Laguna Hills City Council
September 10, 2024

Scale
Job No.

Date

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
Laguna Hills, CA
2022-877
14 0 10’ 20’ 2024-06-18

PROPOSED OVERALL LANDSCAPE SITE PLAN
1” = 10’-0”
Conditional Use Permit / Site Development Permit #0110-2022( Ralphs)

ALISO EQUITIES, LTD
Scale
Job No.

Date

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
Laguna Hills, CA
2022-877
L03
0 10’ 20’ 2024-05-10
1"=10'-0"
Conditional Use Permit / Site Development Permit #0110-2022( Ralphs)

PROPOSED OVERALL LANDSCAPE SITE PLAN
1” = 40’

KEYNOTE LEGEND
1 PROPERTY LINE
2 EXISTING LANDSCAPING TO REMAIN - TYPICAL
3 EXISTING PUBLIC SIDEWALK TO REMAIN - TYPICAL
4 EXISTING MONUMENT SIGN TO REMAIN - PROTECT IN-PLACE
5 EXISTING RETAINING WALL AT TRANSFORMER TO REMAIN -

PROTECT IN-PLACE
6 EXISTING ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMER AND PAD TO REMAIN -

PROTECT IN-PLACE
7 EXISTING LIGHT POST TO REMAIN - PROTECT IN-PLACE
8 PROPOSED CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE RAMP PER CIVIL
9 PROPOSED PARKING STALLS PER CIVIL - TYPICAL
10 PROPOSED MONUMENT SIGNAGE PER OTHER
11 PROPOSED PLANTING AREA - REFER TO PLANTING PLAN FOR TREE

AND SHRUB INFORMATION
12 EXISTING PARKING STALLS TO REMAIN - PROTECT IN-PLACE 13 EXISTING CURB TO REMAIN - PROTECT IN-PLACE
14 EXISTING PUBLIC BENCH AT BUS STOP TO REMAIN -

PROTECT IN-PLACE
15 PROPOSED VENT RISER PER CIVIL
16 IRRIGATION DESIGN NOTES

THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM WILL BE A FULLY AUTOMATIC UNDERGROUND SYSTEM. BACKFLOW PREVENTION DEVICES WILL BE INSTALLED TO MEET APPLICABLE CODES. THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM WILL BE DESIGNED AND

CONSTRUCTED TO BE AS EFFICIENT IN TERMS OF WATER USAGE AS POSSIBLE. WATER CONSERVATION PRODUCTS (HIGH EFFICIENCY / LOW

PRECIPITATION) AND AN EVAPOTRANSPIRATION (ET) WEATHER BASED CONTROL SYSTEM WILL BE INCORPORATED INTO THE SYSTEM DESIGN.

PLANTING DESIGN NOTES

THE SELECTION OF PLANT MATERIAL IS BASED ON CULTURAL, AESTHETIC, AND MAINTENANCE CONSIDERATIONS. ALL PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE

PREPARED WITH APPROPRIATE SOIL AMENDMENTS, FERTILIZERS, AND

APPROPRIATE SUPPLEMENTS BASED UPON A SOILS REPORT FROM AN AGRICULTURAL SUITABILITY SOIL SAMPLE TAKEN FROM THE SITE. GROUND

COVERS OR BARK MULCH SHALL FILL IN BETWEEN THE SHRUBS TO SHIELD THE SOIL FROM THE SUN, EVAPOTRANSPORATION AND RUN-OFF. ALL THE FLOWER AND SHRUB BEDS SHALL BE MULCHED TO A 3” DEPTH TO HELP

CONSERVE WATER, LOWER THE SOIL TEMPERATURE AND REDUCE WEED GROWTH. THE SHRUBS SHALL BE ALLOWED TO GROW IN THEIR NATURAL FORMS. ALL LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS SHALL FOLLOW THE CITY OF LAGUNA HILLS GUIDELINES.

GENERAL DESIGN NOTES

1. FINAL LANDSCAPE PLANS SHALL ACCURATELY SHOW PLACEMENT OF TREES, SHRUBS, AND GROUNDCOVERS.

2. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT SHALL BE AWARE OF UTILITY, SEWER, STORM

DRAIN EASEMENT AND PLACE PLANTING LOCATIONS ACCORDINGLY TO MEET CITY OF LAGUNA HILLS REQUIREMENTS.

3. ALL REQUIRED LANDSCAPE AREAS (INCLUDING PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY) SHALL BE MAINTAINED BY OWNER. THE LANDSCAPE AREAS SHALL BE MAINTAINED PER CITY OF LAGUNA HILLS REQUIREMENTS.

4. ALL IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, INCLUDING

STREET TREES, SHALL BE INSTALLED PER THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PLANS.

ALICIA PARKWAY

PASEO DE VALENCIA

PROPOSED GAS STATION
3 2

LIMIT OF WORK

LIMIT OF WORK
8 1
7 9
11 12
2 13
13 14
6 5
1 4
7 8
10 4
15 ALISO EQUITIES,
LTD

PROJECT SUMMARY
PROJECT SITE AREA 31,065 S.F. (.71 AC)
PROPOSED SOFTSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS 6,278 SF
PROPOSED HARDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS 40,823.45
LANDSCAPE COVERAGE 20.2%

Scale
Job No.

Date

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
Laguna Hills, CA
2022-877
15 0 10’ 20’ 2024-06-18

LANDSCAPE PLANTING PLAN
1” = 10’-0”
Conditional Use Permit / Site Development Permit #0110-2022( Ralphs)

ALISO EQUITIES, LTD
Scale
Job No.

Date

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
Laguna Hills, CA
2022-877
L04
0 10’ 20’ 2024-05-10
1"=10'-0"
Conditional Use Permit / Site Development Permit #0110-2022( Ralphs)

LANDSCAPE PLANTING PLAN

ALICIA PARKWAY

PASEO DE VALENCIA

TREE LEGEND

SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME
COMMON NAME SIZE QTY. WUCOLS NOTES

CUPANIOPSIS

ANACARDIOIDES

CARROTWOOD
24” BOX 8 M STANDARDS
EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN - 8 - PROTECT IN
PLACE

EXISTING PALM TREES TO
REMAIN - 2 - PROTECT IN PLACE

SHRUB LEGEND
SYM. BOTANICAL NAME
COMMON NAME SIZE QTY. WUCOLS NOTES
CARISA GRANDIFLORA ‘GREEN CARPET’
NATAL PLUM 1 GAL. 469 L @ 30” O.C.

CISTUS 'BENNETT'S WHITE'
BENNETT'S WHITE ROCKROSE 5 GAL. 4 L PER PLAN

DIETES BICOLOR
YELLOW DAYLILY 5 GAL. 300 L PER PLAN

LIGUSTRUM JAPONICUM 'TEXANUM'
WAXLEAF PRIVET 15 GAL. 101 M
HEDGE
@ 30"
O.C.

RHAPHIOLEPIS INDICA ‘CLARA’
INDIAN HAWTHORN 15 GAL. 87 L PER PLAN

SENECIO SERPENS
BLUE CHALKSTICKS 1 GAL. 171 L @ 18” O.C.

PROPOSED GAS STATION

PLANTING NOTE

THE TREE AND SHRUB PALETTE ABOVE IS BASED ON PRECEDENCE OF PLANT MATERIAL THAT FLOURISHES IN THIS CLIMATE ZONE, AND REFERENCES THE PALETTE THAT EXISTS ON SITE.

LIMIT OF WORK

LIMIT OF WORK

ALISO EQUITIES,
LTD

Scale
Job No.

Date

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
Laguna Hills, CA
2022-877
16 0 10’ 20’ 2024-06-18

HYDROZONE PLAN & WATER CALCULATIONS
1” = 10’-0”
Conditional Use Permit / Site Development Permit #0110-2022( Ralphs)

ALISO EQUITIES, LTD
Scale
Job No.

Date

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
Laguna Hills, CA
2022-877
L05
0 10’ 20’ 2024-05-10
1"=10'-0"
Conditional Use Permit / Site Development Permit #0110-2022( Ralphs)

HYDROZONE PLAN AND WATER CALCULATIONS

ALICIA PARKWAY

PASEO DE VALENCIA

PROPOSED GAS STATION

LIMIT OF WORK

LIMIT OF WORK

ALISO EQUITIES,
LTD
Select your city:

Laguna
Woods Project name or address:

Reference Evapotranspiration (ETo): 48.0 Landscape Area Sector Type:

Hydrozone #/Planting
Description Location
Plant Factor
(PF) Irrigation Method
Irrigation
Efficiency
(IE)
ETAF
(PF/IE)
Landscape
Area (sq-ft) ETAF x Area
Estimated Total
Water Use (ETWU)
1 Low water use plant Front 0.2 Drip emitter 0.8 0.25 5,097 1259 37,492 2 Medium water use plant Front 0.5 Drip emitter 0.8 0.62 986 609 18,132 3 Lawn Other 0.8 Spray nozzles 0.7 1.13 136 153 4,565
4 --- --- --- --- ---
5 --- --- --- --- ---
6 --- --- --- --- ---
7 --- 0 --- --- ---
8 --- --- --- --- ---
9 --- --- --- --- ---
10 --- --- --- --- ---
11 --- --- --- --- ---
12 --- --- --- --- ---
13 --- --- --- --- ---
14 --- --- --- --- ---
15 --- --- --- --- ---
Average Total Total
add dropdown self depcription location 0.32 6,219 2020
Average ETAF for Regular Landscape Areas: In Compliance SLA-1 Select Select
SLA-2 --- ---
SLA-3 --- ---
SLA-4 --- ---
SLA-5 --- ---
Totals - -
Total Landscape Area 6,219
Sitewide ETAF 0.32
ETWU Total 60,190
Maximum Allowed Water Allowance (MAWA) 83,372
* If muliple points of connection worksheets are submitted either 1) each must be in compliance or 2) a worksheet for the total project area must be in compliance.

WATER EFFICIENCT LANDSCAPE WORKSHEET
Š‹•™‘”•Š‡‡–‹•ˆ‹ŽŽ‡†‘—–„›–Š‡’”‘Œ‡
–ƒ’’Ž‹
ƒ–ƒ†‹–‹•ƒ”‡“—‹”‡†‹–‡‘ˆ–Š‡ƒ†•
ƒ’‡‘
—‡–ƒ–‹‘ƒ
ƒ‰‡Ǥ
Water Efficienct Landscape Worksheet
Fill in all colored cells.

Special Landscape Area
Regular Landscpae Area
Non-Residential
‡™‘”•Š‡‡–
‘’Ž‡–‡ˆ‘”’‘‹–‘ˆ
‘‡
–‹‘ȋ™ƒ–‡”‡–‡”ȌǤȗ
Alicia Town Center
S

IRRIGATION HYDROZONE LEGEND

SYMBOL HYDROZONE AREA WATER
USAGE
PLANT
FACTOR
HYDROZONE 1
DRIP IRRIGATION 5,097 S.F. L 0.2
HYDROZONE 2
DRIP IRRIGATION 986 S.F. M 0.5
HYDROZONE 3

SPRAY NOZZLES
(EXISTING LAWN)
136 S.F. H 0.8
Scale
Job No.

Date

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
Laguna Hills, CA
2022-877
L05
0 10’ 20’ 2024-05-10
1"=10'-0"
Conditional Use Permit / Site Development Permit #0110-2022( Ralphs)

HYDROZONE PLAN AND WATER CALCULATIONS

ALICIA PARKWAY

PASEO DE VALENCIA

PROPOSED GAS STATION

LIMIT OF WORK

LIMIT OF WORK

ALISO EQUITIES,
LTD
Select your city:

Laguna
Woods Project name or address:

Reference Evapotranspiration (ETo): 48.0 Landscape Area Sector Type:

Hydrozone #/Planting
Description Location
Plant Factor
(PF) Irrigation Method
Irrigation
Efficiency
(IE)
ETAF
(PF/IE)
Landscape
Area (sq-ft) ETAF x Area
Estimated Total
Water Use (ETWU)
1 Low water use plant Front 0.2 Drip emitter 0.8 0.25 5,097 1259 37,492 2 Medium water use plant Front 0.5 Drip emitter 0.8 0.62 986 609 18,132 3 Lawn Other 0.8 Spray nozzles 0.7 1.13 136 153 4,565
4 --- --- --- --- ---
5 --- --- --- --- ---
6 --- --- --- --- ---
7 --- 0 --- --- ---
8 --- --- --- --- ---
9 --- --- --- --- ---
10 --- --- --- --- ---
11 --- --- --- --- ---
12 --- --- --- --- ---
13 --- --- --- --- ---
14 --- --- --- --- ---
15 --- --- --- --- ---
Average Total Total
add dropdown self depcription location 0.32 6,219 2020
Average ETAF for Regular Landscape Areas: In Compliance SLA-1 Select Select
SLA-2 --- ---
SLA-3 --- ---
SLA-4 --- ---
SLA-5 --- ---
Totals - -
Total Landscape Area 6,219
Sitewide ETAF 0.32
ETWU Total 60,190
Maximum Allowed Water Allowance (MAWA) 83,372
* If muliple points of connection worksheets are submitted either 1) each must be in compliance or 2) a worksheet for the total project area must be in compliance.

WATER EFFICIENCT LANDSCAPE WORKSHEET
Š‹•™‘”•Š‡‡–‹•ˆ‹ŽŽ‡†‘—–„›–Š‡’”‘Œ‡
–ƒ’’Ž‹
ƒ–ƒ†‹–‹•ƒ”‡“—‹”‡†‹–‡‘ˆ–Š‡ƒ†•
ƒ’‡‘
—‡–ƒ–‹‘ƒ
ƒ‰‡Ǥ
Water Efficienct Landscape Worksheet
Fill in all colored cells.

Special Landscape Area
Regular Landscpae Area
Non-Residential
‡™‘”•Š‡‡–
‘’Ž‡–‡ˆ‘”’‘‹–‘ˆ
‘‡
–‹‘ȋ™ƒ–‡”‡–‡”ȌǤȗ
Alicia Town Center
S
DRIP IRRIGATION 5,097 S.F. L 0.2
HYDROZONE 2
DRIP IRRIGATION 986 S.F. M 0.5
HYDROZONE 3

SPRAY NOZZLES
(EXISTING LAWN)
136 S.F. H 0.8
Scale
Job No.

Date

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
Laguna Hills, CA
2022-877
L05
0 10’ 20’ 2024-05-10
1"=10'-0"
Conditional Use Permit / Site Development Permit #0110-2022( Ralphs)

HYDROZONE PLAN AND WATER CALCULATIONS

ALICIA PARKWAY

PASEO DE VALENCIA

PROPOSED GAS STATION

LIMIT OF WORK

LIMIT OF WORK

ALISO EQUITIES,
LTD
Select your city:

Laguna
Woods Project name or address:

Reference Evapotranspiration (ETo): 48.0 Landscape Area Sector Type:

Hydrozone #/Planting
Description Location
Plant Factor
(PF) Irrigation Method
Irrigation
Efficiency
(IE)
ETAF
(PF/IE)
Landscape
Area (sq-ft) ETAF x Area
Estimated Total
Water Use (ETWU)
1 Low water use plant Front 0.2 Drip emitter 0.8 0.25 5,097 1259 37,492 2 Medium water use plant Front 0.5 Drip emitter 0.8 0.62 986 609 18,132 3 Lawn Other 0.8 Spray nozzles 0.7 1.13 136 153 4,565
4 --- --- --- --- ---
5 --- --- --- --- ---
6 --- --- --- --- ---
7 --- 0 --- --- ---
8 --- --- --- --- ---
9 --- --- --- --- ---
10 --- --- --- --- ---
11 --- --- --- --- ---
12 --- --- --- --- ---
13 --- --- --- --- ---
14 --- --- --- --- ---
15 --- --- --- --- ---
Average Total Total
add dropdown self depcription location 0.32 6,219 2020
Average ETAF for Regular Landscape Areas: In Compliance SLA-1 Select Select
SLA-2 --- ---
SLA-3 --- ---
SLA-4 --- ---
SLA-5 --- ---
Totals - -
Total Landscape Area 6,219
Sitewide ETAF 0.32
ETWU Total 60,190
Maximum Allowed Water Allowance (MAWA) 83,372
* If muliple points of connection worksheets are submitted either 1) each must be in compliance or 2) a worksheet for the total project area must be in compliance.

WATER EFFICIENCT LANDSCAPE WORKSHEET
Š‹•™‘”•Š‡‡–‹•ˆ‹ŽŽ‡†‘—–„›–Š‡’”‘Œ‡
–ƒ’’Ž‹
ƒ–ƒ†‹–‹•ƒ”‡“—‹”‡†‹–‡‘ˆ–Š‡ƒ†•
ƒ’‡‘
—‡–ƒ–‹‘ƒ
ƒ‰‡Ǥ
Water Efficienct Landscape Worksheet
Fill in all colored cells.

Special Landscape Area
Regular Landscpae Area
Non-Residential
‡™‘”•Š‡‡–
‘’Ž‡–‡ˆ‘”’‘‹–‘ˆ
‘‡
–‹‘ȋ™ƒ–‡”‡–‡”ȌǤȗ
Alicia Town Center
S

DRIP IRRIGATION
HYDROZONE 2
DRIP IRRIGATION 986 S.F. M 0.5
HYDROZONE 3

SPRAY NOZZLES
(EXISTING LAWN)
136 S.F. H 0.8
Scale
Job No.

Date

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
Laguna Hills, CA
2022-877
L05
0 10’ 20’ 2024-05-10
1"=10'-0"
Conditional Use Permit / Site Development Permit #0110-2022( Ralphs)

HYDROZONE PLAN AND WATER CALCULATIONS

ALICIA PARKWAY

PASEO DE VALENCIA

PROPOSED GAS STATION

LIMIT OF WORK

LIMIT OF WORK

ALISO EQUITIES,
LTD
Select your city:

Laguna
Woods Project name or address:

Reference Evapotranspiration (ETo): 48.0 Landscape Area Sector Type:

Hydrozone #/Planting
Description Location
Plant Factor
(PF) Irrigation Method
Irrigation
Efficiency
(IE)
ETAF
(PF/IE)
Landscape
Area (sq-ft) ETAF x Area
Estimated Total
Water Use (ETWU)
1 Low water use plant Front 0.2 Drip emitter 0.8 0.25 5,097 1259 37,492 2 Medium water use plant Front 0.5 Drip emitter 0.8 0.62 986 609 18,132 3 Lawn Other 0.8 Spray nozzles 0.7 1.13 136 153 4,565
4 --- --- --- --- ---
5 --- --- --- --- ---
6 --- --- --- --- ---
7 --- 0 --- --- ---
8 --- --- --- --- ---
9 --- --- --- --- ---
10 --- --- --- --- ---
11 --- --- --- --- ---
12 --- --- --- --- ---
13 --- --- --- --- ---
14 --- --- --- --- ---
15 --- --- --- --- ---
Average Total Total
add dropdown self depcription location 0.32 6,219 2020
Average ETAF for Regular Landscape Areas: In Compliance SLA-1 Select Select
SLA-2 --- ---
SLA-3 --- ---
SLA-4 --- ---
SLA-5 --- ---
Totals - -
Total Landscape Area 6,219
Sitewide ETAF 0.32
ETWU Total 60,190
Maximum Allowed Water Allowance (MAWA) 83,372
* If muliple points of connection worksheets are submitted either 1) each must be in compliance or 2) a worksheet for the total project area must be in compliance.

WATER EFFICIENCT LANDSCAPE WORKSHEET
Š‹•™‘”•Š‡‡–‹•ˆ‹ŽŽ‡†‘—–„›–Š‡’”‘Œ‡
–ƒ’’Ž‹
ƒ–ƒ†‹–‹•ƒ”‡“—‹”‡†‹–‡‘ˆ–Š‡ƒ†•
ƒ’‡‘
—‡–ƒ–‹‘ƒ
ƒ‰‡Ǥ
Water Efficienct Landscape Worksheet
Fill in all colored cells.

