property, the applicant shall submit a separate building permit application for the installation of the signs and any electrical work needed. All signs are required to be kept in good condition by the sign applicant or landowner. Any signs erected or maintained in violation of Municipal Code Chapter 17.55 are subject to abatement procedures as described in the Municipal Code, including section 17.55.120 (APPLICABLE TO CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001)

10. Landscaping and Fencing Plans: At the time of building permit submittals or prior to issuance of building permit, the applicant shall submit a final landscaping plan package (including fencing) in compliance with Municipal Code section 15.50.030, The Plans shall show twenty (20%) percent of the site landscaped. Provisions for new or rehabilitated landscapes containing calculations for Maximum Applied Water Use (MAWU), Estimated Applied Water Use (EAWU) and Estimated Total Water Use calculations. The Community Development Director or her designee shall review final Landscape Plans for consistency with the Concept Plans approved by the Planning Commission, and City Council on appeal, and for consistency with the provisions for complying with Municipal Code Section 15.50.030.

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; LP CASE NO. L21-000-001; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
PAGE 8 OF 26
01222.0005/783425.1
(APPLICABLE TO LP CASE NO. L21-000-001)

11. Landscaping Performance Security: Prior to issuance of a building permit if found necessary by the City Engineer, the Applicant shall post a performance security in an amount agreed to by the City Engineer to guarantee the installation of plantings, irrigation, and walls/fences, in accordance with the approved landscape and irrigation plans

(APPLICABLE TO LP CASE NO. L21-000-001)

12. Installation of Landscaping: Prior to final approval by the Building Department, the applicant shall contact the Community Development Department to inspect the plants and trees prior to removal of any landscaping materials from their containers and prior to any installation of landscaping to ensure conformance with the approved Final Landscape Plans. Please contact Adriana Granados at (831) 386-5925 to schedule the inspection, preferably 24 hours in advance to schedule a site visit to check the plant species, gallon size, and location.
(APPLICABLE TO LP CASE NO. L21-000-001)

13. Bicycle Parking: The applicant shall provide bicycle racks or other secure bicycle parking to accommodate four (4) bicycles. A bicycle parking facility may also be a fully enclosed space or locker accessible only to the owner or operator of the bicycle, which protects the bike from inclement weather. Specific facilities and location (e.g., provision of racks, lockers, or locked room) shall be to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department. Each bicycle rack should stand a minimum of thirty (30’) inches from ground level and support each bike in a stable position by providing at least two (2) vertical contact points for a bicycle frame. The rack should be coated with or constructed of a durable material that prevents rust and corrosion.
(APPLICABLE TO CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005)

14. Lighting/Glare Plan: An adequate security lighting shall be provided at the time of building permit submittal. The lighting shall be directed not to face adjacent properties and an intensity compatible with the neighborhood. Outdoor lighting fixtures, either wall mounted or light standards, should be in keeping with the architectural theme of the buildings. Lighting should provide enhanced pedestrian safety, in addition to street light fixtures, and accentuate, but not dominate architectural features.
(APPLICABLE TO CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091)

15. Architectural Features: The proposed building colors and materials shall be as presented in Exhibit 2. Minor variations will be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. All surfaces visible from the adjacent streets will be finished according to these standards.

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; LP CASE NO. L21-000-001; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
PAGE 9 OF 26
01222.0005/783425.1
(APPLICABLE TO ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005)

16. Screening of Roof and Ground Equipment: At the time of building permit submittal, an amended site plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Department showing the methods of screening of roof-mounted and ground mounted equipment such as, but not limited to air conditioning and other equipment. Site and roofmounted equipment shall be painted and screened from adjacent public street visibility and shall coordinate with architectural features of the building. Ground mounted equipment should be screened by walls or landscaping.
(APPLICABLE TO CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005, LP CASE NO. L21-000-001)

17. Trash Enclosures/Receptacles: The applicant shall coordinate with Waste Management, or successor authorized to provide solid-waste services, and the City to assure all enclosures and receptacles meet Waste Management specifications.
(APPLICABLE TO CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005, LP CASE NO. L21-000-001)

18. Business License: Before issuance of a building permit, a business license shall be obtained for every person conducting or carrying on the business of general contractor or contractor constructing, altering, repairing, wrecking or salvaging buildings, highways, roads, railroads, excavations or other structures, projects, developments or improvements. • Every person conducting or carrying on the business of electrical, plumbing or painting subcontractor.
• Every person conducting or carrying on the business of masonry, glazier, cement, floor, heating, plastering, roofing, sash, sheet metal, tile, lathing and any other subcontractor not specifically mentioned in this Title 5 of the Municipal Code. • Every person conducting or carrying on the business of house moving, grading, paving, wrecking, sewer construction, pipeline construction, trenching, or excavating. (APPLICABLE TO CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091)

19. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs): The property is Parcel 1 of Tentative Parcel Map Case No. P21-000-006. Parcel 1, 2, and 3 are governed by CC&R’s such as all three parcels will have a shared access (vehicle and pedestrian), parking and utilities. Parcel 1, 2, and 3 as separate legal parcels, shall, operate, function and be maintained similar to one large parcel, based on access and utility easements and the CC&R’s per COA No. 23 of Tentative Parcel Map Case No. PM21-000-006.