Special Landscape Area
Regular Landscpae Area
Non-Residential
‡™‘”•Š‡‡–
‘’Ž‡–‡ˆ‘”’‘‹–‘ˆ
‘‡
–‹‘ȋ™ƒ–‡”‡–‡”ȌǤȗ
Alicia Town Center
S
DRIP IRRIGATION 986 S.F. M 0.5
HYDROZONE 3

SPRAY NOZZLES
(EXISTING LAWN)
136 S.F. H 0.8
Scale
Job No.

Date

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
Laguna Hills, CA
2022-877
L05
0 10’ 20’ 2024-05-10
1"=10'-0"
Conditional Use Permit / Site Development Permit #0110-2022( Ralphs)

HYDROZONE PLAN AND WATER CALCULATIONS

ALICIA PARKWAY

PASEO DE VALENCIA

PROPOSED GAS STATION

LIMIT OF WORK

LIMIT OF WORK

ALISO EQUITIES,
LTD
Select your city:

Laguna
Woods Project name or address:

Reference Evapotranspiration (ETo): 48.0 Landscape Area Sector Type:

Hydrozone #/Planting
Description Location
Plant Factor
(PF) Irrigation Method
Irrigation
Efficiency
(IE)
ETAF
(PF/IE)
Landscape
Area (sq-ft) ETAF x Area
Estimated Total
Water Use (ETWU)
1 Low water use plant Front 0.2 Drip emitter 0.8 0.25 5,097 1259 37,492 2 Medium water use plant Front 0.5 Drip emitter 0.8 0.62 986 609 18,132 3 Lawn Other 0.8 Spray nozzles 0.7 1.13 136 153 4,565
4 --- --- --- --- ---
5 --- --- --- --- ---
6 --- --- --- --- ---
7 --- 0 --- --- ---
8 --- --- --- --- ---
9 --- --- --- --- ---
10 --- --- --- --- ---
11 --- --- --- --- ---
12 --- --- --- --- ---
13 --- --- --- --- ---
14 --- --- --- --- ---
15 --- --- --- --- ---
Average Total Total
add dropdown self depcription location 0.32 6,219 2020
Average ETAF for Regular Landscape Areas: In Compliance SLA-1 Select Select
SLA-2 --- ---
SLA-3 --- ---
SLA-4 --- ---
SLA-5 --- ---
Totals - -
Total Landscape Area 6,219
Sitewide ETAF 0.32
ETWU Total 60,190
Maximum Allowed Water Allowance (MAWA) 83,372
* If muliple points of connection worksheets are submitted either 1) each must be in compliance or 2) a worksheet for the total project area must be in compliance.

WATER EFFICIENCT LANDSCAPE WORKSHEET
Š‹•™‘”•Š‡‡–‹•ˆ‹ŽŽ‡†‘—–„›–Š‡’”‘Œ‡
–ƒ’’Ž‹
ƒ–ƒ†‹–‹•ƒ”‡“—‹”‡†‹–‡‘ˆ–Š‡ƒ†•
ƒ’‡‘
—‡–ƒ–‹‘ƒ
ƒ‰‡Ǥ
Water Efficienct Landscape Worksheet
Fill in all colored cells.

Special Landscape Area
Regular Landscpae Area
Non-Residential
‡™‘”•Š‡‡–
‘’Ž‡–‡ˆ‘”’‘‹–‘ˆ
‘‡
–‹‘ȋ™ƒ–‡”‡–‡”ȌǤȗ
Alicia Town Center
S

IRRIGATION HYDROZONE LEGEND

SYMBOL HYDROZONE AREA WATER
USAGE
PLANT
FACTOR
HYDROZONE 1
DRIP IRRIGATION 5,097 S.F. L 0.2
HYDROZONE 2
DRIP IRRIGATION 986 S.F. M 0.5
HYDROZONE 3

SPRAY NOZZLES
(EXISTING LAWN)
136 S.F. H 0.8
Scale
Job No.

Date

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
Laguna Hills, CA
2022-877
L05
0 10’ 20’ 2024-05-10
1"=10'-0"
Conditional Use Permit / Site Development Permit #0110-2022( Ralphs)

HYDROZONE PLAN AND WATER CALCULATIONS

ALICIA PARKWAY

PASEO DE VALENCIA

PROPOSED GAS STATION

LIMIT OF WORK

LIMIT OF WORK

ALISO EQUITIES,
LTD
Select your city:

Laguna
Woods Project name or address:

Reference Evapotranspiration (ETo): 48.0 Landscape Area Sector Type:

Hydrozone #/Planting
Description Location
Plant Factor
(PF) Irrigation Method
Irrigation
Efficiency
(IE)
ETAF
(PF/IE)
Landscape
Area (sq-ft) ETAF x Area
Estimated Total
Water Use (ETWU)
1 Low water use plant Front 0.2 Drip emitter 0.8 0.25 5,097 1259 37,492 2 Medium water use plant Front 0.5 Drip emitter 0.8 0.62 986 609 18,132 3 Lawn Other 0.8 Spray nozzles 0.7 1.13 136 153 4,565
4 --- --- --- --- ---
5 --- --- --- --- ---
6 --- --- --- --- ---
7 --- 0 --- --- ---
8 --- --- --- --- ---
9 --- --- --- --- ---
10 --- --- --- --- ---
11 --- --- --- --- ---
12 --- --- --- --- ---
13 --- --- --- --- ---
14 --- --- --- --- ---
15 --- --- --- --- ---
Average Total Total
add dropdown self depcription location 0.32 6,219 2020
Average ETAF for Regular Landscape Areas: In Compliance SLA-1 Select Select
SLA-2 --- ---
SLA-3 --- ---
SLA-4 --- ---
SLA-5 --- ---
Totals - -
Total Landscape Area 6,219
Sitewide ETAF 0.32
ETWU Total 60,190
Maximum Allowed Water Allowance (MAWA) 83,372
* If muliple points of connection worksheets are submitted either 1) each must be in compliance or 2) a worksheet for the total project area must be in compliance.

WATER EFFICIENCT LANDSCAPE WORKSHEET
Š‹•™‘”•Š‡‡–‹•ˆ‹ŽŽ‡†‘—–„›–Š‡’”‘Œ‡
–ƒ’’Ž‹
ƒ–ƒ†‹–‹•ƒ”‡“—‹”‡†‹–‡‘ˆ–Š‡ƒ†•
ƒ’‡‘
—‡–ƒ–‹‘ƒ
ƒ‰‡Ǥ
Water Efficienct Landscape Worksheet
Fill in all colored cells.

Special Landscape Area
Regular Landscpae Area
Non-Residential
‡™‘”•Š‡‡–
‘’Ž‡–‡ˆ‘”’‘‹–‘ˆ
‘‡
–‹‘ȋ™ƒ–‡”‡–‡”ȌǤȗ
Alicia Town Center
S
DRIP IRRIGATION 5,097 S.F. L 0.2
HYDROZONE 2
DRIP IRRIGATION 986 S.F. M 0.5
HYDROZONE 3

SPRAY NOZZLES
(EXISTING LAWN)
136 S.F. H 0.8
Scale
Job No.

Date

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
Laguna Hills, CA
2022-877
L05
0 10’ 20’ 2024-05-10
1"=10'-0"
Conditional Use Permit / Site Development Permit #0110-2022( Ralphs)

HYDROZONE PLAN AND WATER CALCULATIONS

ALICIA PARKWAY

PASEO DE VALENCIA

PROPOSED GAS STATION

LIMIT OF WORK

LIMIT OF WORK

ALISO EQUITIES,
LTD
Select your city:

Laguna
Woods Project name or address:

Reference Evapotranspiration (ETo): 48.0 Landscape Area Sector Type:

Hydrozone #/Planting
Description Location
Plant Factor
(PF) Irrigation Method
Irrigation
Efficiency
(IE)
ETAF
(PF/IE)
Landscape
Area (sq-ft) ETAF x Area
Estimated Total
Water Use (ETWU)
1 Low water use plant Front 0.2 Drip emitter 0.8 0.25 5,097 1259 37,492 2 Medium water use plant Front 0.5 Drip emitter 0.8 0.62 986 609 18,132 3 Lawn Other 0.8 Spray nozzles 0.7 1.13 136 153 4,565
4 --- --- --- --- ---
5 --- --- --- --- ---
6 --- --- --- --- ---
7 --- 0 --- --- ---
8 --- --- --- --- ---
9 --- --- --- --- ---
10 --- --- --- --- ---
11 --- --- --- --- ---
12 --- --- --- --- ---
13 --- --- --- --- ---
14 --- --- --- --- ---
15 --- --- --- --- ---
Average Total Total
add dropdown self depcription location 0.32 6,219 2020
Average ETAF for Regular Landscape Areas: In Compliance SLA-1 Select Select
SLA-2 --- ---
SLA-3 --- ---
SLA-4 --- ---
SLA-5 --- ---
Totals - -
Total Landscape Area 6,219
Sitewide ETAF 0.32
ETWU Total 60,190
Maximum Allowed Water Allowance (MAWA) 83,372
* If muliple points of connection worksheets are submitted either 1) each must be in compliance or 2) a worksheet for the total project area must be in compliance.

WATER EFFICIENCT LANDSCAPE WORKSHEET
Š‹•™‘”•Š‡‡–‹•ˆ‹ŽŽ‡†‘—–„›–Š‡’”‘Œ‡
–ƒ’’Ž‹
ƒ–ƒ†‹–‹•ƒ”‡“—‹”‡†‹–‡‘ˆ–Š‡ƒ†•
ƒ’‡‘
—‡–ƒ–‹‘ƒ
ƒ‰‡Ǥ
Water Efficienct Landscape Worksheet
Fill in all colored cells.

Special Landscape Area
Regular Landscpae Area
Non-Residential
‡™‘”•Š‡‡–
‘’Ž‡–‡ˆ‘”’‘‹–‘ˆ
‘‡
–‹‘ȋ™ƒ–‡”‡–‡”ȌǤȗ
Alicia Town Center
S

DRIP IRRIGATION
HYDROZONE 2
DRIP IRRIGATION 986 S.F. M 0.5
HYDROZONE 3

SPRAY NOZZLES
(EXISTING LAWN)
136 S.F. H 0.8

Scale
Job No.

Date

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
Laguna Hills, CA
2022-877
17 0 10’ 20’ 2024-06-18

TREE CANOPY / SHADE PLAN
1” = 10’-0”
Conditional Use Permit / Site Development Permit #0110-2022( Ralphs)

ALISO EQUITIES, LTD
Scale
Job No.

Date

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
Laguna Hills, CA
2022-877
L06
0 10’ 20’ 2024-05-10
1"=10'-0"
Conditional Use Permit / Site Development Permit #0110-2022( Ralphs)

TREE CANOPY/SHADE PLAN
S

TREE SHADING LEGEND
TOTAL PARKING AREA AREA (3,769 S.F.)
TOTAL SHADE PROVIDED (1,147 S.F.)

PERCENTAGE OF COVERAGE
NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS 22
PERCENTAGE OF SHADE REQUIRED 20%
PERCENTAGE OF SHADE PROVIDED 37%
* TREES SHOWN AT 15 YEAR GROWTH

ALICIA PARKWAY

PASEO DE VALENCIA

LIMIT OF WORK

LIMIT OF WORK

PROPOSED GAS STATION

ALISO EQUITIES,
LTD

Scale
Job No.

Date

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
Laguna Hills, CA
2022-877
18 2024-06-18

PLANTING IMAGERY
N.T.S.

Conditional Use Permit / Site Development Permit #0110-2022( Ralphs)

ALISO EQUITIES, LTD
Scale
Job No.

Date

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
Laguna Hills, CA
2022-877
L06
2024-05-10
Conditional Use Permit / Site Development Permit #0110-2022( Ralphs) N/A

PLANTING IMAGERY & CERTIFICATION OF LANDSCAPE DESIGN

CUPANIOPSIS ANACARDIOIDES
(CARROTWOOD TREE)
HEIGHT: 40’
SPREAD: 30’
WUCOLS: M

FULL SUN TO PART SHADE

TREE IMAGES SHRUB IMAGES
CARISSA MACROCARPA ‘GREEN CARPET’
(GREEN CARPET NATAL PLUM)
HEIGHT: 12” - 15”
SPREAD: 4’ - 5’
WUCOLS: L

DIETES BICOLOR
(YELLOW FORTNIGHT LILY)
HEIGHT: 2’
SPREAD: 1'
WUCOLS: M
RHAPHIOLEPIS INDICA ‘CLARA’
(INDIAN HAWTHORN CLARA)
HEIGHT: 4’ - 5’
SPREAD: 4’ - 5’
WUCOLS: M

CISTUS 'BENNETT'S WHITE'
(BENNETT'S WHITE ROCK ROSE)
HEIGHT: 6’
SPREAD: 6’
WUCOLS: L

SENECIO SERPENS
(BLUE CHALKSTICKS)
HEIGHT: 1’
SPREAD: 3’
WUCOLS: L

LIGUSTRUM JAPONICUM 'TEXANUM'
(WAXLEAF PRIVET)
HEIGHT: 4’ - 5’
SPREAD: 4’ - 5’
WUCOLS: M

APPENDIX B

ALISO EQUITIES,
LTD
23 Appendix B: Certification of Landscape Design

CERTIFICATION OF LANDSCAPE DESIGN
I hereby certify that:
(1) I am a professional appropriately licensed in the State of California to provide professional landscape design services.
(2) The landscape design and water use calculations for the property located at

(provide street address or parcel number(s)) were prepared by me or under my supervision. (3) The landscape design and water use calculations for the identified property comply with the requirements of the City of Anaheim Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance (Chapter 10.19 of Title 10 of Anaheim Municipal Code) and the Guidelines for Implementation of the City of Anaheim Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance.
(4) The information I have provided in this Certificate of Landscape Design is true and correct and is hereby submitted in compliance with the Guidelines for Implementation of the City of Anaheim Landscape Water Efficiency Ordinance.

Print Name Date

Signature License Number
Address
Telephone E-mail Address
Landscape Design Professional’s Stamp
(If applicable)
25539 PASEO DE VALENCIA, LAGUNA HILLS, CA 92653
DIEGO F. ALESSI 5/9/24
4201
144 N. ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866
714-869-9860 [email protected]

Scale
Job No.

Date

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
Laguna Hills, CA
2022-877
19 0 2024-06-18

SITE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN
Conditional Use Permit / Site Development Permit #0110-2022( Ralphs) 10’ 20’
1” = 10’-0”

ALISO EQUITIES, LTD

Scale
Job No.

Date

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
Laguna Hills, CA
2022-877
20 0 20’ 40’ 2024-06-18

PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN
Conditional Use Permit / Site Development Permit #0110-2022( Ralphs) BY
DATE

AS SHOWN
REVISIONS No. DATE

SCALEDESIGNED BYDRAWN BYCHECKED BY

KHA PROJECT
©

SHEET NUMBER
194307001
5/3/2024
RA
MJ
JG

ALICIA TOWN CENTER

RALPH'S FUEL
25539 PASEO DE VALENCIA DR,
LAGUNA HILLS, CA 92653
NORTH

GRADING AND DRAINAGE NOTES

GRADING PLAN
Know what's below.

Call before you dig.

GRADING LEGEND
2 BY
DATE

AS SHOWN
REVISIONS No. DATE

SCALEDESIGNED BYDRAWN BYCHECKED BY

KHA PROJECT
©

SHEET NUMBER
194307001
5/3/2024
RA
MJ
JG

ALICIA TOWN CENTER

RALPH'S FUEL
25539 PASEO DE VALENCIA DR,
LAGUNA HILLS, CA 92653
NORTH

GRADING AND DRAINAGE NOTES

GRADING PLAN
Know what's below.

Call before you dig.

GRADING LEGEND
2 DATE

AS SHOWN
CHECKED BY No.

SCALE

DESIGNED BY

DRAWN BY

KHA PROJECT
©

SHEET NUMBER
194307001
5/3/2024
RA
MJ
JG

ALICIA TOWN CENTER

RALPH'S FUEL
25539 PASEO DE VALENCIA DR,
LAGUNA HILLS, CA 92653 NORTH

GRADING AND DRAINAGE NOTES
GRADING PLAN 2
1” = 20’-0”

ALISO EQUITIES, LTD

Scale
Job No.

Date

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
Laguna Hills, CA
2022-877
21 2024-06-18

DRAINAGE DETAILS
Conditional Use Permit / Site Development Permit #0110-2022( Ralphs) DATE

AS SHOWN
CHECKED BY No.

SCALE

DESIGNED BY

DRAWN BY

KHA PROJECT
©

SHEET NUMBER
194307001
5/3/2024
RA
MJ
JG

ALICIA TOWN CENTER

RALPH'S FUEL
25539 PASEO DE VALENCIA DR,
LAGUNA HILLS, CA 92653 NORTH

GRADING AND DRAINAGE NOTES
GRADING PLAN 2
N.T.S.

BY
DATE

AS SHOWN
REVISIONS No. DATE

SCALEDESIGNED BYDRAWN BYCHECKED BY

KHA PROJECT
©

SHEET NUMBER
194307001
5/3/2024
RA
MJ
JG

ALICIA TOWN CENTER

RALPH'S FUEL
25539 PASEO DE VALENCIA DR,
LAGUNA HILLS, CA 92653
ALISO EQUITIES, LTD 3

Scale
Job No.

Date

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
Laguna Hills, CA
2022-877
22 0 20’ 40’ 2024-06-18

UTILITY PLAN
Conditional Use Permit / Site Development Permit #0110-2022( Ralphs) DATE

AS SHOWN
CHECKED BY No.

SCALE

DESIGNED BY

DRAWN BY

KHA PROJECT
©

SHEET NUMBER
194307001
5/3/2024
RA
MJ
JG

ALICIA TOWN CENTER

RALPH'S FUEL
25539 PASEO DE VALENCIA DR,
LAGUNA HILLS, CA 92653 NORTH

GRADING AND DRAINAGE NOTES
GRADING PLAN 2
1” = 20’-0” BY
DATE

AS SHOWN
REVISIONS No. DATE

SCALEDESIGNED BYDRAWN BYCHECKED BY

KHA PROJECT
©

SHEET NUMBER
194307001
5/3/2024
RA
MJ
JG

ALICIA TOWN CENTER

RALPH'S FUEL
25539 PASEO DE VALENCIA DR,
LAGUNA HILLS, CA 92653
LEGEND

UTILITY PLAN
Know what's below.

Call before you dig.

NORTH
4 DOMESTIC WATER

OTHER UTILITY NOTES
SEWER

ALISO EQUITIES, LTD

RK19158
JN: 2776-2022-01
ALICIA TOWN CENTER RALPH’S FUEL CENTER

TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY
City of Laguna Hills, California
Prepared for:

Monique Lacher

ALISO EQUITIES, LTD
2901 W. Coast Highway, Suite 200
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Prepared by:

RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
1401 Dove Street, Ste. 540
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Justin Tucker, P.E.

Michael Torres, E.I.T.