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; LP CASE NO. L21-000-001; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
PAGE 10 OF 26
01222.0005/783425.1
(APPLICABLE TO CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091)
Public Works Department (The applicant should contact Octavio Hurtado, City Engineer, at (831) 385-3281 regarding the following COA, if there are any questions.). (ALL PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ARE APPLICABLE TO CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091)

20. City Standard Drawings/Specifications: The applicant shall cause the construction of all public and private improvements in accordance with the latest City Standard Drawings and Specifications.

21. Improvement Drawings: The applicant shall submit as part of the improvement drawings for the project, profiles of all improvements in the project and typical cross-sections of all streets and details of curbs, gutters, and sidewalks, to be accomplished to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to issuance of building permit.

22. Reciprocal Agreements: Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all common roads, drives or parking areas shall be provided by CC&R's and by deed and shall be recorded concurrent with the map, or prior to issuance of building permit where no map is involved.

23. Sanitary Sewer Improvements: The applicant shall cause to be undertaken the design and construction of sanitary sewer improvements including, but not limited to installation of sewer line extension on the proposed public street(s) or private street(s)/drive aisle(s).

The sanitary collection system shall include, but not be limited to manholes with manhole frames and covers, cleanouts, wye-branches and laterals, and separate sewer taps to each lot. These are to be installed by the Owner per the City of Kings Design Standards and StandardDetails for Construction.

24. Drainage Study: A complete storm drainage study of the proposed development must be submitted showing amount of run-off, and existing and proposed drainage structure capacities. This study shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. All needed improvements will be made by the applicant. No overloading of the existing system will be permitted.

25. Grading and Drainage Plans: Before issuance of any building permit, the applicant shall submit grading and drainage plans for the City Engineer review and approval. The grading and drainage plans shall be folded accordion style and no larger than 8.5' x 14". The grading and drainage plans shall include:
a. Drainage Plan.
b. Best Management Practices Plans (NPDES). The NPDES must include:

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; LP CASE NO. L21-000-001; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
PAGE 11 OF 26
01222.0005/783425.1
i. Permanent: Urban Storm Water Management Plan.
ii. Construction: Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. iii. Construction during November - April: Wet Weather Erosion Control Plan.

The grading and drainage plan shall be signed and stamped by a State of CaliforniaRegistered Civil Engineer. All grading shall be done in conformance with City standards and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

26. Submittal of a Storm Water Control Plan: Before issuance of any building permit, the applicant shall provide calculations and details showing compliance with Regional Boards MS4 permit requirements pertaining to the size of this project.

27. Soils Report: A Soils Report, prepared to the satisfaction of the Building Official, containing foundation, retaining wall (if applicable) and parking lot section design recommendations shall be submitted with Civil drawings and with Building Permit Application. Report shall include percolation test for use with Storm Water Control Plan Calculations. This report shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer specializing in soils mechanics.

One electronic copy (PDF) of the soils and geologic report shall be submitted with the application. The soils report shall include specific criteria and standards governing site grading, drainage, pavement design, retaining wall design (if applicable), erosion control and percolation conditions. The report shall be signed and wet stamped by the engineer or geologist, in conformance with Section 6735 of the California Business and Professions Code.

28. Soils Engineer Construction Observation: During construction, all excavations and grading shall be inspected by the Owner, Applicant and/or Developer’s soils engineer prior to placement of concrete and/or backfill so they can verify that the actual conditions are as anticipated in the design-level geotechnical report and recommend appropriate changes in the recommendations contained in the report, if necessary. The results of the construction observation and testing shall be documented in an “as-built” letter/report prepared by the Owner, Applicant and/or Developer’s soils engineer and submitted to the City before a certificate of occupancy is granted.

29. Hauling of Soil: Hauling of soil on-or-off-site shall not occur during the morning or evening peak periods (between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. and between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m.), and at other times as specified by the City Engineer. Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit, the Owner and/or Applicant or their representative shall work with the City’s Building Department and Engineering Division Inspectors to devise a traffic control plan to ensure safe and efficient traffic flow under periods when soil is hauled on or off the project site. This may include, but is not limited to provisions for the Owner and/or Applicant to place construction notification signs noting the dates and time of construction and hauling activities, or providing additional traffic control. Coordination with other significant projects in the area may also be required. Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand and other loose debris.

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; LP CASE NO. L21-000-001; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
PAGE 12 OF 26
01222.0005/783425.1

30. Foundation Inspections: A pad certificate prepared by a licensed civil engineer or land surveyor shall be submitted to the project Building Inspector at foundation inspection. The certificate shall certify compliance with the recommendations as specified in the Soils Report, and that the building pad elevations and on-site retaining wall locations and elevations (if applicable) have been prepared according to the approved plans. Horizontal and vertical control shall be set and certified by a licensed surveyor or registered Civil Engineer for the following items:
a. Building pad elevation
b. Finish Floor elevations
c. Foundation corner locations
d. Retaining wall (s) locations and elevations (if applicable)

31. State Construction General Permit: In the event that, during the production of construction drawings for the plans approved with this application by the City, it is determined that the project will disturb one (1) acre or more of site area, the filing of a Notice of Intent (NOi) and submittal of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board as part of a State Construction General Permit will be required.