April 22, 2024

Table of Contents

Section Page

1.0 Introduction.......................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 Purpose of Report & Study Objectives 1-1

1.2 Site Location & Project Description 1-1

1.3 Traffic Study Area & Analysis Scenarios 1-2

2.0 Analysis Methodology, Performance Criteria &
Thresholds of Improvement Requirement ............................................ 2-1

2.1 Signalized Intersection Peak Hour Level of Service Analysis Methodology 2-1

2.2 Unsignalized Intersection Peak Hour Level of Service Analysis Methodology 2-3

2.3 LOS Performance Criteria & Thresholds of Improvement Requirement 2-4

3.0 Circulation System & Existing Conditions............................................. 3-1

3.1 Existing Traffic Controls & Intersection Geometrics 3-1

3.2 Existing Traffic Volumes 3-1

4.0 Project Traffic Volumes......................................................................... 4-1

4.1 Project Traffic Conditions 4-1

4.1.1 Project Trip Generation 4-1

4.1.2 Project Trip Distribution & Assignment 4-2

4.1.3 Modal Split 4-2

4.1.4 Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 4-2

4.2 Background Traffic 4-2

4.2.1 Method of Projection 4-2

4.2.2 Cumulative Projects Traffic Volumes 4-3

4.3 Existing Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes 4-3

4.4 Opening Year (2025) Without Project Conditions Traffic Volumes 4-3

4.5 Opening Year (2025) With Project Conditions Traffic Volumes 4-3

5.0 Study Intersection Peak Hour LOS Analysis .......................................... 5-1

5.1 Existing Traffic Conditions Level of Service 5-1

5.2 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions Level of Service 5-1

5.3 Opening Year (2025) Without Project Traffic Conditions Level of Service 5-1

5.4 Opening Year (2025) With Project Traffic Conditions Level of Service 5-2

Table of Contents (Cont.)

Section Page

6.0 Gas Station Queuing Analysis............................................................... 6-1

7.0 CEQA Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis ........................................ 7-1

7.1 VMT Screening Step 3: Local Serving Land Use 7-1

8.0 Findings & Recommendations .............................................................. 8-1

8.1 Site Location & Project Description 8-1

8.2 Traffic Study Area & Analysis Scenarios 8-2

8.3 Project Trip Generation 8-2

8.4 Intersection Peak Hour LOS Analysis 8-2

8.5 Gas Station Queuing Analysis 8-2

8.6 CEQA Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis 8-3

List of Attachments

Exhibits
Location Map ........................................................................................................... 1-1 Site Plan ................................................................................................................... 1-2 Existing Lane Geometry and Traffic Controls.............................................................. 3-1 Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes............................................................................ 3-2 Project Trip Distribution Pattern ................................................................................ 4-1 Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes............................................................................. 4-2 Cumulative Projects Location Map............................................................................. 4-3 Cumulative Projects Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ......................................................... 4-4 Existing Plus Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ......................................................... 4-5 Opening Year (2025) Without Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes .............................. 4-6 Opening Year (2025) With Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes.................................... 4-7

List of Attachments (Cont.)

Tables
Intersection ICU Level of Service ................................................................................ 2-1 Intersection HCM Level of Service (Unsignalized Intersections) ................................... 2-2 ITE Trip Generation Rates.......................................................................................... 4-1 Proposed Project Trip Generation .............................................................................. 4-2 Cumulative Projects Trip Generation.......................................................................... 4-2 Study Intersection LOS Analysis Summary –
Existing & Existing Plus Project Conditions................................................................. 5-1 Study Intersection LOS Analysis Summary –
Opening Year (2025) Without & With Project Conditions .......................................... 5-2

List of Attachments (Cont.)

Appendices
Approved Scope of Work.......................................................................................... A Traffic Count Worksheets.......................................................................................... B Existing Peak Hour LOS Calculation Worksheets......................................................... C Existing Plus Project Peak Hour LOS Calculation Worksheets ...................................... D Opening Year (2025) Without Project Peak Hour LOS Calculation Worksheets............ E Opening Year (2025) With Project Peak Hour LOS Calculation Worksheets................. F Gas Station Queuing Count Worksheets.................................................................... G

1-1

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Purpose of Report & Study Objectives
The purpose of this traffic impact study is to evaluate the proposed Alicia Town Center Ralph’s Fuel Center (hereinafter referred to as “Project”) from a traffic and circulation standpoint and to determine whether the Project has a significant traffic impact.

This traffic study has been conducted pursuant to the City of Laguna Hills Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines under the California Environmental Quality Act and General Plan Development Review Traffic Study Guidelines, dated August 2021.

This study is prepared in accordance with the scope of work that has been approved by the City of Laguna Hills, which is contained in Appendix A.

1.2 Site Location & Project Description
The proposed project is located within the existing Alicia Town Center shopping center at the southeast corner of Alicia Parkway and Paseo de Valencia, in the City of Laguna Hills.

The project site is currently part of the existing Ralph’s parking lot and is bounded by Paseo De Valencia to the north, the Ralph’s shopping center to the south and east, and Alicia Parkway to the west.

The proposed project consists of a 10-vehicle fueling position (VFP) gas station (five dual sided pump islands). The project will require the removal of 39 parking spaces and will add 4 spaces (306 total current parking spaces to 271 total spaces after the proposed project is constructed) within the existing Alicia Town Center shopping center.

Access to the project is currently provided and will continue to be provided via the existing full-access signalized intersection of Alicia Parkway at Community Center Drive (i.e. Project Access No. 1) and the one (1) full-access unsignalized driveway located along Paseo De Valencia (i.e. Project Access No. 2). The existing Alicia Town Center is also served by two additional driveways, one driveway on Alicia Parkway and one driveway on Paseo De Valencia, that serve the back of house loading docks and receiving area for the existing supermarket. For the purposes of this study, no project traffic is expected to utilize either of these back of house driveways and thus they are not included in this analysis.

The project is anticipated to open in 2025 and will be evaluated in one single phase.

1-2
Exhibit 1-1 shows the location map of the proposed project. Exhibit 1-2 shows the proposed site plan.

1.3 Traffic Study Area & Analysis Scenarios
Exhibit 1-1 illustrates the project’s site location map and traffic analysis study area. The study area consists of the following three (3) study intersections, which are all located in the City of Laguna Hills.

1. Alicia Parkway (N/S) at Paseo de Valencia (E/W)

2. Alicia Parkway (N/S) at Community Center Drive/Alicia Town Center Dwy No. 1 (E/W)

3. Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 (N/S) and Paseo de Valencia The analysis evaluates traffic conditions of the three (3) study intersection for the following scenarios during the weekday (7:00 AM to 9:00 AM) and weekday PM (4:00 PM to 6:00 PM) peak periods, in accordance with the applicable jurisdictional traffic impact analysis guidelines for the City of Laguna Beach.
• Existing Conditions;
• Existing Plus Project Conditions;
• Opening Year (2025) Without Project Conditions; and
• Opening Year (2025) With Project Conditions.

engineering group, inc. ALICIA TOWN CENTER RALPH'S FUEL CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, City of Laguna Hills, CA 2776-2022-01 N Site Plan Exhibit 1-2

2-1

2.0 Analysis Methodologies, Performance Criteria, and
Thresholds of Significance
This section of the report presents the methodologies used to perform the traffic analyses summarized in this report in accordance with the City of Laguna Hills. This section also discusses the agency-established applicable performance criteria and thresholds of significance for the study facilities.

2.1 Signalized Intersection Peak Hour Level of Service Analysis Methodology The methodology used to assess the operation of the signalized study area intersection is the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology. To calculate the ICU, the volume of traffic using the intersection is compared with the capacity of the intersection. ICU is usually expressed as a ratio. This ratio represents that portion of the hour required to provide sufficient capacity to accommodate all intersection traffic if all approaches operate at capacity.

Level of Service (LOS) is commonly used as a qualitative description of intersection operation and is based on the capacity of the intersection and the volume of traffic using the intersection.

The definitions of level of service for uninterrupted flow (flow unrestrained by the existence of traffic control devices) are:
• LOS A represents free flow. Individual users are virtually unaffected by the presence of others in the traffic stream.
• LOS B is in the range of stable flow, but the presence of other users in the traffic stream begins to be noticeable. Freedom to select desired speeds is relatively unaffected, but there is a slight decline in the freedom to maneuver. • LOS C is in the range of stable flow, but marks the beginning of the range of flow in which the operation of individual users becomes significantly affected by interactions with others in the traffic stream.
• LOS D represents high-density but stable flow. Speed and freedom to maneuver are severely restricted, and the driver experiences a generally poor level of comfort and convenience.

2-2
• LOS E represents operating conditions at or near the capacity level. All speeds are reduced to a low, but relatively uniform value. Small increases in flow will cause breakdowns in traffic movement.
• LOS F is used to define forced or breakdown flow. This condition exists wherever the amount of traffic approaching a point exceeds the amount which can traverse the point. Queues form behind such locations.

The ICU analysis has been prepared utilizing the following parameters:
• Saturation Flow Rate: Saturation flow value of 1,700 vehicles per lane per hour; no adjustments are used for protected movements with dedicated lanes (including both right and left turns).
• Clearance Interval: A clearance interval factor of 5% (0.05) is applied to the ICU calculations.
• Level of Service Ranges: Table 2-1 below illustrates the thresholds used in assigning a letter value to the resulting LOS:

Table 2-1
Intersection ICU Level of Service
LOS
Critical Volume to
Capacity Ratio
A 0.00 – 0.60
B 0.61 – 0.70
C 0.71 – 0.80
D 0.81 – 0.90
E 0.91 – 1.00
F >1.00
• Peak-Periods: Weekday peak-hour analysis periods are defined as 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM.
• Peak-Hour: The highest one-hour period in both the AM and PM peak periods, as determined by four consecutive 15-minute count periods are used in the ICU calculations. Both AM and PM peak hours are studied.

2-3
• Right Turn Movements: If the distance from the edge of the outside through lane is at least 19 feet and parking is prohibited during the peak period, right turning vehicles may be assumed to utilize this "unofficial" right turn lane. Otherwise, all right turn traffic is assigned to the through lane. If a right turn lane exists, right turn activity is checked for conflicts with other critical movements. It is assumed that right turn movements are accommodated during non-conflicting left turn phases (e.g., northbound right turns during westbound left turn phase), as well as non-conflicting through flows (e.g., northbound right turn movements and north/south through flows). Right turn movements become critical when conflicting movements (e.g., northbound right turns, southbound left turns, and eastbound through flows) represent a sum of V/C ratios, which are greater than the normal through/left turn critical movements.

2.2 Unsignalized Intersection Peak Hour Level of Service Analysis Methodology The Highway Capacity Manual 7th Edition (HCM 7) methodology is used to calculate level of service at unsignalized study area intersections. For intersections with stop control on the minor approach only, the calculation of level of service is dependent on the occurrence of gaps occurring in the free-flow traffic movement of the major street, and the level of service is determined based on the worst individual movement on the stop-controlled minor approach or movements sharing a single lane on the stop-controlled minor approach.

Table 2-2 shows the level of service criteria based on the HCM 7 methodology.

Table 2-2
HCM Level of Service - Vehicle Delay (Unsignalized Intersections) Level of Service (LOS) Vehicle Delay (Seconds)
A 0.00 - 10.00
B 10.01 - 15.00
C 15.01 - 25.00
D 25.01 - 35.00
E 35.01 - 50.00
F >50.00

2-4

2.3 LOS Performance Criteria & Thresholds of Improvement Requirement The City of Laguna Hills General Plan Mobility Element level of service standard for intersections is LOS D. This would be appropriate for both signalized and unsignalized intersections listed in the Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH).

A LOS impact is identified when an intersection is operating at an ICU or V/C ratio at or below 0.90 and the project causes the level to exceed 0.90 by an impact equal to or greater than 0.01. Furthermore, if an intersection is already operating at a LOS E or F, any ICU or V/C ratio impact equal to or greater than 0.01 would be considered a significant impact by the project. For unsignalized intersections, if the LOS with the project exceeds LOS D then a level of service impact would occur if the following conditions are met:
• The project increases the delay by 2-seconds or more, • The project contributes 50 or more peak hour trips to the intersection, and • Traffic signal warrants are satisfied.

3-1

3.0 Circulation System & Existing Conditions
This section provides a discussion of existing study area conditions and traffic volumes.

3.1 Existing Traffic Controls & Intersection Geometrics Exhibit 3-1 identifies the existing roadway conditions for the study area roadways. The number of through traffic lanes for existing roadways and the existing intersection controls are identified. The type of traffic control and number of lanes at an intersection are key inputs for the calculation of level of service.

3.2 Existing Traffic Volumes
Existing conditions intersection level of service calculations are based upon manual AM and PM peak hour turning movement counts taken in May 2023 during typical weekday conditions. The weekday AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes were determined by counting the two-hour peak period from 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM, and from 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM, respectively, and using the highest hour within each two-hour peak period.

The traffic count worksheets are included in Appendix B. Existing traffic volumes are provided in Exhibit 3-2.

4-1

4.0 Project Traffic Volumes
This section provides a discussion on methodologies utilized to derive project traffic volumes for the study area.

4.1 Project Traffic Conditions

4.1.1 Project Trip Generation
Trip generation represents the amount of traffic that is attracted and produced by a development. The trip generation for the project is based upon specific land uses that have been planned for this development.

Trip generation rates for the proposed development are shown in Table 4-1 and are from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2021). This publication provides a comprehensive evaluation of trip generation rates for a variety of land uses. The proposed project consists of a 10- vehicle fueling position (VFP) gas station. As such, ITE Land Use 944:

Gasoline/Service Station trip rates are the most appropriate for the proposed project.

Utilizing the trip generation rates from Table 4-1, Table 4-2 summarizes the daily and peak hour trip generation for weekday conditions for the proposed project and the entitled land use.

It should be noted that the total net trip generation includes adjustments for passby per the ITE Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition). These pass-by reductions account for trips that are already present in everyday traffic on the adjacent streets (i.e., Alicia Parkway & Paseo de Valencia) and will stop by the project site as they pass by on their way to another destination. The pass-by reduction factors used are summarized in the footnotes of Table 4-2.

As shown at the bottom of Table 4-2, the project is forecast to generate approximately 1,290 net daily trips which include approximately 38 net AM peak hour net trips and approximately 60 net PM peak hour net trips.

In Out Total In Out Total
Gasoline/Service Station 944 VFP 50% 50% 10.28 50% 50% 13.91 172.01 1 Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual (2021, 11th Edition).2 VFP = Vehicle Fueling Positions.

Table 4-1
ITE Trip Generation Rates1
Land Use ITE Code Units2
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Daily
j:\rktables\27762201 Report Tables.xlsx
JN: 2776-2022-01

In Out Total In Out Total
Gasoline/Service Station (944) 10 VFP 51 52 103 70 69 139 1,720 -32 -33 -65 -40 -39 -79 -430
19 19 38 30 30 60 1,290
1 Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual (2021, 11th Edition).2 VFP = Vehicle Fueling Positions.

Total Net Trip Generation
Pass-By Trip Reduction30
3 Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual (2021, 11th Edition). Pass-by reductions for ITE Land Use 944: Gasoline/Service Station consist of the following: 63% AM Peak Hour, 57% PM Peak Hour, and 25% Daily (estimated).

Table 4-2
Proposed Project Trip Generation1
Land Use (ITE Code) Quantity Units2
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Daily
j:\rktables\27762201 Report Tables.xlsx
JN: 2776-2022-01

4-2

4.1.2 Project Trip Distribution & Assignment
Trip distribution represents the directional orientation of traffic to and from the project site. Trip distribution is heavily influenced by the geographical location of the site, the location of residential, employment and recreational opportunities, and the proximity to the regional freeway system. The directional orientation of traffic was determined by evaluating existing and proposed land uses, highways within the community, and existing traffic volumes.

Exhibit 4-1 shows the project’s trip distribution pattern.

4.1.3 Modal Split
Modal split denotes the proportion of traffic generated by a project that would use any of the transportation modes, namely buses, cars, bicycles, motorcycles, trains, carpools, etc. The traffic-reducing potential of public transit and other modes is significant. However, the traffic projections in this study are conservative in that public transit and alternative transportation may be able to reduce the traffic volumes, but no modal split reduction is applied to the projections. With the implementation of transit service and provision of alternative transportation ideas and incentives, the automobile traffic demand can be reduced significantly.

4.1.4 Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
The assignment of project traffic to the adjoining roadway system is based upon the project’s trip generation, trip distribution, and arterial highway and local street systems that would be in place by the time of initial occupancy of the site The project’s AM and PM peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Exhibit 4-2.

4.2 Background Traffic

4.2.1 Method of Projection
To assess future traffic conditions, project traffic is combined with existing traffic and area-wide growth. As directed by City staff, to account for area-wide/ambient growth in the study area, a linear annual growth rate of one percent (1%) per year

4-3
has been applied to the existing (2023) traffic volumes over a two-year period for project opening year 2025 conditions (i.e. 2% total growth).

4.2.2 Cumulative Projects Traffic Volumes
Information on future projects in the vicinity of the study area has been provided by City of Laguna Hills staff for inclusion in this analysis and is shown in Table 4-3.

Table 4-3 shows the land uses, and daily and peak hour trip generation for the nearby cumulative projects provided by the public agencies.

A location map of the cumulative projects is shown on Exhibit 4-3. Cumulative projects traffic volumes are shown on Exhibit 4-4.

In reality, some of the cumulative projects may be downsized or may not be developed by the project opening year (2025). In addition, many of the cumulative projects have been or will be subject to a variety of mitigation measures that will reduce the potential environmental impacts associated with those projects.

However, those mitigation measures have not been taken into account in projecting the environmental impact of the related projects. Therefore, the cumulative analyses set forth below are conservative and could result in greater impacts than actually anticipated.

4.3 Existing Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes
Existing Plus Project Conditions traffic volumes consist of existing (2023) traffic volumes plus traffic generated by the proposed project. Existing Plus Project Conditions traffic volumes are shown on Exhibit 4-5.

4.4 Opening Year (2025) Without Project Conditions Traffic Volumes Opening Year (2025) Without Project Conditions traffic volumes consist of two (2) years of linear annual growth on top of existing (2023) traffic volumes at one percent (1%) per year (i.e. 2% total growth), plus traffic generated by the cumulative projects. Opening Year (2025) Without Project Conditions traffic volumes are shown on Exhibit 4-6.

4.5 Opening Year (2025) With Project Conditions Traffic Volumes Opening Year (2025) With Project Conditions traffic volumes consist of two (2) years of linear annual growth on top of existing (2023) traffic volumes at one percent (1%) per year

In Out Total In Out Total
1 City of Laguna Hills Village at Laguna Hills 695 550 1,245 936 1,126 2,062 22,5112 City of Laguna Hills Laguna Hills Plaza 139 93 232 124 138 262 3,0223 City of Laguna Hills 24888 Alicia Parkway Commercial Project 27 25 52 21 20 41 8844 City of Laguna Hills 24422 Avenida de la Carlota Project 124 77 201 124 178 302 3,214 985 745 1,730 1,205 1,462 2,667 29,631
1 Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2021), unless otherwise stated.

Cumulative Projects information provided by the City of Laguna Hills. 2 TSF = Thousand Square Feet; DU = Dwelling Units.
3 Source: Traffic Impact Analysis for the Village at Laguna Hills Project, prepared by LLG Engineers, dated September 1, 2020.4 Source: Revised Traffic Impact Analysis for Laguna Hills Plaza , prepared by LLG Engineers, dated November 28, 2022.5 Source: Revised Traffic Impact Analysis Report 24888 Alicia Parkway Commercial Project, prepared by LLG Engineers, dated September 25, 2020.6 Source: 24422 Avenida de la Carlota Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by RK Engineering, dated May 11, 2023.

Land Use/Size from Sourced Study6
Total Cumulative Projects Trip Generation
AM PM Daily
Land Use/Size from Sourced Study5
Land Use/Size from Sourced Study3Land Use/Size from Sourced Study4 Table 4-3
Cumulative Projects Trip Generation1
ID No. Jurisdiction Project Name / Case Number Land Use Quantity Units2 Peak Hour
j:\rktables\27762201 Report Tables.xlsx
JN: 2776-2022-01

= City of Laguna Hills Cumulative Project
Legend:
engineering
group, inc. ALICIA TOWN CENTER RALPH'S FUEL CENTER TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, City of Laguna Hills, CA 2776-2022-01
N
Cumulative Projects Location Map
Exhibit 4-3

4-4
(i.e. 2% total growth, plus traffic generated by the cumulative projects and the proposed project. Opening Year (2025) With Project Conditions traffic volumes are shown on Exhibit 4-7.