These items shall all be completed and accepted by the City Engineer before issuance of a grading/building permit.

32. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP): As required by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, construction activity resulting in a land disturbance of one (1) acre or more of soil, or whose projects are part of a larger common plan of development that in total disturbs more than one (1) acre, are required to obtain coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit No. CAS000002 for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity (General Permit). To be permitted with the SWRCB under the General Permit, owners must file a complete Notice of Intent (NOI) ONLINE at:
http://smarts.waterboards.ca.gov/smarts/faces/SwSmartsLogin.jsp and develop a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Manual in accordance with the General Permit.

The SWPPP Manual shall follow the CASQA SWPPP template/format at https://www.casqa.org/store/products/tabid/154/p-167-construction-handbookportalinitial- subscription.aspx and shall be approved by Public Works Engineering. A Waste Discharger Identification (WDID) number to will be issued to the construction site after the SWRCB receives and verifies the submitted ONLINE NOi information. The WDID number and approved SWPPP Manual shall be provided to Public Works and the Building Department priorto any approval of grading activities (SWRCB NPDES General Permit CA000002).

33. NPDES General Permit Site SWPPP Inspections and Compliance:
a. All project onsite and offsite construction activity shall have the site inspected by a qualified third party SWPPP Inspector (QSD or QSP or RCE).

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; LP CASE NO. L21-000-001; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
PAGE 13 OF 26
01222.0005/783425.1
b. SWPPP Inspections shall occur weekly during the rainy season (September 15th thru May 1st).
c. SWPPP Inspections shall occur bi-weekly during the non-rainy season. d. Forty-eight (48) hours prior to and following a forecasted rain event, SWPPP Inspections shall occur inaddition to those of items 2 or 3 above. e. Per each of the inspection conditions 2, 3, or 4, the NPDES SWPPP Inspector shall certify in writing to the Building and Public Works Department if the site is in compliance or non-- compliance with the NPDES General Permit for Stormwater, site SWPPP Manual, and Water Pollution Control Drawings (per the CMH-SWPPP Inspection Check List to be provided by Public Works). QSD/QSP SWPPP Inspectors shall forward onsite and offsite information/certification to the Building (on-site private property issues) and Public Works (public right-of-way issues) inspectors respectively. f. Prior to rain events, BMPs* not in compliance will need to be corrected immediately. g. Illicit discharges per the NPDES General Permit, non-compliance of tracking control, and inlet protection within the public right of way shall be address immediately. h. Other non-compliance issues need to be addressed within a twenty-four (24) hour period.
i. Non-compliance issues which have been corrected shall be verified by NPDES SWPPP Inspector by a follow up inspection.
*BMPs maintenance/inspections shall include tree protection if applicable.

34. NPDES Water Quality Stormwater Management Development Standards For All Projects
a. State Water Resources Control Board Post Construction Requirements (PCRs):

Project shall comply with the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Coast Region Resolution No. R3-2013-0032 as documented by the Stormwater Management Guidance Manual for Low Impact Development and Post-Construction Requirements (developed from Resolution No. R-2013-0032 Attachment 1 and 2 at:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralcoast/water
issues/programs/stormwater/docs/lid/lid hydr omod charette index.shtml).

A copy of the guidance manual can be obtained through the Department of Public Works internet site. Project shall provide Stormwater Control Plan Checklist and applicable calculations per the Stormwater Management Guidance Manual for Low Impact Development and Post-Construction Requirements. Project shall meet the

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; LP CASE NO. L21-000-001; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
PAGE 14 OF 26
01222.0005/783425.1
applicable requirements of the Stormwater Management Guidance Manual for Low Impact Development and Post-Construction Requirements:

1. Performance Requirement 1: Site Design and Runoff Reduction

2. Performance Requirement 2: Water Quality Treatment

3. Performance Requirement 3: Runoff Retention

4. Performance Requirement 4: Peak Management
b. Peak Storm Water Runoff Discharge Rates - Post-development peak storm water runoff discharge rates shall not exceed the estimated pre-development rate for developments where the increased peak storm water discharge rate will result in increased potential for downstream erosion. Note: the project may be required to retain stormwater runoff as part of resolution R3- 2013-0032 prior to releasing discharge rates at predevelopment flows. c. Minimize Storm Water Pollutants of Concern - Storm water runoff from a site has the potential to contribute oil and grease, suspended solids, metals, gasoline, pesticides, and pathogens to the storm water conveyance system. The development must be designed so as to minimize, to the maximum extent practicable, the introduction of pollutants of concern that may result in significant impacts, generated from site runoff of directly connected impervious areas (DCIA), to the storm water conveyance system as approved by the building official. Pollutants of concern consist of any pollutants that exhibit one or more of the following characteristics: current loadings or historic deposits of the pollutant are impacting the beneficial uses of a receiving water, elevated levels of the pollutant are found in sediments of a receiving water and/or have thepotential to bio-accumulate in organisms therein, or the detectable inputs of the pollutant are at concentrations or loads considered potentially toxic to humans and/or flora and fauna.

In meeting this specific requirement, "minimization of the pollutants of concern" will require the incorporation of a BMP or combination of BMPs best suited to maximize the reduction of pollutant loadings in that runoff to the Maximum Extent Practicable.

Those BMPs best suited for that purpose are those listed in:
• California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA) Handbook: BMPs for New Development and Redevelopment
• Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association (BASMAA) Design Guidance Manual for Stormwater Quality Protection: Start at the Source 1999 • California Storm Water Best Management Practices Handbooks • Caltrans Storm Water Quality Handbook: Planning and Design Staff Guide d. Provide Storm Drain System Stenciling and Signage - Storm drain stencils are highly visible source controls that are typically placed directly adjacent to storm drain inlets.

The stencil contains a brief statement that prohibits the dumping of improper materials

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; LP CASE NO. L21-000-001; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
PAGE 15 OF 26
01222.0005/783425.1
into the storm water conveyance system. Graphical icons, either illustrating antidumping symbols or images of receiving water fauna, are effective supplements to the anti-dumping message. All stormdrain inlets and catch basins within the project area must be stenciled with prohibitive language (such as: "NO DUMPING - DRAINS TO RIVER") and/or graphical icons to discourage illegal dumping. Signs and prohibitive language and/or graphical icons, which prohibit illegal dumping, must be posted at public access points along channels and creeks within the project area.· Legibility of stencils and signs must be maintained.
e. Properly Design Outdoor Material Storage Areas - Outdoor material storage areas refer to storage areas or storage facilities solely for the storage of materials. Improper storage of materials outdoors may provide an opportunity for toxic compounds, oil and grease, heavy metals, nutrients, suspended solids, and other pollutants to enter the storm water conveyance system. Where proposed project plans include outdoor areas for storage of materials that may contribute pollutants to the storm water conveyance system, the following Structural or Treatment BMPs are required:

1. Materials with the potential to contaminate storm water must be: (1) placed in an enclosure such as, but not limited to, a cabinet, shed, or similar structure that prevents contact with runoff or spillage to the storm water conveyance system; or (2) protected by secondary containment structures such as berms, dikes, or curbs.

2. The storage area must be paved and sufficiently impervious to contain leaks and spills.

3. The storage area must have a roof or awning to minimize collection of storm water within the secondary containment area.
f. Properly Design Trash Enclosure Areas - All trash enclosure areas must meet the following Structural or Treatment Control BMP requirements (individual single-family residences are exempt from these requirements):

1. Roof Required: Trash enclosure areas shall have an all-weather noncombustible solid roof to prevent rainwater from mixing with the enclosure's contents.

2. Walls Required: Trash enclosure shall have structural walls to prevent unauthorized off-site transport of trash.

3. Doors: Trash enclosure shall have door(s) which can be secured when closed.

4. Grades: The pad for the enclosure shall be designed to not drain outward, and the gradesurrounding the enclosure shall be designed to not drain into the enclosure.

5. Drain Inlet: Within the enclosure, an area drain with an approved (Zurn) vandal proof drain shall be installed and shall be plumbed to the sanitary sewer system

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; LP CASE NO. L21-000-001; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
PAGE 16 OF 26
01222.0005/783425.1
with grease trap. Grease trap shall be located within the trash enclosure footprint. g. Design Standards for Structural or Treatment Control BMPs -The post-construction treatment control BMPs shall incorporate, at a minimum, either a volumetric or flow-based treatment control design standard, or both, as identified below to mitigate (infiltrate, filter or treat) storm water runoff:

1. Volumetric Treatment Control BMP
a. The 85th percentile 24-hour runoff event determined as the maximized capture storm water volume for the area, from the formula recommended in Urban Runoff Quality Management, WEF Manual of Practice No. 23/ASCE Manual of Practice No. 87, (1998);or
b. The volume of annual runoff based on unit basin storage water quality volume, to achieve 80 percent or more volume treatment by the method recommended in California Stormwater Best Management Practices Handbook - Industrial/ Commercial, (2003); or
c. The volume of runoff produced from a historical-record based reference 24-hour rainfallcriterion for "treatment" that achieves approximately the same reduction in pollutant loads achieved by the 85th percentile 24-hour runoff event.

2. Flow Based Treatment Control BMP
a. The flow of runoff produced from a rain event equal to at least two times the 85th percentile hourly rainfall intensity for the area; or
b. The flow of runoff produced from a rain event that will result in treatment of the same portion of runoff as treated using volumetric standards above. h. Stormwater Runoff Management Plan (SWRMP) required - The stormwater runoff management plan shall include sufficient information to evaluate the environmental characteristics of affected areas, the potential impacts of the proposed development on water resources, and the effectiveness and acceptability of measures (post construction BMPs) proposed for managing stormwater runoff.

1. The stormwater runoff management plan shall be prepared under the direction of a professional civil engineer registered in the State of California. The responsible professional civil engineer shall stamp and sign the approved stormwater runoff management plan.