5-1

5.0 Study Intersection Peak Hour LOS Analysis
This section of the report provides a discussion on the study intersection peak hour level of service (LOS) analysis and findings.

5.1 Existing Traffic Conditions Level of Service
Existing LOS calculations for the three (3) study intersections are shown on Table 5-1 and is based on the existing lane geometry shown on Exhibit 3-1 and the Existing AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes shown on Exhibit 3-2.

As shown in Table 5-1, all three (3) study intersections are currently operating at an acceptable LOS during the AM and PM peak hours under Existing Traffic Conditions.

Detailed LOS analysis worksheets for Existing Traffic Conditions are contained in Appendix C.

5.2 Existing Plus Project Conditions Level of Service
Existing Plus Project Conditions LOS calculations for the three (3) study intersections are shown on Table 5-1 and are based on the Existing Plus Project AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes shown on Exhibit 4-5 and the existing lane geometry shown on Exhibit 3-1.

As shown in Table 5-1, the three (3) study intersections are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS during the AM and PM peak hours under Existing Plus Project Conditions.

Detailed LOS analysis worksheets for Existing Plus Project Conditions are contained in Appendix D.

5.3 Opening Year (2025) Without Project Conditions Level of Service Opening Year (2025) Without Project Conditions LOS calculations for the three (3) study intersections are shown on Table 5-2 and is based on the Opening Year (2025) Without Project Conditions AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes shown on Exhibit 4-6 and the existing lane geometry shown on Exhibit 3-1.

AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM

1. TS3 ICU 0.548 0.576 -- -- A A 0.547 0.574 -- -- A A No No

2. TS3 ICU 0.467 0.480 -- -- A A 0.476 0.491 -- -- A A No No3. CSS3 HCM 7 -- -- 15.5 17.1 C C -- -- 17.5 20.0 C C No No 123
CSS = Cross-Street StopDeficient operation shown in Bold.

Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 (N/S) and Paseo de Valencia (E/W) Requires
Improvements?
Analysis Software: PTV Vistro.HCM 7 methodology determines the level of service at unsignalized intersections utilizing the delay of the worst approach delay in seconds.TS = Traffic Signal V/C Ratio Delay (Secs / Veh)
ICU methodology determines the level of service at signalized intersections utilizing the volume of the intersection compared with the capacity of the intersection, expressed as a ratio.

Alicia Parkway (N/S) at Paseo de Valencia (E/W)Alicia Pkwy (N/S) at Community Center Dr/Alicia Town Center Dwy No. 1 (E/W) Table 5-1
Study Intersection LOS Analysis Summary
Existing & Existing Plus Project Conditions
Intersection Traffic Control Methodology2
Existing Conditions1 Existing Plus Project Conditions1
Level of Service V/C Ratio Delay (Secs / Veh) Level of Service j:\rktables\27762201 Report Tables.xlsx
JN: 2776-2022-01

AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM

1. TS3 ICU 0.575 0.614 -- -- A B 0.574 0.612 -- -- A B No No

2. TS3 ICU 0.482 0.500 -- -- A A 0.491 0.511 -- -- A A No No3. CSS3 HCM 7 -- -- 16.2 18.8 C C -- -- 18.6 22.3 C C No No 123
Table 5-2
Study Intersection LOS Analysis Summary
Opening Year (2025) Without & With Project Conditions
Intersection Traffic Control Methodology2
Opening Year (2025) Without Project Conditions1 Opening Year (2025) With Project Conditions1 V/C Ratio Delay (Secs / Veh) Level of Service V/C Ratio Delay (Secs / Veh) Level of Service Requires Improvements? CSS = Cross-Street Stop
Alicia Parkway (N/S) at Paseo de Valencia (E/W)Alicia Pkwy (N/S) at Community Center Dr/Alicia Town Center Dwy No. 1 (E/W)Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 (N/S) and Paseo de Valencia (E/W) Deficient operation shown in Bold.Analysis Software: PTV Vistro.ICU methodology determines the level of service at signalized intersections utilizing the volume of the intersection compared with the capacity of the intersection, expressed as a ratio. HCM 7 methodology determines the level of service at unsignalized intersections utilizing the delay of the worst approach delay in seconds.TS = Traffic Signal j:\rktables\27762201 Report Tables.xlsx
JN: 2776-2022-01

5-2
As shown in Table 5-2, the three (3) study intersections are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS during the AM and PM peak hours under Opening Year (2025) Without Project Conditions.

Detailed LOS analysis worksheets for Opening Year (2025) Without Project Conditions are contained in Appendix E.

5.4 Opening Year (2025) With Project Conditions Level of Service Opening Year (2025) With Project Conditions LOS calculations for the three (3) study intersections are shown on Table 5-2 and are based on the Opening Year (2025) With Project Conditions AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes shown on Exhibit 4-7 and the existing lane geometry shown on Exhibit 3-1.

As shown in Table 5-2, the three (3) study intersections are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS during the AM and PM peak hours under Opening Year (2025) With Project Conditions.

Detailed LOS analysis worksheets for Opening Year (2025) With Project Conditions are contained in Appendix F.

6-1

6.0 Gas Station Queuing Analysis
This section of the report analyzes the potential queuing associated with the gas station to ensure that the existing parking spaces and/or the parking drive aisles are not impacted by drivers waiting to fuel their vehicles.

Per City staff direction, gas station queuing data has been collected at the following two (2) existing gas station/supermarket combo locations:
• Ralphs: 12618 Limonite Avenue, Eastvale, CA (14 Vehicle Fueling Positions) • Food 4 Less: 2090 South Garey Avenue, Pom6-1ona, CA (10 Vehicle Fueling Positions)
These queuing observations were conducted on a typical weekday (Thursday, June 8, 2023) during the AM peak period (7:00 AM to 9:00 AM) and PM peak period (4:00 PM to 6:00 PM). Queuing observations were also conducted on a typical Saturday (Saturday, June 3, 2023) during the midday peak period (12:00 PM to 2:00 PM). These queuing observations were conducted in 5-minute intervals.

The observed gas station queuing data is provided in Appendix G.

As shown in Appendix G, the maximum number of vehicles waiting for a gas pump during Thursday conditions was two (2) vehicles during one 5-minute interval at the Eastvale location. There was never a queue during Thursday conditions at the Pomona location.

Furthermore, there was never a queue at either location during Saturday conditions.

As such, the maximum queue of two (2) vehicles which was only observed for one 5- minute interval at one location during all queuing observation timeframes, can be fully accommodated within the adjacent area next to the fueling area without blocking the existing parking spaces and/or the parking drive aisles. Additionally, the traffic flow will be bi-directional for the pump access which will further help facilitate ingress/ egress for vehicles as they enter/exit the fueling area.

7-1

7.0 CEQA Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis
A vehicle miles traveled (VMT) analysis has been prepared pursuant to the latest requirements for assessing transportation impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City of Laguna Hills has adopted methodologies and recommendations for VMT assessment as contained within the City of Laguna Hills Vehicles Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines under the California Environment Quality Act and General Plan Development Review Traffic Study Guidelines, dated August, 2021. In accordance with the City of Laguna Hills VMT guidelines, there are five (5) types of screening that lead agencies can be applied to effectively screen projects from project-level assessment. These are summarized below:

1. 100% Affordable Housing

2. Located within ½ mile of Qualifying Transit

3. Local Serving Land Use

4. Low VMT Area

5. Net Daily Trips Less Than 500 ADT

7.1 VMT Screening Step 3: Local Serving Land Use
Per the City of Laguna Hills VMT guidelines, local serving land uses provide goods and services to the local community and offer more opportunities for residents and employees to obtain services closer to home and work, which thereby shortens trip lengths and reduced VMT. As such, projects with a local serving land use may be presumed to have a less than significant impact on VMT.

Table 1: List of Local Serving Uses from the City of Laguna Hills VMT guidelines identifies gas service station as a local serving land use under the category of local serving retail less than 50,000 square feet. Because the proposed project is a gasoline/service station, the project meets the VMT Screening Step 3: Local Serving Land Use criterion.

As a result, the project can be assumed to have a less than significant impact on VMT under CEQA and no further VMT analysis is required.

8-1

8.0 Findings and Recommendations
The purpose of this traffic impact study is to evaluate the proposed Alicia Town Center Ralph’s Fuel Center (hereinafter referred to as “Project”) from a traffic and circulation standpoint and to determine whether the Project has a significant traffic impact.

This traffic study has been conducted pursuant to the City of Laguna Hills Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines under the California Environmental Quality Act and General Plan Development Review Traffic Study Guidelines, dated August 2021.

8.1 Site Location & Project Description
The proposed project is located within the existing Alicia Town Center shopping center at the southeast corner of Alicia Parkway and Paseo de Valencia, in the City of Laguna Hills.

The project site is currently part of the existing Ralph’s parking lot and is bounded by Paseo De Valencia to the north, the Ralph’s shopping center to the south and east, and Alicia Parkway to the west.

The proposed project consists of a 10-vehicle fueling position (VFP) gas station (five dual sided pump islands). The project will require the removal of 39 parking spaces and will add 4 spaces (306 total current parking spaces to 271 total spaces after the proposed project is constructed) within the existing Alicia Town Center shopping center.

Access to the project is currently provided and will continue to be provided via the existing full-access signalized intersection of Alicia Parkway at Community Center Drive (i.e. Project Access No. 1) and the one (1) full-access unsignalized driveway located along Paseo De Valencia (i.e. Project Access No. 2). The existing Alicia Town Center is also served by two additional driveways, one driveway on Alicia Parkway and one driveway on Paseo De Valencia, that serve the back of house loading docks and receiving area for the existing supermarket. For the purposes of this study, no project traffic is expected to utilize either of these back of house driveways and thus they are not included in this analysis.

The project is anticipated to open in 2025 and will be evaluated in one single phase.

8-2

8.2 Traffic Study Area & Analysis Scenarios
The study area consists of the following three (3) study intersections, which are all located in the City of Laguna Hills.

1. Alicia Parkway (N/S) at Paseo de Valencia (E/W)

2. Alicia Parkway (N/S) at Community Center Drive/Alicia Town Center Dwy No. 1 (E/W)

3. Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 (N/S) and Paseo de Valencia The analysis evaluates traffic conditions of the three (3) study intersection for the following scenarios during the weekday (7:00 AM to 9:00 AM) and weekday PM (4:00 PM to 6:00 PM) peak periods, in accordance with the applicable jurisdictional traffic impact analysis guidelines for the City of Laguna Beach.
x Existing Conditions;
x Existing Plus Project Conditions;
x Opening Year (2025) Without Project Conditions; and
x Opening Year (2025) With Project Conditions.

8.3 Project Trip Generation
The proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 1,290 net daily trips which include approximately 38 net AM peak hour net trips and approximately 60 net PM peak hour net trips.

8.4 Intersection Peak Hour LOS Analysis
All study intersections are currently operating and are forecasted to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS during the AM and PM peak hours for all analysis scenarios. As such, no improvements are required.

8.5 Gas Station Queuing Analysis
The maximum number of vehicles waiting for a gas pump during Thursday conditions was two (2) vehicles during one 5-minute interval at the Eastvale location. There was never a queue during Thursday conditions at the Pomona location. Furthermore, there was never a

8-3
queue at either location during Saturday conditions. As such, the maximum queue of two (2) vehicles which was only observed for one 5-minute interval at one location during all queuing observation timeframes, can be fully accommodated within the adjacent area next to the fueling area without blocking the existing parking spaces and/or the parking drive aisles.

8.6 CEQA Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis
The City of Laguna Hills VMT guidelines identifies gas service station as a local serving land use under the category of local serving retail less than 50,000 square feet. Because the proposed project is a gasoline/service station, the project meets the VMT Screening Step 3:

Local Serving Land Use criterion. As a result, the project can be assumed to have a less than significant impact on VMT under CEQA and no further VMT analysis is required.

Appendices

Appendix A
Approved Scope of Work

1 Alicia Town Center Ralph’s Fuel Center
REVISED Traffic Impact Analysis Scoping Agreement
May 17, 2023
The following provides information on the proposed project, summarizes the analysis scope, parameters, and assumptions for review and approval, and also includes a request for information on items related to the study.

A. Project Description: The proposed Alicia Town Center Ralph’s Fuel Center project is located within the existing Alicia Town Center shopping center at the southwest corner of Alicia Parkway and Paseo de Valencia in the City of Laguna Hills.

The proposed project consists of a 10 vehicle fueling position (VFP) gas station (five dual sided pump islands). The project will require the removal of 42 parking spaces (306 total parking spaces currently to 264 total spaces after the proposed project is constructed).

Access to the project is currently provided and will continue to be provided via the existing full-access signalized intersection of Alicia Parkway at Community Center Drive and the one (1) full-access unsignalized driveway located along Paseo De Valencia. (The existing Alicia Town Center is also served by two additional driveways, one driveway on Alicia Parkway and one driveway on Paseo De Valencia that serve the back of house loading docks and receiving area for the existing supermarket. For purposes of this project, no project traffic is expected to utilize the back of house driveways and thus they are not included in the scope of this analysis).

The project is planned to open in 2025 and will be evaluated in one phase.

Exhibit A shows the location map of the proposed project. Exhibit B shows the proposed project site plan.

B. Project Trip Generation: Trip generation represents the amount of traffic that is attracted and produced by a development.

Trip generation is typically estimated based on the trip generation rates from the latest Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual. The latest and most recent version (11th Edition, 2021) ITE Manual will be utilized in the traffic study. This publication provides a comprehensive evaluation of trip generation rates for a variety of land uses.

2 The project is proposing to construct a 10 vehicle fueling position (VFP) gas station (five dual sided pump islands. As such, ITE Land Use 944: Gasoline/Service Station trip rates are most appropriate for the proposed project.

Table 1 shows the ITE trip generation rates utilized for the trip generation analysis of the proposed project.

Table 1
ITE Trip Generation Rates1
Land Use Units
2 ITE Code
AM PM
Daily
In Out Total In Out Total
Gasoline/Service Station VFP 944 50% 50% 10.28 50% 50% 13.91 172.01 1 Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual (2021, 11th Edition) 2 VFP = Vehicle Fueling Position
Table 2 shows the trip generation for the proposed project and the entitled land use utilizing the trip generation rates shown in Table 1.

It should be noted that the total net trip generation includes adjustments for pass-by per the ITE Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition). These pass-by reductions account for trips that are already present in everyday traffic on the adjacent streets (i.e. Alicia Parkway, Paseo de Valencia, etc.) and will stop by the project site as they pass by on their way to another destination. The pass-by reduction factors used are summarized in the footnotes of Table

2. Table 2
Proposed Project Trip Generation1
Land Use (ITE Code) Quantity Units2
AM PM
Daily
In Out Total In Out Total
Gasoline/Service Station (944) 10 VFP 51 52 103 70 69 139 1,720 Pass-By Trip Reduction3
-32 -33 -65 -40 -39 -79 -430
Total Net Trip Generation 19 19 38 30 30 60 1,290
1 Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual (2021, 11th Edition) 2 VFP = Vehicle Fueling Position
3 Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual (2021, 11th Edition). Pass-by reductions for ITE Land Use 944: Gasoline/Service Station consist of the following: 63% AM Peak Hour, 57% PM Peak Hour, and 25% daily (estimated).

3 As shown in Table 2, without taking credit for ITE-recommended pass-by trip adjustments, the proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 1,720 gross daily trips which include approximately 103 gross AM peak hour trips and approximately 140 gross PM peak hour trips. After taking credit for ITE-recommended pass-by trip adjustments, the proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 1,290 net daily trips, which include approximately 38 net AM peak hour trips and approximately 60 net AM peak hour trips C. Project Trip Distribution: Exhibit C shows the project’s trip distribution pattern.

D. Study Intersections: The analysis will evaluate the following three (3) study intersections:

1. Alicia Parkway (N/S) at Paseo de Valencia (E/W);

2. Alicia Parkway (N/S) at Community Center Drive/Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 1 (E/W); and

3. Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 (N/S) and Paseo de Valencia.

E. Analysis Scenarios: The analysis will evaluate traffic conditions for the following scenarios during the weekday AM (7:00 AM to 9:00 AM) and weekday PM (4:00 PM to 6:00 PM) peak hour conditions:
• Existing Conditions;
• Existing Plus Project Conditions;
• Project Opening Year (Year 2025) With Cumulative Projects Without Project Conditions; and
• Project Opening Year (Year 2025) With Cumulative Projects With Project Conditions.

F. Traffic Analysis Parameters: The analysis will utilize the following parameters:
• PTV Vistro 2023 analysis software.
• Signalized intersections will be analyzed via the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology &
• Unsignalized intersections will be analyzed via the Highway Capacity Manual 7 th
Edition (HCM 7) methodology.

4 • Intersection LOS parameters as identified within the City of Laguna Hills Traffic Study Guidelines, City of Laguna Hills, California, dated August 31, 2010, prepared by RK Engineering Group Inc.

G. Existing Traffic Counts: The analysis will utilize new traffic counts. The counts will not be collected by vehicle classification.
• AM peak period counts will be collected during one typical weekday from 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM.
• PM peak period counts will be collected during one typical weekday from 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM.

H. Project Opening Year Conditions Traffic Volumes: Background (project opening year) traffic volumes will be derived by applying an annual growth rate of one percent (1%) per year to the Existing traffic volumes (i.e. 2% total growth) and adding traffic from any cumulative developments located within one and one-half mile of the project site.

I. VMT Screening Analysis: The City of Laguna Hills has adopted methodologies and recommendations for VMT assessment as contained within the City of Laguna Hills Vehicles Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines under the California Environment Quality Act and General Plan Development Review Traffic Study Guidelines, dated August, 2021. In accordance with the City of Laguna Hills VMT guidelines, there are five (5) types of screening that lead agencies can be applied to effectively screen projects from project-level assessment. These are summarized below:

1. 100% Affordable Housing

2. Located within ½ mile of Qualifying Transit

3. Local Serving Land Use

4. Low VMT Area

5. Net Daily Trips Less Than 500 ADT
VMT Screening Step 3: Local Serving Land Use
Per the City of Laguna Hills VMT guidelines, local serving land uses provide goods and services to the local community and offer more opportunities for residents and employees to obtain services closer to home and work, which thereby shortens trip lengths and

5 reduced VMT. As such, projects with a local serving land use may be presumed to have a less than significant impact on VMT.

Table 1: List of Local Serving Uses from the City of Laguna Hills VMT guidelines identifies gas service station as a local serving land use under the category of local serving retail less than 50,000 square feet. Because the proposed project is a gasoline/service station, the project meets the VMT Screening Step 3: Local Serving Land Use criterion.

As a result, the project can be assumed to have a less than significant impact on VMT under CEQA and no further VMT analysis is required. A summary of the VMT screening analysis will be provided in the Traffic Impact Study report.

J. Gas Station Queuing Analysis: To ensure that existing parking spaces and/or the parking drive aisles are not impacted by drivers waiting to fuel their vehicles, queuing observations will be conducted at the following two (2) existing gas station/supermarket combo locations:
• Ralphs: 12618 Limonite Avenue, Corona, CA
• Food 4 Less: 2090 South Garey Avenue, Pomona, CA
These drive-through observations will be conducted during one typical weekday during the AM peak (7:00 AM to 9:00 AM) and PM peak (4:00 PM to 6:00 PM) periods in 5-minute intervals. Additionally, a Saturday queuing observation will also be conducted during the midday peak period (12:00 PM to 2:00 PM) in 5-minute intervals. The results from these queuing observations will be tabulated and compared against the on-site circulation/storage to determine if adequate storage is provided and ensure the queue will not extend back to block parking spaces and/or parking drive aisles.