2. The chief engineer or designee may require a developer to provide a signed certification from the civil engineer responsible for preparing the stormwater runoff management plan that all stormwater best management practices have

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; LP CASE NO. L21-000-001; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
PAGE 17 OF 26
01222.0005/783425.1
been designed to meet the requirements of this chapter.

3. Each certifying civil engineer shall establish to the city's satisfaction that such person has been trained on the design of stormwater quality best management practices not more than three (3) years prior to the certification signature date.

4. Qualifying training shall be conducted by an organization with stormwater quality management expertise, such as a university, the Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association, the American Society of Civil Engineers, the American Public Works Association, or the California Water Environment Association.
i. Stormwater BMP operation, maintenance, and replacement responsibility.

1. All on-site stormwater management facilities shall be operated and maintained in goodcondition and promptly repaired/replaced by the property owner(s), an owners' or homeowners' association or other legal entity approved by the city.

2. Any repairs or restoration/replacement and maintenance shall be in accordance with city- approved plans.

3. The property owner(s) shall develop a maintenance schedule for the life of any stormwater management facility and shall describe the maintenance to be completed, the time period for completion, and who shall perform the maintenance. This maintenance schedule shall be included with the approved stormwater runoff management plan.
j. Stormwater BMP operation and Maintenance Agreement (SWBOMA) required - Improper maintenance is one of the most common reasons why water quality controls will not function as designed or which may cause the system to fail entirely. It is important to consider who will be responsible for maintenance of a permanent BMP, and what equipment is required to perform themaintenance properly.

1. Prior to the issuance of any building permit requiring stormwater management BMPs, the owner(s) of the site shall enter into a formal written stormwater BMP operation and maintenance agreement with the city. The city shall record this agreement, against the property or properties involved, with the County of Monterey and it shall be binding on all subsequent owners of land served by the storm water management treatment BMPs (City Standard STORMWATER BMP OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT to be provided by Public Works Engineering).

2. The stormwater BMP operation and maintenance agreement shall require that

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; LP CASE NO. L21-000-001; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
PAGE 18 OF 26
01222.0005/783425.1
the BMPs not be modified and BMP maintenance activities not alter the designed function of the facility from its original design unless approved by the city prior to the commencement of the proposed modification or maintenance activity.

3. The stormwater BMP operation and maintenance agreement shall provide that in the event that maintenance or repair is neglected, or the stormwater management facility becomes a danger to public health or safety, the city shall have the authority to perform maintenance and/or repair work and to recover the costs from the owner.
k. Stormwater BMP inspection responsibility:

1. The property owner(s) shall be responsible for having all stormwater management facilities inspected for condition and function by a Register Civil Engineer (RCE).

2. Unless otherwise required by the chief engineer or designee, stormwater facility inspections shall be done at least twice per year (April 15th and September 15th) by the RCE. Written records shall be kept of all inspections and shall include, at minimum, the following information:
a. Site address;
b. Date and time of inspection;
c. Name of the person conducting the inspection;
d. List of stormwater facilities inspected;
e. Condition of each stormwater facility inspected;
f. Description of any needed maintenance or repairs; and g. As applicable, the need for site re-inspection.

3. Upon completion of each inspection, an inspection report shall be submitted to Public Works Engineering.
l. Records of maintenance and inspection activities - On or before April 15th and September 15th of each year, the party responsible for the operation and maintenance of on-site stormwater management facilities under the BMP operation and maintenance agreement shall provide the chief engineer or designee with records of all inspections, maintenance and repairs.

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; LP CASE NO. L21-000-001; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
PAGE 19 OF 26
01222.0005/783425.1
m. Annual Certification of SWRMP - On or before September 30th of each year a Registered Civil Engineer (RCE) shall provide written certification that the developments stormwater quality design standards are properly maintained and functioning as required by the SWRMP.

35. Submittal of Erosion and Sediment Control Measures and SWPPP: Before any construction, erosion and sediment control measures for grading and construction as well as for the permanent project shall be prepared and approved by the City Engineer. In addition, if required by State and Federal Law, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) may be required to be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval, depending on size of project. To prevent silt and debris from entering the existing storm drain system during construction, the developer shall utilize storm drain inlet interceptors or filters to protect the existing storm drain. Soils and/or percolation test(s) may be required by the City Engineer and/or RWQCB to identify measures necessary to maintain and reduce stormwater on-site and other measures to provide erosion, sediment and pollution control at the site. On cover sheet, provide calculations showing disturbed area during construction. If project is under the SWPPP area requirements, provide note stating project is exempt from obtaining coverage under the State’s Construction General Permit.

36. Encroachment Permit: All work in the public right-of-way will require a Construction Encroachment Permit. It is the responsibility of the Owner/Applicant/Developer to obtain any necessary encroachment permits from affected agencies and private parties, including but not limited to, pacific gas and electric, (PG&E), AT&T, Spectrum, Cal Water, California Department of Transpiration (Caltrans). Copies of any approvals or permits must be submitted to the City Engineer.

37. Public Works Inspections: The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer or their representative shall notify the Engineering Inspector at least twenty-four (24) hours before starting any work pertaining to on-site drainage facilities, grading or paving, and all work in the City right-of-way.