K. Performance Criteria: The City of Laguna Hills level of service standard for signalized and unsignalized intersections is LOS D.

L. Significant Impact Criteria: For signalized intersections, a significant impact is identified when an intersection or roadway segment is already operating at an ICU or V/C ratio at or below 0.900 and the project causes the level to exceed 0.900 by an impact equal to or greater than 0.010. Furthermore, if an intersection or roadway segment is already operating at a LOS E or F, any ICU or V/C ratio impact equal to or greater than

0.010 would be considered a significant impact by the project.

6 For unsignalized intersections, utilizing the HCM 7 methodology, a significant impact is identified when an intersection is operating at a LOS E or F and the project causes any increase in delay.

M. Request for Information: Please provide information on the following for use in the traffic study:
• Information on cumulative projects that need to be included in the traffic analysis (location, land use type(s), and land use quantities); and • Information on future roadway and circulation system modifications/improvements that are planned within the study area and would potentially affect the analysis.

If you have any questions, or would like further review, please call us at (949) 474-0809.

Sincerely,
RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.

Approved by:

Justin Tucker, P.E. City of Laguna Hills
Principal Engineer
Attachments
Date

Consulting Traffic Engineers to Government Agencies
May 23, 2023
Mr. Joe Ames, P.E., T.E,
Director of Public Services/City Engineer
City of Laguna Hills
24035 El Toro Road
Laguna Hills, CA 92653
Subject: Alicia Town Center - Ralphs Fuel Center
Traffic Impact Analysis - Proposed Scope of Work
Dear Mr. Ames:

Pursuant to your request, Hartzog & Crabill, Inc. (HCI) has reviewed the subject Traffic Impact Analysis scope of work prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc., dated May 17, 2023.

Prior comments have been addressed and the proposed scope of work is acceptable.

It has been our pleasure to prepare this assessment for your review. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me via my cell phone at 714-448-5835.

Sincerely,
HARTZOG & CRABILL, INC.

Gerald J. Stock, PE, TE,
Executive Vice President
City & Traffic Engineering Services
Trammell Hartzog, President
Gerald J. Stock, PE, TE,
Executive Vice President
17852 E. 17th Street
Suite 101
Tustin, CA 92780
Phone: (714) 731-9455
FAX: (714) 731-9498
www.hartzog-crabill.com

Attachments

Appendix B
Traffic Count Worksheets

T218
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC4032
Wed, May 17, 23 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 1
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: SIGNAL
NOTES: AM ▲
PM N
MD ◄ W E ►

OTHER S
OTHER ▼

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND

NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 2 3 1 2 2 2 2 3 0 1 3 1 0 0 0 0
7:00 AM 11 41 7 29 29 37 22 185 15 8 217 25 626 0 0 0 1 1 7:15 AM 26 66 10 35 45 59 43 288 16 9 281 41 919 0 1 0 0 1 7:30 AM 20 85 14 54 65 60 60 305 22 11 311 33 1,040 0 0 0 1 1 7:45 AM 20 84 14 90 68 64 74 334 23 11 292 72 1,146 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 AM 39 119 13 79 103 47 81 265 26 20 326 86 1,204 0 0 0 2 2 8:15 AM 55 134 21 52 83 60 72 248 27 23 323 92 1,190 0 0 0 1 1 8:30 AM 14 98 12 64 65 90 65 242 19 24 299 58 1,050 0 0 0 1 1 8:45 AM 13 72 12 40 50 59 67 253 25 23 284 52 950 0 0 0 4 4 VOLUMES 198 699 103 443 508 476 484 2,120 173 129 2,333 459 8,125 0 1 0 10 11 APPROACH % 20% 70% 10% 31% 36% 33% 17% 76% 6% 4% 80% 16% APP/DEPART 1,000 / 1,643 1,427 / 800 2,777 / 2,675 2,921 / 3,007 0

BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 128 435 60 285 319 261 292 1,089 95 78 1,240 308 4,590 APPROACH % 21% 70% 10% 33% 37% 30% 20% 74% 6% 5% 76% 19% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.742 0.944 0.856 0.928 0.953
APP/DEPART 623 / 1,035 865 / 488 1,476 / 1,438 1,626 / 1,629 0 4:00 PM 37 65 9 44 90 98 93 212 32 28 256 58 1,022 1 0 0 6 7 4:15 PM 16 63 14 39 91 90 102 243 21 23 293 54 1,049 0 0 0 5 5 4:30 PM 25 76 10 56 100 105 85 203 26 48 294 74 1,102 0 0 0 8 8 4:45 PM 11 92 9 44 139 96 87 185 25 38 269 51 1,046 0 0 0 9 9 5:00 PM 27 48 15 52 103 109 75 265 31 37 316 54 1,132 1 1 0 4 6 5:15 PM 39 76 11 51 121 110 88 242 32 36 291 83 1,180 0 0 0 7 7 5:30 PM 20 59 12 43 75 99 93 219 42 31 355 101 1,149 0 0 0 6 6 5:45 PM 16 74 9 37 133 116 97 182 15 29 267 71 1,046 0 0 0 7 7 VOLUMES 191 553 89 366 852 823 720 1,751 224 270 2,341 546 8,726 2 1 0 52 55 APPROACH % 23% 66% 11% 18% 42% 40% 27% 65% 8% 9% 74% 17% APP/DEPART 833 / 1,820 2,041 / 1,296 2,695 / 2,257 3,157 / 3,353 0

BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 102 257 47 183 432 434 353 908 120 133 1,229 309 4,507 APPROACH % 25% 63% 12% 17% 41% 41% 26% 66% 9% 8% 74% 18% PEAK HR FACTOR 0.806 0.917 0.931 0.858 0.955
APP/DEPART 406 / 920 1,049 / 662 1,381 / 1,161 1,671 / 1,764 0 Paseo de Valencia

NORTH SIDE
Alicia WEST SIDE EAST SIDE Alicia

SOUTH SIDE
Paseo de Valencia

INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected]
Laguna Hills
Paseo de Valencia
Alicia

U-TURNS
Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Alicia Alicia
AM
7:45 AM
PM
5:00 PM

3,468 1,299 1,360 809 TOTAL 3,463
2,041 823 852 366 PM 1,820
1,427 476 508 443 AM 1,643
2,921 3,157 6,078
6,360 3,353 3,007
459 546
1,005
2,333 2,341 4,674
TOTAL
PM
AM
129 270 399
1,204
720 484
AM
PM
TOTAL
3,871 1,751 2,120
397 224 173
2,675 2,257 4,932
5,472 2,695 2,777
800 AM 198 699 103 1,000
1,296 PM 191 553 89 833
2,096 TOTAL 389 1,252 192 1,833
1,914 695 751 468 TOTAL 1,955
1,049 434 432 183 PM 920
865 261 319 285 AM 1,035
1,626 1,671 3,297
3,393 1,764 1,629
308 309 617
1,240 1,229 2,469
TOTAL
PM
AM
AM 7:45 AM
8:45 AM
78 133 211
645 353 292
#N/A
AM
PM
TOTAL
1,997
908
1,089
PM 5:00 PM
5:45 PM
215 120
95 1,438 1,161 2,599
2,857 1,381 1,476
488 AM 128 435 60 623
662 PM 102 257 47 406
1,150 Total 230 692 107 1,029
AimTD LLC

TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
Paseo de Valencia
Alicia
Alicia
Laguna Hills
SC4032

ALL HOURS
Paseo de Valencia
Paseo de Valencia
Paseo de Valencia
Alicia
Alicia

PEAK HOUR

T218
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC4032
Wed, May 17, 23 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 2
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: SIGNAL
NOTES: AM ▲
PM N
MD ◄ W E ►

OTHER S
OTHER ▼

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND

NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 0.5 0.5 1 0.5 0.5 1 1 3 0 1 3 1 0 0 0 0
7:00 AM 5 1 2 4 1 4 7 216 3 0 258 5 506 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 4 2 3 8 0 18 49 337 4 1 326 37 789 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM 2 2 5 12 4 20 18 371 5 0 373 18 830 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 4 0 3 0 0 5 9 428 7 1 361 12 830 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 AM 3 5 1 9 1 11 30 362 7 3 370 38 840 0 0 0 1 1
8:15 AM 8 8 15 26 6 29 62 307 5 1 377 58 902 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 AM 5 0 8 8 2 12 12 314 6 6 386 10 769 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM 12 0 6 8 0 3 5 330 8 5 344 7 728 0 0 0 1 1
VOLUMES 43 18 43 75 14 102 192 2,665 45 17 2,795 185 6,194 0 0 0 2 2 APPROACH % 41% 17% 41% 39% 7% 53% 7% 92% 2% 1% 93% 6%
APP/DEPART 104 / 395 191 / 74 2,902 / 2,785 2,997 / 2,940 0

BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 17 15 24 47 11 65 119 1,468 24 5 1,481 126 3,402 APPROACH % 30% 27% 43% 38% 9% 53% 7% 91% 1% 0% 92% 8%
PEAK HR FACTOR 0.452 0.504 0.907 0.924 0.943
APP/DEPART 56 / 260 123 / 39 1,611 / 1,540 1,612 / 1,563 0 4:00 PM 15 0 17 13 4 10 8 307 20 4 367 18 783 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 14 2 15 5 3 11 14 346 21 4 370 24 829 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 19 0 17 9 1 13 19 289 14 6 402 15 804 0 0 0 1 1 4:45 PM 14 1 13 9 2 8 6 276 11 6 359 10 715 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 PM 23 1 15 14 1 17 12 344 11 4 429 18 889 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 14 0 14 7 3 8 15 342 12 7 407 26 855 0 0 0 1 1
5:30 PM 11 2 14 21 1 15 14 320 6 1 451 21 877 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 16 0 9 5 2 5 12 280 11 2 385 11 738 0 0 0 0 0
VOLUMES 126 6 114 83 17 87 100 2,504 106 34 3,170 143 6,490 0 0 0 2 2 APPROACH % 51% 2% 46% 44% 9% 47% 4% 92% 4% 1% 95% 4%
APP/DEPART 246 / 249 187 / 155 2,710 / 2,703 3,347 / 3,383 0

BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 64 3 52 47 7 45 53 1,286 40 14 1,672 76 3,359
APPROACH % 54% 3% 44% 47% 7% 45% 4% 93% 3% 1% 95% 4%
PEAK HR FACTOR 0.763 0.669 0.934 0.931 0.945
APP/DEPART 119 / 132 99 / 60 1,379 / 1,386 1,762 / 1,781 0 Community Center

NORTH SIDE
Alicia WEST SIDE EAST SIDE Alicia

SOUTH SIDE
Community Center

INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected]
Laguna Hills
Community Center
Alicia

U-TURNS
Alicia Town Center Dwy
Queue EB AM/PM
Community Center Alicia Alicia
AM
7:30 AM
PM
5:00 PM

378 189 31 158 TOTAL 644
187 87 17 83 PM 249
191 102 14 75 AM 395
2,997 3,347 6,344
6,323 3,383 2,940
185 143 328
2,795 3,170 5,965
TOTAL
PM
AM
17 34 51
292 100 192
AM
PM
TOTAL
5,169 2,504 2,665
151 106
45 2,785 2,703 5,488
5,612 2,710 2,902
74 AM 43 18 43 104
155 PM 126
6 114 246
229 TOTAL 169 24 157 350
222 110 18 94 TOTAL 392
99 457 47 PM 132
123 65 11 47 AM 260
1,612 1,762 3,374
3,344 1,781 1,563
126
76 202
1,481 1,672 3,153
TOTAL
PM
AM
AM 7:30 AM
8:45 AM
5 14 19
172
53 119
#N/A
AM
PM
TOTAL
2,754 1,286 1,468
PM 5:00 PM
5:45 PM
64 40 24
1,540 1,386 2,926
2,990 1,379 1,611
39 AM 17 15 24 56
60 PM 64
3 52 119
99 Total 81 18 76 175
AimTD LLC

TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
Community Center
Alicia
Alicia
Laguna Hills
SC4032

ALL HOURS
Alicia Town Center Dwy
Alicia Town Center Dwy
Community Center
Alicia
Alicia

PEAK HOUR

T218
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC4032
Wed, May 17, 23 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 3
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: STOP E
NOTES: AM ▲
PM N
MD ◄ W E ►

OTHER S
OTHER ▼

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND

NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL LANES: 1 3 X X 2 0 1 X 1 X X X 0 0 0 0
7:00 AM 3 59 0 0 45 6 1 0 2 0 0 0 116 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 2 98 0 0 63 7 4 0 1 0 0 0 175 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM 4 116 0 0 85 11 4 0 4 0 0 0 224 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 4 114 0 0 97 5 4 0 6 0 0 0 230 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 AM 8 167 0 0 132 14 5 0 3 0 0 0 329 0 0 0 0 0
8:15 AM 6 203 0 0 117 15 8 0 12 0 0 0 361 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 AM 5 120 0 0 93 13 4 0 9 0 0 0 244 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM 5 87 0 0 78 16 10 0 6 0 0 0 202 0 0 0 0 0
VOLUMES 37 964 0 0 710 87 40 0 43 0 0 0 1,881 0 0 0 0 0 APPROACH % 4% 96% 0% 0% 89% 11% 48% 0% 52% 0% 0% 0%
APP/DEPART 1,001 / 1,004 797 / 753 83 / 0 0 / 124 0

BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 23 604 0 0 439 47 21 0 30 0 0 0 1,164
APPROACH % 4% 96% 0% 0% 90% 10% 41% 0% 59% 0% 0% 0%
PEAK HR FACTOR 0.750 0.832 0.638 0.000 0.806
APP/DEPART 627 / 625 486 / 469 51 / 0 0 / 70 0
4:00 PM 7 106 0 0 124 21 6 0 26 0 0 0 290 0 0 0 0 0
4:15 PM 16 81 0 0 104 25 12 0 14 0 0 0 252 0 0 0 0 0
4:30 PM 7 104 0 0 143 22 8 0 20 0 0 0 304 0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM 6 99 0 0 154 39 14 0 18 0 0 0 330 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 PM 15 75 0 0 144 24 16 0 15 0 0 0 289 0 0 0 0 0
5:15 PM 10 114 0 0 154 28 12 0 19 0 0 0 337 0 0 0 0 0
5:30 PM 7 79 0 0 120 22 12 0 17 0 0 0 257 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM 7 90 0 0 148 22 10 0 16 0 0 0 293 0 0 0 0 0
VOLUMES 75 748 0 0 1,091 203 90 0 145 0 0 0 2,352 0 0 0 0 0 APPROACH % 9% 91% 0% 0% 84% 16% 38% 0% 62% 0% 0% 0%
APP/DEPART 823 / 838 1,294 / 1,236 235 / 0 0 / 278 0

BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 38 392 0 0 595 113 50 0 72 0 0 0 1,260
APPROACH % 9% 91% 0% 0% 84% 16% 41% 0% 59% 0% 0% 0%
PEAK HR FACTOR 0.867 0.917 0.953 0.000 0.935
APP/DEPART 430 / 442 708 / 667 122 / 0 0 / 151 0
Paseo de Valencia

NORTH SIDE
Alicia Town Center Dwy WEST SIDE EAST SIDE Alicia Town Center Dwy

SOUTH SIDE
Paseo de Valencia
AM
7:45 AM
PM
4:30 PM

U-TURNS
Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Alicia Town Center Dwy Alicia Town Center Dwy

INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected]
Laguna Hills
Paseo de Valencia
Alicia Town Center Dwy

2,091 290 1,801 0 TOTAL 1,842
1,294 203 1,091 0 PM 838
797 87 710 0 AM 1,004
0 0 0
402 278 124
0 0 0
0 0 0
TOTAL
PM
AM
0 0 0
130
90 40
AM
PM
TOTAL
0 0 0
188 145
43 0 0 0
318 235
83 753 AM 37 964 0 1,001
1,236 PM 75 748 0 823
1,989 TOTAL 112 1,712 0 1,824
1,194 160 1,034 0 TOTAL 1,067
708 113 595 0 PM 442
486 47 439 0 AM 625
0 0 0
221 151
70 0 0 0
0 0 0
TOTAL
PM
AM
AM 7:45 AM
8:45 AM
0 0 0
71 50 21
#N/A
AM
PM
TOTAL
0 0 0
PM 4:30 PM
5:45 PM
102
72 30
0 0 0
173 122
51 469 AM 23 604 0 627
667 PM 38 392 0 430
1,136 Total 61 996 0 1,057
Paseo de Valencia
Paseo de Valencia
Paseo de Valencia
Alicia Town Center Dwy
Alicia Town Center Dwy

PEAK HOUR
AimTD LLC

TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
Paseo de Valencia
Alicia Town Center Dwy
Alicia Town Center Dwy
Laguna Hills
SC4032

ALL HOURS

Appendix C
Existing Peak Hour Level of Service Calculation Worksheets

Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.548
Level Of Service: A
Delay (sec / veh): -
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: ICU 1
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: Alicia Parkway at Paseo de Valencia
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 292 1089 95 78 1240 308 285 319 261 128 435 60 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 73 272 24 20 310 77 71 80 65 32 109 15 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 292 1089 95 78 1240 308 285 319 261 128 435 60 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 292 1089 95 78 1240 308 285 319 261 128 435 60 Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Volumes
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 1: 1 AM Existing
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Intersection V/C 0.548
Intersection LOS A
V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.09 0.23 0.23 0.05 0.24 0.18 0.08 0.09 0.07 0.04 0.09 0.04 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups 1,8
Signal Group 1 6 0 5 2 0 3 8 8 7 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Overlap Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 5.00
Cycle Length [s] 100
Intersection Settings
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 1: 1 AM Existing
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.467
Level Of Service: A
Delay (sec / veh): -
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: ICU 1
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 2: Alicia Parkway at Community Center Drive/Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 1 Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Community Center Drive Al To Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 119 1468 24 5 1481 126 47 11 65 17 15 24 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 30 367 6 1 370 32 12 3 16 4 4 6 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 119 1468 24 5 1481 126 47 11 65 17 15 24 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 119 1468 24 5 1481 126 47 11 65 17 15 24 Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Community Center Drive Al To Volumes
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 1: 1 AM Existing
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Intersection V/C 0.467
Intersection LOS A
V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.07 0.29 0.29 0.00 0.29 0.07 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.01 0.02 0.01 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 1 6 0 5 2 0 0 8 0 0 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 5.00
Cycle Length [s] 100
Intersection Settings
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 1: 1 AM Existing
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.113
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 22.6
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 3: Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 at Paseo de Valencia Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Left Right Thru Right Left Thru
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 26 37 545 58 29 749
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 7 9 136 15 7 187
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.8060 0.8060 0.8060 0.8060 0.8060 0.8060 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 21 30 439 47 23 604
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 21 30 439 47 23 604
Name Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Volumes
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 1: 1 AM Existing
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Intersection LOS C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.85
Approach LOS C A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 15.48 0.00 0.33
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 9.40 4.21 0.00 0.00 2.31 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.38 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00 Movement LOS C B A A A A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 22.61 10.47 0.00 0.00 8.82 0.00 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.11 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.01
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane
Priority Scheme Stop Free Free
Intersection Settings
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 1: 1 AM Existing
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.576
Level Of Service: A
Delay (sec / veh): -
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: ICU 1
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: Alicia Parkway at Paseo de Valencia
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 353 908 120 133 1229 309 183 432 434 102 257 47 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 88 227 30 33 307 77 46 108 109 26 64 12 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 353 908 120 133 1229 309 183 432 434 102 257 47 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 353 908 120 133 1229 309 183 432 434 102 257 47 Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Volumes
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 2: 2 PM Existing
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Intersection V/C 0.576
Intersection LOS A
V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.08 0.24 0.18 0.05 0.13 0.15 0.03 0.05 0.03 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups 1,8
Signal Group 1 6 0 5 2 0 3 8 8 7 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Overlap Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 5.00
Cycle Length [s] 100
Intersection Settings
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 2: 2 PM Existing
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.480
Level Of Service: A
Delay (sec / veh): -
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: ICU 1
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 2: Alicia Parkway at Community Center Drive/Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 1 Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Community Center Drive Al To Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 53 1286 40 14 1672 76 47 7 45 64 3 52 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 13 322 10 4 418 19 12 2 11 16 1 13 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 53 1286 40 14 1672 76 47 7 45 64 3 52 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 53 1286 40 14 1672 76 47 7 45 64 3 52 Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Community Center Drive Al To Volumes
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 2: 2 PM Existing
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Intersection V/C 0.480
Intersection LOS A
V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.03 0.26 0.26 0.01 0.33 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.03 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 1 6 0 5 2 0 0 8 0 0 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 5.00
Cycle Length [s] 100
Intersection Settings
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 2: 2 PM Existing
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.228
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 25.0
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 3: Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 at Paseo de Valencia Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Left Right Thru Right Left Thru
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 53 77 636 121 41 419
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 13 19 159 30 10 105
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.9350 0.9350 0.9350 0.9350 0.9350 0.9350 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 50 72 595 113 38 392
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 50 72 595 113 38 392
Name Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Volumes
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 2: 2 PM Existing
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Intersection LOS D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 1.94
Approach LOS C A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 17.09 0.00 0.84
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 21.36 10.58 0.00 0.00 3.80 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.85 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 Movement LOS D B A A A A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 25.02 11.64 0.00 0.00 9.45 0.00 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.23 0.12 0.01 0.00 0.05 0.00
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane
Priority Scheme Stop Free Free
Intersection Settings
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 2: 2 PM Existing
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Appendix D
Existing Plus Project Peak Hour Level of Service Calculation Worksheets

Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.547
Level Of Service: A
Delay (sec / veh): -
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: ICU 1
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: Alicia Parkway at Paseo de Valencia
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 292 1086 95 93 1231 308 285 323 261 128 439 69 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 73 272 24 23 308 77 71 81 65 32 110 17 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 292 1086 95 93 1231 308 285 323 261 128 439 69 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 292 1086 95 93 1231 308 285 323 261 128 439 69 Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Volumes
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 3: 3 AM Existing + Project
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Intersection V/C 0.547
Intersection LOS A
V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.09 0.23 0.23 0.05 0.24 0.18 0.08 0.10 0.07 0.04 0.09 0.04 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups 1,8
Signal Group 1 6 0 5 2 0 3 8 8 7 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Overlap Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 5.00
Cycle Length [s] 100
Intersection Settings
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 3: 3 AM Existing + Project
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.476
Level Of Service: A
Delay (sec / veh): -
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: ICU 1
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 2: Alicia Parkway at Community Center Drive/Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 1 Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Community Center Drive Al To Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 119 1458 39 7 1470 126 47 11 65 35 15 31 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 30 365 10 2 368 32 12 3 16 9 4 8 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 119 1458 39 7 1470 126 47 11 65 35 15 31 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 119 1458 39 7 1470 126 47 11 65 35 15 31 Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Community Center Drive Al To Volumes
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 3: 3 AM Existing + Project
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Intersection V/C 0.476
Intersection LOS A
V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.07 0.29 0.29 0.00 0.29 0.07 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.03 0.02 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 1 6 0 5 2 0 0 8 0 0 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 5.00
Cycle Length [s] 100
Intersection Settings
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 3: 3 AM Existing + Project
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.204
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 25.4
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 3: Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 at Paseo de Valencia Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Left Right Thru Right Left Thru
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 45 52 535 92 37 746
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 11 13 134 23 9 186
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.8060 0.8060 0.8060 0.8060 0.8060 0.8060 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 36 42 431 74 30 601
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 36 42 431 74 30 601
Name Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Volumes
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 3: 3 AM Existing + Project
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Intersection LOS D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 1.35
Approach LOS C A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 17.53 0.00 0.42
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 18.55 6.17 0.00 0.00 3.03 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.74 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.00 Movement LOS D B A A A A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 25.41 10.71 0.00 0.00 8.94 0.00 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.20 0.08 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.01
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane
Priority Scheme Stop Free Free
Intersection Settings
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 3: 3 AM Existing + Project
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.574
Level Of Service: A
Delay (sec / veh): -
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: ICU 1
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: Alicia Parkway at Paseo de Valencia
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 353 905 120 153 1218 309 183 438 434 102 263 59 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 88 226 30 38 305 77 46 110 109 26 66 15 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 353 905 120 153 1218 309 183 438 434 102 263 59 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 353 905 120 153 1218 309 183 438 434 102 263 59 Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Volumes
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 4: 4 PM Existing + Project
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Intersection V/C 0.574
Intersection LOS A
V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.09 0.24 0.18 0.05 0.13 0.15 0.03 0.05 0.03 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups 1,8
Signal Group 1 6 0 5 2 0 3 8 8 7 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Overlap Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 5.00
Cycle Length [s] 100
Intersection Settings
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 4: 4 PM Existing + Project
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.491
Level Of Service: A
Delay (sec / veh): -
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: ICU 1
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 2: Alicia Parkway at Community Center Drive/Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 1 Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Community Center Drive Al To Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 53 1274 61 17 1658 76 47 7 45 87 3 61 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 13 319 15 4 415 19 12 2 11 22 1 15 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 53 1274 61 17 1658 76 47 7 45 87 3 61 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 53 1274 61 17 1658 76 47 7 45 87 3 61 Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Community Center Drive Al To Volumes
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 4: 4 PM Existing + Project
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Intersection V/C 0.491
Intersection LOS A
V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.03 0.26 0.26 0.01 0.33 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.05 0.04 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 1 6 0 5 2 0 0 8 0 0 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 5.00
Cycle Length [s] 100
Intersection Settings
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 4: 4 PM Existing + Project
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.345
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 29.8
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 3: Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 at Paseo de Valencia Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Left Right Thru Right Left Thru
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 76 94 626 159 51 415
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 19 24 156 40 13 104
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.9350 0.9350 0.9350 0.9350 0.9350 0.9350 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 71 88 585 149 48 388
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 71 88 585 149 48 388
Name Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Volumes
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 4: 4 PM Existing + Project
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Intersection LOS D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 2.73
Approach LOS C A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 19.95 0.00 1.05
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 36.60 13.64 0.00 0.00 4.90 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.46 0.55 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.00 Movement LOS D B A A A A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 29.75 12.02 0.00 0.00 9.62 0.00 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.35 0.16 0.01 0.00 0.06 0.00
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane
Priority Scheme Stop Free Free
Intersection Settings
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 4: 4 PM Existing + Project
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Appendix E
Project Opening Year (2025) Without Project Peak Hour
Level of Service Calculation Worksheets

Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.575
Level Of Service: A
Delay (sec / veh): -
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: ICU 1
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: Alicia Parkway at Paseo de Valencia
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 323 1134 97 86 1282 320 299 338 285 131 460 69 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 81 284 24 22 321 80 75 85 71 33 115 17 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 323 1134 97 86 1282 320 299 338 285 131 460 69 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 323 1134 97 86 1282 320 299 338 285 131 460 69 Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Volumes
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 5: 5 AM 2025 Cumulative
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Intersection V/C 0.575
Intersection LOS A
V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.10 0.24 0.24 0.05 0.25 0.19 0.09 0.10 0.07 0.04 0.09 0.04 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups 1,8
Signal Group 1 6 0 5 2 0 3 8 8 7 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Overlap Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 5.00
Cycle Length [s] 100
Intersection Settings
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 5: 5 AM 2025 Cumulative
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.482
Level Of Service: A
Delay (sec / veh): -
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: ICU 1
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 2: Alicia Parkway at Community Center Drive/Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 1 Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Community Center Drive Al To Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 121 1545 24 5 1547 129 48 11 66 17 15 24 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 30 386 6 1 387 32 12 3 17 4 4 6 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 121 1545 24 5 1547 129 48 11 66 17 15 24 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 121 1545 24 5 1547 129 48 11 66 17 15 24 Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Community Center Drive Al To Volumes
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 5: 5 AM 2025 Cumulative
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Intersection V/C 0.482
Intersection LOS A
V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.07 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.30 0.08 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.01 0.02 0.01 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 1 6 0 5 2 0 0 8 0 0 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 5.00
Cycle Length [s] 100
Intersection Settings
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 5: 5 AM 2025 Cumulative
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.123
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 24.4
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 3: Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 at Paseo de Valencia Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Left Right Thru Right Left Thru
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 26 38 579 60 29 794
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 7 10 145 15 7 199
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.8060 0.8060 0.8060 0.8060 0.8060 0.8060 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 21 31 467 48 23 640
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 21 31 467 48 23 640
Name Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Volumes
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 5: 5 AM 2025 Cumulative
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Intersection LOS C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.85
Approach LOS C A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 16.24 0.00 0.32
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 10.34 4.46 0.00 0.00 2.38 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.41 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 Movement LOS C B A A A A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 24.42 10.64 0.00 0.00 8.95 0.00 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.12 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.01
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane
Priority Scheme Stop Free Free
Intersection Settings
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 5: 5 AM 2025 Cumulative
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.614
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): -
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: ICU 1
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: Alicia Parkway at Paseo de Valencia
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 392 946 122 144 1276 323 194 468 482 104 283 55 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 98 237 31 36 319 81 49 117 121 26 71 14 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 392 946 122 144 1276 323 194 468 482 104 283 55 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 392 946 122 144 1276 323 194 468 482 104 283 55 Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Volumes
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 6: 6 PM 2025 Cumulative
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Intersection V/C 0.614
Intersection LOS B
V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.12 0.21 0.21 0.08 0.25 0.19 0.06 0.14 0.17 0.03 0.06 0.03 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups 1,8
Signal Group 1 6 0 5 2 0 3 8 8 7 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Overlap Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 5.00
Cycle Length [s] 100
Intersection Settings
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 6: 6 PM 2025 Cumulative
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.500
Level Of Service: A
Delay (sec / veh): -
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: ICU 1
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 2: Alicia Parkway at Community Center Drive/Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 1 Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Community Center Drive Al To Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 54 1364 41 14 1766 78 48 7 46 65 3 53 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 14 341 10 4 442 20 12 2 12 16 1 13 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 54 1364 41 14 1766 78 48 7 46 65 3 53 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 54 1364 41 14 1766 78 48 7 46 65 3 53 Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Community Center Drive Al To Volumes
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 6: 6 PM 2025 Cumulative
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Intersection V/C 0.500
Intersection LOS A
V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.03 0.28 0.28 0.01 0.35 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.03 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 1 6 0 5 2 0 0 8 0 0 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 5.00
Cycle Length [s] 100
Intersection Settings
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 6: 6 PM 2025 Cumulative
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.265
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 28.5
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 3: Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 at Paseo de Valencia Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Left Right Thru Right Left Thru
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 55 78 687 123 42 458
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 14 20 172 31 10 114
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.9350 0.9350 0.9350 0.9350 0.9350 0.9350 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 51 73 642 115 39 428
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 51 73 642 115 39 428
Name Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Volumes
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 6: 6 PM 2025 Cumulative
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Intersection LOS D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 2.01
Approach LOS C A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 18.80 0.00 0.81
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 25.68 11.23 0.00 0.00 4.09 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.03 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.00 Movement LOS D B A A A A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 28.51 11.96 0.00 0.00 9.68 0.00 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.27 0.13 0.01 0.00 0.05 0.00
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane
Priority Scheme Stop Free Free
Intersection Settings
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 6: 6 PM 2025 Cumulative
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Appendix F
Project Opening Year (2025) With Project Peak Hour
Level of Service Calculation Worksheets

Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.574
Level Of Service: A
Delay (sec / veh): -
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: ICU 1
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: Alicia Parkway at Paseo de Valencia
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 323 1131 97 101 1273 320 299 342 285 131 464 78 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 81 283 24 25 318 80 75 86 71 33 116 20 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 323 1131 97 101 1273 320 299 342 285 131 464 78 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 323 1131 97 101 1273 320 299 342 285 131 464 78 Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Volumes
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 7: 7 AM 2025 Cumulative + Project
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Intersection V/C 0.574
Intersection LOS A
V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.10 0.24 0.24 0.06 0.25 0.19 0.09 0.10 0.07 0.04 0.09 0.05 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups 1,8
Signal Group 1 6 0 5 2 0 3 8 8 7 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Overlap Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 5.00
Cycle Length [s] 100
Intersection Settings
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 7: 7 AM 2025 Cumulative + Project
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.491
Level Of Service: A
Delay (sec / veh): -
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: ICU 1
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 2: Alicia Parkway at Community Center Drive/Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 1 Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Community Center Drive Al To Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 121 1535 39 7 1536 129 48 11 66 35 15 31 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 30 384 10 2 384 32 12 3 17 9 4 8 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 121 1535 39 7 1536 129 48 11 66 35 15 31 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 121 1535 39 7 1536 129 48 11 66 35 15 31 Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Community Center Drive Al To Volumes
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 7: 7 AM 2025 Cumulative + Project
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Intersection V/C 0.491
Intersection LOS A
V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.07 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.30 0.08 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.03 0.02 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 1 6 0 5 2 0 0 8 0 0 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 5.00
Cycle Length [s] 100
Intersection Settings
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 7: 7 AM 2025 Cumulative + Project
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.222
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 27.7
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 3: Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 at Paseo de Valencia Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Left Right Thru Right Left Thru
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 45 53 569 93 37 790
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 11 13 142 23 9 198
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.8060 0.8060 0.8060 0.8060 0.8060 0.8060 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 36 43 459 75 30 637
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 36 43 459 75 30 637
Name Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Volumes
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 7: 7 AM 2025 Cumulative + Project
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Intersection LOS D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 1.36
Approach LOS C A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 18.62 0.00 0.41
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 20.53 6.48 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.82 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 Movement LOS D B A A A A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 27.73 10.88 0.00 0.00 9.07 0.00 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.22 0.08 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.01
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane
Priority Scheme Stop Free Free
Intersection Settings
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 7: 7 AM 2025 Cumulative + Project
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.612
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): -
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: ICU 1
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: Alicia Parkway at Paseo de Valencia
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 392 943 122 164 1265 323 194 474 482 104 289 67 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 98 236 31 41 316 81 49 119 121 26 72 17 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 392 943 122 164 1265 323 194 474 482 104 289 67 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 392 943 122 164 1265 323 194 474 482 104 289 67 Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Volumes
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 8: 8 PM 2025 Cumulative + Project
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Intersection V/C 0.612
Intersection LOS B
V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.12 0.21 0.21 0.10 0.25 0.19 0.06 0.14 0.17 0.03 0.06 0.04 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups 1,8
Signal Group 1 6 0 5 2 0 3 8 8 7 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Overlap Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 5.00
Cycle Length [s] 100
Intersection Settings
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 8: 8 PM 2025 Cumulative + Project
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.511
Level Of Service: A
Delay (sec / veh): -
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: ICU 1
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 2: Alicia Parkway at Community Center Drive/Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 1 Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No Yes Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Community Center Drive Al To Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 54 1352 62 17 1752 78 48 7 46 88 3 62 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 14 338 16 4 438 20 12 2 12 22 1 16 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 54 1352 62 17 1752 78 48 7 46 88 3 62 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 54 1352 62 17 1752 78 48 7 46 88 3 62 Name Alicia Parkway Alicia Parkway Community Center Drive Al To Volumes
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 8: 8 PM 2025 Cumulative + Project
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Intersection V/C 0.511
Intersection LOS A
V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.03 0.28 0.28 0.01 0.34 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.05 0.04 Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 1 6 0 5 2 0 0 8 0 0 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 5.00
Cycle Length [s] 100
Intersection Settings
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 8: 8 PM 2025 Cumulative + Project
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.391
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 34.6
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 3: Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 at Paseo de Valencia Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Left Right Thru Right Left Thru
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 77 95 676 161 52 453
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 19 24 169 40 13 113
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.9350 0.9350 0.9350 0.9350 0.9350 0.9350 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 72 89 632 151 49 424
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 72 89 632 151 49 424
Name Alicia Town Center Driveway No. 2 Paseo de Valencia Paseo de Valencia Volumes
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 8: 8 PM 2025 Cumulative + Project
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Intersection LOS D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 2.87
Approach LOS C A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 22.32 0.00 1.02
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 43.23 14.45 0.00 0.00 5.25 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.73 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.00 Movement LOS D B A A A A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 34.60 12.37 0.00 0.00 9.86 0.00 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.39 0.16 0.01 0.00 0.07 0.00
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane
Priority Scheme Stop Free Free
Intersection Settings
RK Engineering Group, Inc.

Scenario 8: 8 PM 2025 Cumulative + Project
JN: 2776-2023-01
Alicia T.C. Ralph's Fuel Center
Version 2023 (SP 0-3)
Generated with

Appendix G
Gas Station Queuing Count Worksheets

LOCATION: Ralphs 12618 Limonite DAY: Thursday
CITY: Eastvale DATE: 6/8/2023
GAS PUMPS: 14
TIME
Vehicles at
Gas Pump
Vehcles Waiting
For Gas Pump
TOTAL
7:00 6 0 6
7:05 5 0 5
7:10 5 0 5
7:15 4 0 4
7:20 8 0 8
7:25 4 0 4
7:30 2 0 2
7:35 4 0 4
7:40 4 0 4
7:45 4 0 4
7:50 6 0 6
7:55 6 0 6
8:00 5 0 5
8:05 6 0 6
8:10 5 0 5
8:15 7 0 7
8:20 10 1 11
8:25 7 0 7
8:30 9 2 11
8:35 5 0 5
8:40 5 0 5
8:45 5 0 5
8:50 4 0 4
8:55 3 0 3
9:00 9 0 9

QUEUE SURVEY
Counts Unlimited, Inc.

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

LOCATION: Ralphs 12618 Limonite DAY: Thursday
CITY: Eastvale DATE: 6/8/2023
GAS PUMPS: 14
TIME
Vehicles at
Gas Pump
Vehcles Waiting
For Gas Pump
TOTAL
16:00 11 0 11
16:05 9 0 9
16:10 12 0 12
16:15 9 0 9
16:20 7 0 7
16:25 10 0 10
16:30 7 0 7
16:35 11 0 11
16:40 13 0 13
16:45 11 0 11
16:50 9 0 9
16:55 6 0 6
17:00 10 0 10
17:05 11 0 11
17:10 8 0 8
17:15 7 0 7
17:20 9 0 9
17:25 9 0 9
17:30 6 0 6
17:35 12 1 13
17:40 10 1 11
17:45 11 0 11
17:50 5 0 5
17:55 6 0 6
18:00 9 0 9

QUEUE SURVEY
Counts Unlimited, Inc.

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

LOCATION: Ralphs 12618 Limonite DAY: Saturday
CITY: Eastvale DATE: 6/3/2023
GAS PUMPS: 14
TIME
Vehicles at
Gas Pump
Vehcles Waiting
For Gas Pump
TOTAL
12:00 5 0 5
12:05 6 0 6
12:10 6 0 6
12:15 9 0 9
12:20 7 0 7
12:25 6 0 6
12:30 8 0 8
12:35 5 0 5
12:40 6 0 6
12:45 6 0 6
12:50 6 0 6
12:55 4 0 4
13:00 7 0 7
13:05 6 0 6
13:10 8 0 8
13:15 11 0 11
13:20 8 0 8
13:25 8 0 8
13:30 12 0 12
13:35 10 0 10
13:40 7 0 7
13:45 10 0 10
13:50 10 0 10
13:55 7 0 7
14:00 8 0 8

QUEUE SURVEY
Counts Unlimited, Inc.