38. Restoration of Public Improvements: The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer or their representative shall repair or replace all existing improvements not designated for removal that are damaged or removed because of the Owner, Applicant and/or Developer or their representative’s operations. Improvements such as, but not limited to: curbs, gutters, sidewalks, driveways, signs, pavements, raised pavement markers, thermoplastic pavement markings, etc., shall be repaired and replaced to the condition equal to or better than the original condition. Any new concrete shall be free of graffiti. Existing improvements to be repaired or replaced shall be at the direction of the Engineering Construction Inspector and shall comply with all Title 24 Disabled Access provisions. The restoration of all improvements identified by the Engineering Construction Inspector shall be completed before the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer or their representative shall request a walk-through with the Engineering Construction Inspector before the start of construction to verify existing conditions.

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; LP CASE NO. L21-000-001; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
PAGE 20 OF 26
01222.0005/783425.1

39. Site Supervision: The General Contractor shall provide qualified supervision on the job site at all times during construction.

40. Street Closure: Any proposed blockage or partial closure of the street and/or sidewalk requires an encroachment permit. Special provisions such as limitations on work hours, protective enclosures, or other means to facilitate public access in a safe manner may be required.

41. Advance Notification: Advance notification of all affected residents and emergency services shall be made regarding parking restriction, lane closure or road closure, with specification of dates and hours of operation.

42. Design Changes: Any proposed changes to the approved plans shall be subject to the approval of the City prior to the commencement of any and all altered work. The Owner, Applicant and/or Developer’s project engineer shall notify, in writing, the City Engineer of the proposed changes.

43. Preconstruction Meeting: Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits or the commencement of any site work, the general contractor shall:
a. Along with the Owner, Applicant and/or Developer, attend a pre-construction meeting with the City Engineer to discuss the project COAs, working hours, site maintenance and other construction matters.
b. Acknowledge in writing that they have read and understand the project COAs and will make certain that all project sub-contractors have read and understand them as well prior to commencing any work, and that a copy of the project COAs will be posted on-site at all times during construction.

44. Utilities: The applicant shall obtain and pay all associated permits/fees/costs for any/all utility companies and any/all government agencies, as applicable.

45. Infrastructure and Underground Utilities: Before issuance of a building permit, an Infrastructure and Utility Plan for the entire site shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. The underground utilities shall include storm drain piping, sanitary sewer, water piping, and other requirements per City standards. The applicant shall obtain and pay all associated permits/fees/costs for any/all Utility Companies (including but not limited to PG&E, Telephone, TV, California Water System) and any/all governmental agencies.

46. Storm Drain Pipe: Storm Drain Pipe within the City Right of Way shall be reinforced concrete pipe (RCP).

47. Bio-filtration Areas: Show downspout locations and points of connection to landscaping, bio-filtration areas and/or storm drain pipe as required.

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; LP CASE NO. L21-000-001; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
PAGE 21 OF 26
01222.0005/783425.1

48. Stormwater: Storm water shall not cross property lines. Provide storm drain system using LID methods to send storm water to bio-retention areas and to storm drain along Broadway Street. Cross lot drainage can be permitted across property lines should a covenant be recorded (CC&R’s), allowing for cross lot drainage.

49. Traffic Control Plans: shall be required at the time of applying for an Encroachment Permit to perform work in the City Right of Way.

50. Curb/Gutter/Sidewalk: Curb gutter and sidewalk shall be inspected prior to final and be free from defects and meet most current ADA requirements.

Fire Department (The applicant should contact John Serritelli at (831) 385-5169 if there are questions on the following conditions of approval “COA”.) (ALL FIRE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ARE APPLICABLE TO CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091)

51. Automated Fire Suppression System: The applicant shall submit automated fire suppression system plans, including fire sprinklers, fire alarm, underground fire service mains and if appropriate kitchen hood and duct fire suppression system plans, to the Building and Safety Department. The fire suppression system plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and Fire Marshal, before final of final occupancy permit.

52. Fire Sprinkler Systems: Fire Sprinkler Systems will be required in all structures in this proposed complex. Fire sprinkler systems are to meet NFPA 13. Fire sprinkler plans are to be submitted by a California licensed c-16 contractor to the Fire Marshal’s office for review and approval, prior to any work done on the fire sprinklers. This submittal can be considered as a deferred submittal.

53. Fire Alarm System: A fire alarm system will be required in all structures in this proposed complex. The fire alarm system is to be submitted by a California licensed C-10 contractor to the Fire Marshal’s Office for review and approval, before to any work being done on the fire alarm system.

54. Underground Fire Service Mains: At the time of building permit submittal, will be required to be documented separately from the normal civil drawings and be submitted by the general engineering contractor to the Fire Marshal’s Office for review and approval, before a work being done on the underground fire service mains. This submittal can be considered as a deferred submittal.

55. Portable Fire Extinguishers: Portable fire extinguishers are required to be installed in accordance with NFPA 10 and in consultation with field fire inspector.

Building Department (The applicant should contact Mark McClain at (831) 386-5915 if there are questions on the following conditions of approval “COA”.)