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

LOCATION: Food For Less, 2090 Garey DAY: Thursday
CITY: Pomona DATE: 6/8/2023
GAS PUMPS: 10
TIME
Vehicles at
Gas Pump
Vehcles Waiting
For Gas Pump
TOTAL
7:00 4 0 4
7:05 0 0 0
7:10 4 0 4
7:15 2 0 2
7:20 0 0 0
7:25 1 0 1
7:30 4 0 4
7:35 1 0 1
7:40 0 0 0
7:45 2 0 2
7:50 3 0 3
7:55 2 0 2
8:00 2 0 2
8:05 2 0 2
8:10 1 0 1
8:15 1 0 1
8:20 3 0 3
8:25 1 0 1
8:30 1 0 1
8:35 0 0 0
8:40 1 0 1
8:45 0 0 0
8:50 3 0 3
8:55 1 0 1
9:00 1 0 1

QUEUE SURVEY
Counts Unlimited, Inc.

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

LOCATION: Food For Less, 2090 Garey DAY: Thursday
CITY: Pomona DATE: 6/8/2023
GAS PUMPS: 10
TIME
Vehicles at
Gas Pump
Vehcles Waiting
For Gas Pump
TOTAL
16:00 4 0 4
16:05 4 0 4
16:10 2 0 2
16:15 1 0 1
16:20 2 0 2
16:25 2 0 2
16:30 0 0 0
16:35 6 0 6
16:40 5 0 5
16:45 5 0 5
16:50 4 0 4
16:55 5 0 5
17:00 2 0 2
17:05 3 0 3
17:10 6 0 6
17:15 3 0 3
17:20 0 0 0
17:25 3 0 3
17:30 5 0 5
17:35 2 0 2
17:40 0 0 0
17:45 1 0 1
17:50 5 0 5
17:55 1 0 1
18:00 2 0 2

QUEUE SURVEY
Counts Unlimited, Inc.

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

LOCATION: Food For Less, 2090 Garey DAY: Saturday
CITY: Pomona DATE: 6/3/2023
GAS PUMPS: 10
TIME
Vehicles at
Gas Pump
Vehcles Waiting
For Gas Pump
TOTAL
12:00 4 0 4
12:05 6 0 6
12:10 7 0 7
12:15 4 0 4
12:20 3 0 3
12:25 6 0 6
12:30 7 0 7
12:35 5 0 5
12:40 2 0 2
12:45 3 0 3
12:50 2 0 2
12:55 4 0 4
13:00 5 0 5
13:05 4 0 4
13:10 5 0 5
13:15 6 0 6
13:20 5 0 5
13:25 5 0 5
13:30 5 0 5
13:35 5 0 5
13:40 3 0 3
13:45 2 0 2
13:50 2 0 2
13:55 3 0 3
14:00 3 0 3

QUEUE SURVEY
Counts Unlimited, Inc.

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

group, inc. engineering

UPDATED PARKING STUDY

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
City of Laguna Hills, CA

April 22, 2024
Ms. Monique Lacher
Aliso Equities Ltd.
2801 W. Coast Hwy. #380
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Subject: Alicia Town Center Updated Parking Study, City of Laguna Hills Dear Ms. Lacher:

Introduction
RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. (RK) is pleased to provide this updated parking study for the Alicia Town Center Shopping Center. The existing site is located at 25594-25632 Alicia Parkway and 25539 Paseo de Valencia in the City of Laguna Hills, California. The location map is provided in Exhibit A.

Representatives of Alicia Town Center are proposing to include a fuel station with a 178-sf prefabricated kiosk. The fuel station will include water and air services. The project will require the removal of approximately 39 parking spaces to accommodate the gas station.

Four (4) new parking spaces will be added behind Ralphs (306 total current parking spaces – 39 spaces + 4 spaces which is 271 parking spaces in total after the proposed project is constructed). Exhibit B shows the site plan and the location of the four additional spaces.

RK completed an observed parking study for the shopping center in April 2019. The study included parking counts during a typical Friday and Saturday in the month of November. A full tenant occupancy scenario was calculated utilizing observed parking counts, parking demand for tenant vacancies was determined by utilizing the ULI Shared Parking Time-ofDay factors with the Laguna Hills parking requirements, and a 10% increase was added to account for potential fluctuations of parking demand. The analysis also included a calculation of converting vacant tenant space to a “Most Intense Use” like a Gym, Spa, or health club. The findings concluded that under both scenarios, adequate parking is provided at the shopping center assuming full tenant occupancy. As a result, the city approved the project with CUP/PUP 11-18-4383 by Resolution No PA2019-05-14-X.

RK19662

To confirm the adequacy of parking for the shopping center with the proposed fuel station, RK will utilize the observed parking data from the 2019 parking study. This analysis will be consistent with the 2019 study and utilize the City of Laguna Hills Municipal Parking code to verify the parking requirements for the project.

Appendix A includes the 2019 Alicia Town Center Parking Study.

City of Laguna Hills Parking Code: Tables 1 & 2
The project is utilizing the City of Laguna Hills Parking Municipal Parking Code Section 9-

44. A - Off Street Parking Spaces to determine the parking requirements for the project.

The analysis covers existing and proposed parking calculations as identified below:

Table 1: Existing Conditions (Year 2019)

For consistency and accuracy, the Existing Conditions Table is consistent with the 2019 approved parking study Table 1. The project provides a total of 306 parking spaces.

Considering all tenants and vacancies the center has a parking deficiency of 40 parking spaces or 12% deficient per code.

Table 2: Proposed Conditions w/ Fuel Station
Table 2 identifies the current tenants with the proposed fuel station. Based on the municipal parking code, the parking requirement for the fuel station is “2 stalls plus additional parking as required for a convenience store or auto service/repair uses. The gas station convenience store parking requirement shall be 1 stall /800SF-GFA. Parking spaces abutting air and water service shall not be included in the total number of parking spaces.” As a result, the fuel station parking requirement is 3 parking spaces.

There are no current vacancies within the shopping center. As noted, the proposed fuel station will displace a total of 39 parking spaces. As a result, the parking inventory has been reduced to 271 parking spaces. Assuming the proposed fuel station is in operation, the project has a parking deficiency of 73 parking spaces or 21% deficient per code.

Based on the parking requirements for both existing and proposed conditions, the project falls short of code standards in both scenarios. However, it is crucial to understand that the code's parking deficiency might not necessarily translate to an actual shortage of parking on-site.

RK19662

This is because the parking code does not account for factors such as operational hours, mixed uses, or any unique site operations. Consequently, an hourly parking analysis was conducted to assess the adequacy of parking for the project in a real-world context. The 2019 observed parking data is being utilized to confirm the adequacy of parking based on a full tenant occupancy scenario with the proposed fuel station in operation.

Observed Parking Demand Results: Tables 3 & 4
To determine the adequacy of parking for the project, RK utilized the observed parking counts from the 2019 parking study, the proposed fuel station, and the tenant vacancies at that time (See Table 1). The parking surveys were conducted during the following days and times:

Day Hours Interval
Friday, November 2, 2018 6:00 AM - 9:00 PM Hourly
Saturday November 3, 2018 6:00 AM - 9:00 PM Hourly
The observed analysis follows standard engineering practices and guidelines. The survey days included typical weather conditions with no rain. The observed parking counts were completed when the site was in operation with typical operation conditions and times.

Furthermore, the parking survey hours of 6:00 AM to 9:00 PM were selected because they cover the daily hours of operation for the site. A total of 32 hours of observed parking demand data was collected to determine the adequacy of parking for the project. The parking surveys were conducted by an independent third party (Counts Unlimited, Inc.).

Table 3: Weekday Observed Parking Survey Results w/ Fuel Station The peak parking demand occurred from 5:00 PM - 6:00 PM when a total of 179 vehicles were parked for the project. Since the project will have a total of 271 parking spaces, the site is 66% occupied with 92 parking spaces available.

Table 4: Weekend Observed Parking Survey Results w/ Fuel Station The peak parking demand occurred from 11:00 AM - 12:00 AM when a total of 201 vehicles were parked for the project. Since the project will have a total of 271 parking spaces, the site is 74% occupied with 70 parking spaces available. This represents the overall peak parking demand for the project.

RK19662

Based on the results of the observed parking surveys, the shopping center has a 70-parking stall surplus which is an adequate number of parking spaces to serve the project assuming a full tenant occupancy scenario with the additional fuel station in operation.

Conclusion
Alicia Town Center currently consists of a total of 65,808 square feet of retail, restaurant, bank, dental, grocery store, uses, etc. The site has a total of 306 parking spaces.

Representatives of the project are proposing constructing a fuel station with a 178-squarefoot kiosk. The project will require the removal of approximately thirty-nine (39) parking spaces to accommodate the gas station. Four (4) new parking spaces will be added behind Ralphs (306 total current parking spaces – 39 spaces + 4 spaces which is approximately 271 total spaces in total after the proposed project is constructed).

RK reviewed the parameters and scope of the updated study with the City of Laguna Hills before starting. This study follows standard engineering practice and guidelines for determining future parking demands for a neighborhood shopping center use and is consistent with the 2019 calculations.

The code required parking identifies a parking deficiency in both existing and proposed scenarios. However, it is important to note that the City of Laguna Hill’s approved the 2019 CUP/PUP and Resolution whereby it was shown that the Center has adequate surplus available parking to accommodate existing uses and future uses requiring more parking.

The Center’s actual peak parking demand is far below the parking Code requirement, and there is a surplus parking capacity for a wide range of potential uses.

RK utilized the approved 2019 observed parking data to confirm the adequacy of parking for the project assuming a full tenant occupancy scenario with the proposed fuel station in operation. Based on the observed parking count data, the project has enough parking spaces to serve all uses.

In conclusion, the results of the analysis indicate that the Alicia Town Center has an adequate number of parking spaces to accommodate the proposed fuel station in a full-tenant occupancy scenario, with a parking surplus still available.

RK19662

Attachments
rk19662.doc
JN:2776-2024-01
If you have any questions regarding this review or need further clarification, please contact us at (949) 474-0809.

Sincerely,
RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.

Rogier Goedecke
President

Exhibits

engineering group, inc. ALICIA TOWN CENTER UPDATED PARKING STUDY, City of Laguna Hills, CA 2776-2024-01 N Location Map Exhibit A Legend: = Project Site Boundary

engineering group, inc. ALICIA TOWN CENTER UPDATED PARKING STUDY, City of Laguna Hills, CA 2776-2024-01 N Site Plan Exhibit B 12 34 Legend: = 4 Additional Parking Spaces

Tables

Suite Tenant S.F.2 Use Percent of Gross Floor Area Parking Code1 Number of Spaces Required City Approval 25632 Wells Fargo Bank 3,980 BANK 6% 1 space / 250 SF-GFA 12 COUO 4-16-1301125630 Starbucks 1,250 COFFEE 2% 1 space / 250 SF-GFA 5 25624 VACANT (One West Bank) 3,000 BANK 5% 1 space / 200 SF-GFA 1525620 Mardi's Jewelry 1,862 RETAIL 3% 1 space / 200 SF-GFA 925616 Mission Donuts 1,000 RESTAURANT 2% 1 space / 250 SF-GFA 4 COUO 6-16738 25614 Subway 1,000 RESTAURANT 2% 1 space / 200 SF-GFA 5 COUO 12468 25610 The Pizza Store & More 2,250 RESTAURANT 3% 1 space / 250 SF-GFA 23 COUO 1108025608 VACANT 1,125 RETAIL 2% 1 space / 200 SF-GFA 6 25606 I Heart Sweet Bar 1,125 RESTAURANT 2% 1 space / 250 SF-GFA 4 COM 10-17-15660 25604 Supercuts 812 BARBER SHOP 1% 2 Spaces per Chair 14 25602 Alicia Cleaners 800 DRY CLEANER 1% 1 space / 400 SF-GFA 2 25596 Laguna Spa Dentistry 1,600 DENTAL OFFICE 2% 1 space /150 SF-GFA 8 COUO 2044-1284 25594 Lovely Nails 580 NAIL SALON 1% 3/STATION (4 STATIONS) 12 COUO 2005-080425539 Ralph's 45,424 RETAIL 69% 1 space / 200 SF-GFA 227 4,125 6% 21
65,808 100% 346
306
-40
-12%
3 The Existing Conditions from the 2019 parking study are utilzed for this analysis. The City approved the project with CUP/PUP 11-18-4383 by Resolution No PA2019-05-14-X.

Alicia Town Center Required Parking Code
25602 Alicia Parkway, Laguna Hills
Table 1
2 S.F.GFA Square Feet Gross Floor Area
Total Shopping CenterPercent Deficient Per Code
1 Parking rates obtained from City of Laguna Hills Municipal Parking Code Section 9-44.A - Off Street Parking Spaces Total VacancyNumber of Deficient Parking Spaces Per Municipal CodeParking Spaces Provided On-Site Existing Conditions (Based on April 2019 Approved Parking Study)3 RG:rk19662TBJN:2776-2024-01

Suite Tenant S.F.2 Use Percent of Gross Floor Area Parking Code1 Number of Spaces Required City Approval N/A PROPOSED FUEL STATION 178 Gas Station with 178 SF-GFA Kiosk. No Convenience Market 0.27% 2 stalls plus additional parking as required
for convenience store or auto service/repair
uses. The gas station convenience store
parking requirement shall be 1 stall /800SFGFA. Parking spaces abutting air and water service shall be not included in the total
number of parking spaces.
3 25632 Wells Fargo Bank 3,980 BANK 6% 1 space / 250 SF-GFA 12 COUO 4-16-13011 25630 Karak Coffee 1,250 COFFEE 2% 1 space / 250 SF-GFA 5 25624 Golden 1 Credit Union 3,000 BANK 5% 1 space / 200 SF-GFA 12 BLDG-0029-2019 25620 Mardi's Jewelry 1,862 RETAIL 3% 1 space / 200 SF-GFA 9 25616 Porchbox 1,000 RESTAURANT 2% 1 space / 250 SF-GFA 425614 Subway 1,000 RESTAURANT 2% 1 space / 200 SF-GFA 5 COUO 12468 25610 The Pizza Store & More 2,250 RESTAURANT 3% 1 space / 250 SF-GFA 23 COUO 1108025608 Wateria 1,125 RETAIL 2% 1 space / 200 SF-GFA 6 25606 Pengo 1,125 RESTAURANT 2% 1 space / 250 SF-GFA 4 COM 10-17-15660 25604 Aliso Nails 812 NAIL SALON 1% 3/STATION (6 STATIONS) 18 25602 Alicia Cleaners 800 DRY CLEANER 1% 1 space / 400 SF-GFA 2 25596 Laguna Spa Dentistry 1,600 DENTAL OFFICE 2% 1 space /150 SF-GFA 8 COUO 2044-1284 25594 Threading 580 BEAUTY 1% 3/STATION (2 STATIONS) 6
25539 Ralph's 45,424 RETAIL 69% 1 space / 200 SF-GFA 227 65,986 100% 344
271
-73
-21%
3 The project will require the removal of approximately 39 parking spaces to accommodate the gas station. Four (4) new parking spaces will be added behind Ralphs (306 total current parking spaces – 38 spaces + 4 spaces which isapproximately 271 total spaces in total after the proposed project is constructed).

Table 2
Alicia Town Center Required Parking Code
Proposed Conditions w/ Fuel Station
25602 Alicia Parkway, Laguna Hills
Total Shopping CenterParking Spaces Provided On-Site3Number of Deficient Parking Spaces Per Municipal CodePercent Deficient Per Code1 Parking rates obtained from City of Laguna Hills Municipal Parking Code Section 9-44.A - Off Street Parking Spaces2 S.F.GFA Square Feet Gross Floor Area RG:rk19662TBJN:2776-2024-01

271 Parking
Spaces
Observed Parking
Demand1
Add Vacant Retail
Use 1/200
(4,125 s.f)²
Add Proposed
Fuel Station
Sub-Total Parking Demand
with Proposed Use
Add 10% Parking
Demand3
Total Parking
Demand
Percent of
Occupied Parking
Spaces
Parking Spaces
Available
6:00 AM 39 21 3 63 6 69 26% 202
7:00 AM 58 21 3 82 8 90 33% 181
8:00 AM 70 21 3 94 9 103 38% 168
9:00 AM 84 21 3 108 11 119 44% 152
10:00 AM 109 21 3 133 13 146 54% 125
11:00 AM 99 21 3 123 12 135 50% 136
12:00 PM 104 21 3 128 13 141 52% 130
1:00 PM 138 21 3 162 16 178 66% 932:00 PM 120 21 3 144 14 158 58% 113 3:00 PM 123 21 3 147 15 162 60% 109
4:00 PM 135 21 3 159 16 175 65% 965:00 PM 139 21 3 163 16 179 66% 926:00 PM 120 21 3 144 14 158 58% 113 7:00 PM 105 21 3 129 13 142 52% 129
8:00 PM 91 21 3 115 12 127 47% 145
9:00 PM 84 21 3 108 11 119 44% 152
³ To account for potential fluctuations of parking demand, 10% was added to the parking counts. 2 Retail parking code (1 space / 200 SF-GFA) for the shopping center was utilized to demonstrate full tenant occupancy based on the existing 4,125 square feet of vacant tenant use. As a result, a total of 21 spaces was added to the observed counts during all hours of the day. The observed parking counts from the 2019 parking study are utilzed for this analysis. The City approved the project with CUP/PUP 11-18-4383 by Resolution No PA2019-05-14-X. .

Table 3
Alicia Town Center 25602 Alicia Parkway, Laguna Hills
Observed Parking Survey Results (Full Tenant Occupancy w/ Fuel Station) Friday, November 2, 2018
1 Observed parking surveys were obtained during a typical Friday and Saturday from 6AM to 9PM at one hour intervals. The study days are consistent with shopping center peak parking demand data published in the ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers) Parking Generation Manual 5th Edition.

RG:rk19662TBJN:2776-2024-01

271 Parking
Spaces
Observed Parking
Demand1
Add Vacant Retail
Use 1/200
(4,125 s.f)²
Add Proposed
Fuel Station
Sub-Total Parking Demand
with Proposed Use
Add 10% of
Parking Demand³ Total Parking Demand
Percent of
Occupied
Parking Spaces
Parking Spaces
Available
6:00 AM 34 21 3 58 6 64 24% 2077:00 AM 49 21 3 73 7 80 30% 1918:00 AM 71 21 3 95 10 105 39% 1679:00 AM 96 21 3 120 12 132 49% 139 10:00 AM 128 21 3 152 15 167 62% 104
11:00 AM 159 21 3 183 18 201 74% 70
12:00 PM 125 21 3 149 15 164 60% 107
1:00 PM 108 21 3 132 13 145 54% 126
2:00 PM 133 21 3 157 16 173 64% 983:00 PM 117 21 3 141 14 155 57% 116 4:00 PM 130 21 3 154 15 169 63% 102
5:00 PM 141 21 3 165 17 182 67% 906:00 PM 101 21 3 125 13 138 51% 134 7:00 PM 71 21 3 95 10 105 39% 167
8:00 PM 72 21 3 96 10 106 39% 165
9:00 PM 59 21 3 83 8 91 34% 180
³ To account for potential fluctuations of parking demand, 10% was added to the parking counts. 2 Retail parking code (1 space / 200 SF-GFA) for the shopping center was utilized to demonstrate full tenant occupancy based on the existing 4,125 square feet of vacant tenant use. As a result, a total of 21 spaces was added to the observed counts during all hours of the day. The observed parking counts from the 2019 parking study are utilzed for this analysis. The City approved the project with CUP/PUP 11-18-4383 by Resolution No PA2019-05-14-X. .