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; LP CASE NO. L21-000-001; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
PAGE 22 OF 26
01222.0005/783425.1
(ALL BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ARE APPLICABLE TO CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091)

56. Addressing of Units: As part of the building permit submittal, the project shall identify the commercial units with the alphabet (A-D) and the residential units shall use numerical units for review by the Building and Safety Department, Community Development Department and Fire Department.

57. ADA Requirement: As part of the building permit submittal, the project shall provide accessibility requirements per the Building Code, subject to review and approval by the Building and Safety Department, and Community Development Department.

58. Impact Fees: Prior to building permit issuance, the Applicant shall pay all applicable development impact fees. Fees shall be determined by the Building Official.

Police Department: (The applicant should contact Keith Boyd, Police Chief, at (831) 386-5856 there are questions on the following conditions of approval “COA”.)

59. Video Surveillance: Video surveillance cameras shall be installed, with 1 multi-lens camera station. The coverage area shall be the lot and area around the store to provide a greater level of security. Signs shall be posed under the surveillance cameras notifying the public that the subject property is monitored by video surveillance. (APPLICABLE TO CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091)
Miscellaneous Conditions: (Applicant should contact Maricruz Aguilar, Planner, at (831) 386- 5916, if there is are questions on the following conditions of approval “COA”.)

60. Cultural Resources:
• Prior to excavation and construction on the project site, the prime construction contractor or any subcontractor(s) shall be cautioned on the legal and/or regulatory implications of knowingly destroying historic or prehistoric cultural resources or removing artifacts such as, but not limited to, prehistoric groundstone, projectile points, shell middens, or debitage, human remains, historic materials such as, but not limited to, bottles or cans and other cultural materials from the project site. • Prior to any soil disturbing activities, the archaeologist shall be authorized to perform spot check monitoring of subsurface construction for potential cultural resources and analyze and evaluate those artifacts or resources that may be uncovered. The qualified archaeologist shall also have the authority to temporarily halt excavation and construction activities in the immediate vicinity (within a 50-

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; LP CASE NO. L21-000-001; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
PAGE 23 OF 26
01222.0005/783425.1
meter radius or approximately 164 feet) of a find if significant or potentially significant cultural resources are exposed and/or adversely affected by construction operations.
• In the event of a find, reasonable time shall be allowed for the qualified archaeologist to conduct additional subsurface testing, analysis and reporting, if warranted. During this time, excavation and construction shall not be allowed in the immediate vicinity of the find (within a 50-meter radius or approximately 164 feet or within a larger area as determined by the qualified archaeologist). However, activities may continue in other areas of the project site, if determined by the qualified archaeologist.
• All cultural materials recovered as part of the testing or monitoring program shall be subject to scientific analysis, professional museum curation and reporting prepared according to current professional standards.
• Prior to any demolition, excavation, or construction, the Applicant shall identify a qualified archaeologist to be on call if any cultural resources are identified, or if required by the City, when project excavation of four (4’) feet or greater is needed.

The City shall approve the selected archaeologist prior to issuance of any permit that includes soil disturbance. When excavation of greater than four (4’) feet is anticipated, a Tribal Monitor may be required.
• In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5 (e)(1)(A)(B), in the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains on the project site during development, the following steps should be taken. There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the coroner is contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is required. Possible indications of burials could include a layer of shells placed over the burial. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American, then the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. The Commission shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descendent of the deceased Native American. The most likely descendent may then make recommendations to the landowner or person responsible for the excavation work, for the means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and associated grave goods as provided in the Public Resources Code.
(APPLICABLE TO CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005, LP CASE NO. L21-000-001, SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001)

61. Biological Resources:

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; LP CASE NO. L21-000-001; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
PAGE 24 OF 26
01222.0005/783425.1
Birds
Consistent with the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the California Fish and Game Code, to avoid potential impacts to nesting birds during the nesting season (January 15 through September 15), all construction activities should be conducted between September 16 and January 14, outside of the bird nesting season. If construction occurs during the bird nesting season, then a qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction survey for nesting birds to ensure that no nests would be disturbed during project construction.

If project-related work is scheduled during the nesting season (February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct nesting bird surveys. a. Two surveys for active bird nests will occur within 14 days prior to start of construction, with the final survey conducted within 48 hours prior to construction. Appropriate minimum survey radii surrounding each work area are typically 250 feet for passerines, 500 feet for smaller raptors, and 1,000 feet for larger raptors. Surveys will be conducted at the appropriate times of day to observe nesting activities. Locations off the site to which access is not available may be surveyed from within the site or from public areas. If no nesting birds are found, a letter report confirming absence will be prepared and submitted to King City and no further mitigation is required.
b. If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the project site or in nearby surrounding areas, an appropriate buffer between each nest and active construction shall be established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of each nest to characterize “normal” bird behavior and establish a buffer distance, which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily during construction activities and increase the buffer if birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g., defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist or construction foreman shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active. Once the absence of nesting birds has been confirmed, a letter report will be prepared and submitted to King City.

Bats
Approximately 14 days prior to tree removal or construction activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct a habitat assessment for bats and potential roosting sites in trees to be removed, in trees within 50 feet of the construction easement. These surveys shall include a visual inspection of potential roosting features (bats need not be present) and a search for presence of guano within the project site, construction access routes, and 50 feet around these areas.

Cavities, crevices, exfoliating bark, and bark fissures that could provide suitable potential nest

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; LP CASE NO. L21-000-001; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
PAGE 25 OF 26
01222.0005/783425.1
or roost habitat for bats shall be surveyed. Assumptions can be made on what species is present due to observed visual characteristics along with habitat use, or the bats can be identified to the species level with the use of a bat echolocation detector such as an “Anabat” unit. Potential roosting features found during the survey shall be flagged or marked.

If no roosting sites or bats are found, a letter report confirming absence shall be prepared and submitted to King City and no further mitigation is required.

If bats or roosting sites are found, bats shall not be disturbed without specific notice to and consultation with CDFW.

If bats are found roosting outside of the nursery season (May 1 through October 1), CDFW shall be consulted prior to any eviction or other action. If avoidance or postponement is not feasible, a Bat Eviction Plan will be submitted to CDFW for written approval prior to project implementation. A request to evict bats from a roost includes details for excluding bats from the roost site and monitoring to ensure that all bats have exited the roost prior to the start of activity and are unable to re-enter the roost until activity is completed. Any bat eviction shall be timed to avoid lactation and young-rearing. If bats are found roosting during the nursery season, they shall be monitored to determine if the roost site is a maternal roost. This could occur by either visual inspection of the roost bat pups, if possible, or by monitoring the roost after the adults leave for the night to listen for bat pups. Because bat pups cannot leave the roost until they are mature enough, eviction of a maternal roost cannot occur during the nursery season. Therefore, if a maternal roost is present, a 50-foot buffer zone (or different size if determined in consultation with the CDFW) shall be established around the roosting site within which no construction activities including tree removal or structure disturbance shall occur until after the nursery season.
(APPLICABLE TO CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005, LP CASE NO. L21-000-001, SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001)

62. Parcel Map Case No. PM21-000001: No use, including construction, may commence under any of the Approvals until recordation of the Final Map for Parcel Map Case No PM21-000001 with the County of Monterey.

63. (APPLICABLE TO CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005, LP CASE NO. L21-000-001, SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001)

64. Fair Share Contribution: The applicant shall pay their fair share contribution of

18.9% of the cost for a traffic improvement at the Franciscan Way and Broadway Street intersection. Payment shall be due concurrent with the issuance of a building permit and consistent with City policy.

62. (APPLICABLE TO CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091)

GROCERY OUTLET
1023 BROADWAY STREET
CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005; LP CASE NO. L21-000-001; SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MARCH 15, 2022
PAGE 26 OF 26
01222.0005/783425.1
(APPLICABLE TO CUP CASE NO. CUP-210-091, ARC CASE NO. P21-000-005, LP CASE NO. L21-000-001, SP CASE NO. SN2-100-001)
(CUP/AR/LP/SP)
Conditional Use Permit/Architectural Review/Landscaping Permit/Monument Sign Permit Condition Agreement:

The conditional use permit is not valid until all Conditions of Approval (“COA”) imposed by the Planning Commission, as revised and updated by the City Council on appeal, are signed for and agreed to by the applicant.

I have received a copy of the Project COAs and agree with them. I understand that if I do not abide by them the Planning Commission has the authority to revoke my conditional use permit, pursuant to the Municipal Code or as otherwise authorized by law. (Reference Municipal Code §17.64.040.).

Applicant Signature: _____________________________ Date: __________________ April 12, 2022
Sent by electronic mail1
City Council
City of King
212 South Vanderhurst Avenue
King City, CA 93930
Re: Appeal of Planning Commission approval of Grocery Outlet project at 1023 Broadway Street and Environmental Determination (CUP-210-091 and Related Entitlements) Dear Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council:

I am writing on of behalf of the Best Development Group, LLC (Best), the applicant for the proposed Grocery Outlet project (Project) that would be located at 1023 Broadway Street.

More specifically, I am responding to the above-referenced appeal of the King City Planning Commission’s March 15th actions approving the Project. This appeal was filed on March 30th by Efrain M. Aguilera on behalf of the United Food & Commercial Workers Union (UFCW).

The appeal contends that the Planning Commission violated the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.) (CEQA) by approving the Project based on the so-called Class 32 categorical exemption. The appeal also asserts that the City should prepare a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) “before any permits are approved.” For the reasons discussed below, and as further set forth in the three expert letters attached hereto, the UFCW’s appeal has no merit. The Planning Commission was on very solid legal ground in relying on the Class 32 exemption, the evidentiary bases of which are extremely well documented. This abundant evidence is set forth in the Environmental Assessment (EA) prepared for the Project and is cited in Resolution 22-306, by which the Planning Commission approved the Project.
1 See first five “cc’s” on page 17.

James G. Moose
[email protected]
Exhibit 7
City Council
City of King
April 12, 2022

Page 2 ends

King City City CouncilApril 18, 2022

King City City Council
April 18, 2022