Table 4
Alicia Town Center 25602 Alicia Parkway, Laguna Hills
Observed Parking Survey Results (Full Tenant Occupancy w/ Fuel Station) Saturday, November 3, 2018
1 Observed parking surveys were obtained during a typical Friday and Saturday from 6:00 AM to 9:00 PM at one hour intervals. The study days are consistent with shopping center peak parking demand data published in the ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers) Parking Generation Manual 5th Edition.

RG:rk19662TBJN:2776-2024-01

Appendices

Appendix A
2019 Alicia Town Center Parking Study

April 2, 2019
Ms. Monique Lacher
Aliso Equities Ltd.
2801 W. Coast Hwy. #380
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Subject: Alicia Town Center Parking Study, City of Laguna Hills Dear Ms. Lacher:

Introduction
RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. (RK) is pleased to provide this parking study for the Alicia Town Center Shopping Center. The existing site is located at 25594-25632 Alicia Parkway and 25539 Paseo de Valencia in the City of Laguna Hills, California. The location map is provided in Exhibit A.

Alicia Town Center currently consists of approximately 65,808 square feet of retail, restaurant, barber shop, bank, dental, grocery store, etc. The shopping center is anchored by a Ralph’s super market occupying approximately 45,424 square feet or 69% of the gross floor area. The site currently has approximately 4,125 square feet or 6% of vacant tenant space.

The shopping center provides a total of 306 available parking spaces (including 8 handicap parking spaces) in a surface lot surrounding the buildings. Parking for the project is shared globally and non-exclusively by all tenants and visitors. The shopping center site plan is provided in Exhibit B. (The parking field has a total of 310 spaces, 4 of which are currently being used for cart storage, leaving a balance of 306 available parking spaces.) A representative of the project (Ms. Monique Lacher) is proposing to add new tenants to the shopping center that may generate a higher parking demand when compared to the existing uses within the site. As a result, a parking code calculation and an observed parking study is required in order to demonstrate that adequate parking is provided for all existing and proposed tenants and land uses.

RK 14067

It should be noted that the parking calculations in this report represent proposed uses with the highest possible parking requirements that are appropriate for the shopping center. By analyzing proposed uses with the most intense parking requirements, it can be determined if the site provides adequate parking for a variety of tenant/land uses based on a 100% occupancy scenario. This will allow representatives of Alicia Town Center to have flexibility with potential tenants and land uses.

City of Laguna Hills Parking Code Existing Conditions: Table 1 Taking into account existing conditions and assuming occupancy of the 4,125 square feet of tenant vacancies, per the City of Laguna Hills Municipal Parking Code (9-44.A Off Street Spaces Required) and the parking requirements for City approved projects; Alicia Town Center requires a total of 346 parking spaces. The project provides a total of 306 parking spaces. As a result, the center has a parking deficiency of 40 parking spaces or 12% deficient per the Municipal Parking Code. Table 1 provides the City of Laguna Hills Municipal Parking Code (9-44.A Off Street Parking Spaces Required) for existing conditions.

The City of Laguna Hills Municipal Parking Code is included in Appendix A.

Potential Tenants/Land Uses for Alicia Town Center
In order to accurately determine the future peak parking demands for Alicia Town Center, RK selected tenant/land uses that have the most intense parking requirements based on the City of Laguna Hills Municipal Parking Code. By calculating the required parking for uses that generate the greatest parking demands, the adequacy of parking can be determined based on a variety of potential tenants and land uses. Therefore, tenants/land uses who require lower parking ratios could easily be accommodated.

As new leases become available, representatives of the shopping center are proposing to convert approximately 7,787 square feet of building area to uses that may generate a higher parking rate. Under existing conditions, the shopping center has a total of 4,125 square feet of vacant tenant space. In addition, representatives are proposing to convert approximately 3,662 square feet of existing tenant uses to uses with a higher parking rate.

The parking requirements of potential tenants occupying the vacant square feet can be calculated by utilizing the Municipal Parking Code. A list of potential land uses with the City of Laguna Hills Municipal Parking Code is outlined in the table below on the following page.

RK 14067

Potential Land Use Alternatives
Square
Feet Use City of Laguna Hills Parking Code Required
Parking
7,787
Gyms, Spas,
& Health
Club
1 space/100 SF-GFA 78
7,787 Medical
Office 1 space/150 SF-GFA 52
7,787 Retail 1 space/200 SF-GFA 39
Based on potential land use alternative parking calculations, Gyms, Spas, & Health Clubs were selected for modeling purposes because it has the most intense parking requirement of 78 parking spaces, or 1 space/100 SF-GFA.

It should be noted however, that it is very unlikely that 7,787 square feet of Gyms, Spas, & Health Clubs use will be utilized in the shopping center. This space will most likely be occupied by a combination of the above listed tenants with lower parking requirements such as restaurant, retail, medical office, etc. The Gyms, Spas, & Health Clubs parking requirement calculation is strictly being utilized to determine the most intense and conservative parking scenario for the project.

City of Laguna Hills Parking Code Most Intense Land Use Scenario: Table 2 Taking into account a full occupancy scenario with 7,787 square feet of Gyms, Spas, & Health Clubs use, per the City of Laguna Hills Municipal Parking Code (9-44.A Off Street Spaces Required) and the parking requirements for City approved projects; Alicia Town Center requires a total of 388 parking spaces. The project provides a total of 306 parking spaces. As a result, the center has a parking deficiency of 82 parking spaces or 21% deficient per the Municipal Parking Code. Table 2 provides the City of Laguna Hills Municipal Parking Code (9-44.A Off Street Parking Spaces Required) for the most intense land use scenario.

RK 14067

Observed Parking Surveys Friday, November 2nd and Saturday, November 3rd, 2018 Due to the calculated parking code deficiency per the Municipal Code, RK has been requested to prepare an observed parking study in order to determine whether adequate parking is available to accommodate proposed tenants/uses within the Alicia Town Center.

Prior to initiating the parking study, RK reviewed the parameters of the study with the City of Laguna Hills. This study follows standard engineering practice and guidelines for determining future parking demands for a neighborhood shopping center use.

It should be noted that the observed parking surveys were obtained during a typical Friday and Saturday from 6AM to 9PM at one hour intervals. The study days are consistent with shopping center peak parking demand data published in the ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers) Parking Generation Manual 5th Edition. The data confirms that peak parking demands at shopping centers typically peak on a Friday and Saturday. Please see Appendix B for shopping center peak weekday and weekend parking rates published by ITE.

In addition, the parking survey timeframes of 6AM to 9PM were selected because they cover the peak time of day factors for a variety of potential tenants/uses within the site.

For example, a health club or restaurant serving breakfast would generate a greater parking demand in the early morning hours when compared to a retail use or restaurant only serving lunch or dinner. As a result, the parking survey covers the peak parking demand time of day factors for a variety of potential land uses.

Observed Peak Parking Demand Survey
Per the direction of the City of Laguna Hills, RK obtained a detailed parking survey capturing the parking demand at Alicia Town Center on a typical Friday, November 2nd and Saturday, November 3rd from 6 AM to 9 PM at one hour intervals. As a result, a total of 30 hours of observed parking counts were collected at the shopping center. The parking surveys were conducted by an independent third party (Counts Unlimited, Inc.,).

Representatives from Counts Unlimited Inc. utilized three (3) parking zones within the study area to determine the hourly parking demand for each zone. During the time of the parking survey, the number of parked vehicles was counted in each of the parking zones.

Exhibit C indicates the parking zones utilized in the report. The raw data of the observed parking counts are included in Appendix C.

RK 14067

The parking survey hours straddle the proposed operating hours for many types of tenants and land uses. As a result, the parking survey covers the peak parking demand time of day factors for a variety of potential land uses.

Gyms, Spas, & Health Clubs are appropriate potential land uses that represent the most intense parking rate (1 space / 100 SF-GFA) for the shopping center. This rate was utilized to demonstrate the use with the greatest parking demand and by conservative measure illustrate that adequate parking is provided.

In order to be conservative, the full parking demand (78 spaces) was added to the observed counts during all hours of the day. In addition, at the time of the observed parking study, a total of 4,125 square feet was vacant. The observed parking counts were not discounted due to the conversion of 3,662 square feet of uses which were occupied at the time of the survey. As a result, other potential uses with lower parking rates such as retail, medical office, restaurant, etc. can also be accommodated within the shopping center.

Observed Parking Survey Results: Tables 3 & 4
A total of 78 parking spaces were added to the parking counts to account for the most intense land use scenario of 7,787 square feet of Gyms, Spas, & Health Clubs use. The parking projection for the project is conservative because it does not take into account typical hourly parking demand variations for Gyms, Spas, & Health Clubs use. The full parking requirement of 78 parking spaces was applied to all of the surveyed hours. As a result, other land uses that generate lower parking requirements can also be accommodated.

Friday, November 2, 2018 Observed Parking Results Full Occupancy Scenario:

Table 3
 As identified in Table 3, assuming full occupancy with 7,787 square feet of the most intense use at Alicia Town Center, the projected peak parking demand for the site occurs from 5:00 PM to 6:00 PM on Friday with a total of 217 parking spaces occupied out of 306 parking spaces provided.
 Hence, based on the observed parking demand survey, 71% of the parking spaces would be occupied during the peak parking demand times with a total of 89 surplus unoccupied parking spaces within the shopping center.

RK 14067

Saturday, November 3, 2018 Observed Parking Results with Full Occupancy Scenario: Table 4
 As identified in Table 4, assuming full occupancy with 7,787 square feet of the most intense use at Alicia Town Center, the projected peak parking demand for the site occurs from 11:00 AM to 12:00 PM on Saturday with a total of 237 parking spaces occupied out of 306 parking spaces provided.
 Hence, based on the observed parking demand survey, 77% of the parking spaces would be occupied during peak parking demand times with a total of 69 surplus unoccupied parking spaces within the shopping center.

Based on the results of 30 hours of observed parking counts at Alicia Town Center and assuming full occupancy with the most intense use, the projected overall peak parking demand occurs from 11:00 AM to 12:00 PM on Saturday when a total of 77% of the parking lot was occupied.

It should be noted however, that it is very unlikely that 7,787 square feet of Gyms, Spas, & Health Clubs use will be utilized in the shopping center. This space will most likely be occupied by a combination of other tenants with lower parking requirements such as restaurant, retail, medical office, etc. The Gyms, Spas, & Health Clubs parking requirement calculation is strictly being utilized to determine the most intense and conservative parking scenario for the project.

The parking projections found in this study are conservative due to the fact that the land use with the most intense parking requirement Gyms, Spas, & Health Clubs was utilized for the study. Also, the full parking rate was added to the observed parking counts for all times of the day.

RK 14067

ULI published peak monthly parking variations for shopping centers was also applied to forecast the peak parking demand during all twelve months of the year. As indicated in the graph below, assuming full tenant occupancy, the peak parking demand of the shopping center never exceeds the parking supply.

ULI PEAK MONTHLY PARKING DEMAND

RK 14067

Conclusion
Alicia Town Center currently consists of a total of 65,808 square feet of retail, restaurant, barber shop, bank, dental, grocery store, etc. The project provides a total of 306 available parking spaces that are shared globally by tenants and visitors in a surface parking lot.

RK reviewed the parameters of the study with the City of Laguna Hills. This study follows standard engineering practice and guidelines for determining future parking demands for a neighborhood shopping center use.

This parking study is conservative due to the following factors:

1. At the time of the parking survey, a total of 4,125 square feet of tenant space was vacant. The City Parking Code was utilized to calculate a 100% occupancy scenario with a potential land use that has the most intense parking requirement.

2. The observed parking counts added a parking demand based on a total of 7,787 square feet of tenant/land use with the highest parking rate appropriate for the shopping center. The parking demand was not discounted due to the conversion of 3,662 square feet of uses which were already occupied by tenants at the time of the survey.

3. The full parking demand (78 spaces) was added to the observed counts during all hours of the day.

4. Based on published ULI data, the parking demand never exceeds the parking supply during all times of the year.

5. As indicated Retail parking code (1 space / 200 SF-GFA) for the shopping center was utilized in Table 3A and 4A to demonstrate full tenant occupancy based on the existing 4,125 square feet of vacant tenant use. As a result, a total of 21 spaces was added to the observed counts during all hours of the day.

Table 4: Observed Parking Survey Results with Full Occupancy Scenario  Based on a conservative calculation and assuming full occupancy with the most intense parking demand, the observed parking study indicates that the projected peak parking demand would occur on a Saturday from

RK 14067

Attachments
RG:sl/rk14067.1doc
JN:2776-2018-01
11:00 AM to 12:00 PM when a total of 77% of the parking lot is occupied.

As a result, a total surplus of 69 parking spaces is available to visitors and employees during peak parking demand time frames. (Refer Table 3 and 4) Table 4A: Observed Parking Survey Results Baseline (Full Tenant Occupancy w/ Retail)
 Based on a conservative calculation and assuming full occupancy with the retail parking demand, the observed parking study indicates that the projected peak parking demand would occur on a Saturday from 11:00 AM to 12:00 PM when a total of 65% of the parking lot is occupied. As a result, a total surplus of 108 parking spaces is available to visitors and employees during peak parking demand time frames. (Refer Table 3A and 4A)
In conclusion, the Alicia Town Center has an adequate number of parking spaces to accommodate potential tenants during all times of the year. Re-leasing up to 7,787 square feet of existing uses to retail, medical-office, restaurant, gym, spa, and health club uses could be accommodated and still provide a sufficient amount of parking on site.

If you have any questions regarding this review or need further clarification, please contact us at (949) 474-0809.

Sincerely,
RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.

Rogier Goedecke
President

Exhibits

ALICIA TOWN CENTER

OBSERVED PARKING ANALYSIS

LAGUNA HILLS, CALIFORNIA
f
,<_
It
t
^.

I
I
i
i
j|-»,C
3^ I
^S laawvf^ s^f
jfs ^ s:§ t=S ^ S% y3:s -^f?
^3a°l° /^TSJ. ^3:± - OQ ^^ )
co . / "^ ub o),
^-^^ 5°;
Lf) J
C\l
OJ/

engineering
group, inc. ALICIA TOWN CENTER OBSERVED PARKING ANALYSIS, City of Laguna Hills 2776-2018-01
Parking Zones
Exhibit C
N
Zone: 1
Zone: 3 Zone: 2

Tables

Suite Tenant S.F.2 Use Percent of Gross Floor Area Parking Code1 Number of Spaces Required City Approval 25632 Wells Fargo Bank 3,980 BANK 6% 1 space / 250 SF-GFA 12 COUO 4-16-1301125630 Starbucks 1,250 COFFEE 2% 1 space / 250 SF-GFA 5 25624 VACANT (One West Bank) 3,000 BANK 5% 1 space / 200 SF-GFA 1525620 Mardi's Jewelry 1,862 RETAIL 3% 1 space / 200 SF-GFA 925616 Mission Donuts 1,000 RESTAURANT 2% 1 space / 200 SF-GFA 4 COUO 6-16738 25614 Subway 1,000 RESTAURANT 2% 1 space / 200 SF-GFA 5 COUO 12468 25610 The Pizza Store & More 2,250 RESTAURANT 3% 1 space / 250 SF-GFA 23 COUO 1108025608 VACANT 1,125 RETAIL 2% 1 space / 200 SF-GFA 6 25606 I Heart Sweet Bar 1,125 RESTAURANT 2% 1 space / 250 SF-GFA 4 COM 10-17-15660 25604 Supercuts 812 BARBER SHOP 1% 2 Spaces per Chair 14 25602 Alicia Cleaners 800 DRY CLEANER 1% 1 space / 400 SF-GFA 2 25596 Laguna Spa Dentistry 1,600 DENTAL OFFICE 2% 1 space /150 SF-GFA 8 COUO 2044-1284 25594 Lovely Nails 580 NAIL SALON 1% 3/STATION (4 STATIONS) 12 COUO 2005-080425539 Ralph's 45,424 RETAIL 69% 1 space / 200 SF-GFA 227 4,125 6% 21
65,808 100% 346
306
-40
-12%
Alicia Town Center Required Parking Code (Existing Conditions) 25602 Alicia Parkway, Laguna Hills
Table 1
2 S.F.GFA Square Feet Gross Floor Area
Total Shopping CenterPercent Deficient Per Code
1 Parking rates obtained from City of Laguna Hills Municipal Parking Code Section 9-44.A - Off Street Parking Spaces Total VacancyNumber of Deficient Parking Spaces Per Municipal CodeParking Spaces Provided On-Site RG:sl/rk14067TBJN:2776-2018-01

Suite Tenant S.F.2 Use Percent of Gross Floor Area Parking Code1 Number of Spaces Required 25632 Wells Fargo Bank 3,980 BANK 6% 1 space / 250 SF-GFA 12 25630 Starbucks 1,250 COFFEE 2% 1 space / 250 SF-GFA 5
25624 VACANT (Gyms, Spas, & Health Club) 3,000 (Gyms, Spas, & Health Club) 5% 1 space / 100 SF-GFA 30 25620 CONVERSION (Gyms, Spas, & Health Club) 1,862 (Gyms, Spas, & Health Club) 3% 1 space/100 SF-GFA 19 25616 CONVERSION (Gyms, Spas, & Health Club) 1,000 (Gyms, Spas, & Health Club) 2% 1 space/100 SF-GFA 10 25614 Subway 1,000 RESTAURANT 2% 1 space / 200 SF-GFA 5 25610 The Pizza Store & More 2,250 RESTAURANT 3% 1 space / 250 SF-GFA 23 25608 VACANT (Gyms, Spas, & Health Club) 1,125 (Gyms, Spas, & Health Club) 2% 1 space/100 SF-GFA 11 25606 I Heart Sweet Bar 1,125 RESTAURANT 2% 1 space / 250 SF-GFA 425604 Supercuts 812 BARBER SHOP 1% 2 Spaces per Chair 14 25602 CONVSERSION (Gyms, Spas, & Health Club) 800 (Gyms, Spas, & Health Club) 1% 1 space/100 SF-GFA 8 25596 Laguna Spa Dentistry 1,600 DENTAL OFFICE 2% 1 space /150 SF-GFA 8 25594 Lovely Nails 580 NAIL SALON 1% 3/STATION (4 STATIONS) 12 25539 Ralph's 45,424 RETAIL 69% 1 space / 200 SF-GFA 227 7,787 (Gyms, Spas, & Health Club) 12% 1 space / 100 SF-GFA 78 65,808 100% 388
Parking Spaces Provided On-Site 306
-82
-21%
Table 2
Alicia Town Center Required Parking Code (Most Intense Use Scenario) 25602 Alicia Parkway, Laguna Hills
Total Proposed (Gyms, Spas, & Health Club) (Most Intense Use)Total Shopping Center 2 S.F.GFA Square Feet Gross Floor Area
3 Gyms, Spas, & Health Clubs are appropriate potential land uses that represent the most intense parking rate (1 space / 100 SF-GFA) for the shopping center. This rate was utilized to demonstrate the use with the greatest parking demand and by conservative measure illustrate that adequate parking is provided based on the observed parking analysis found in Tables 3 & 4. As a result, other potential uses with lower parking rates such as retail, medical office, restaurant, etc. can also be accommodated within the shopping center.

Number of Deficient Parking Spaces Per Municipal CodePercent Deficient Per Code 1 Parking rates obtained from City of Laguna Hills Municipal Parking Code Section 9-44.A - Off Street Parking Spaces RG:sl/rk14067TBJN:2776-2018-01

306 Parking
Spaces
Observed Parking
Demand1
Add Most Intense
Use (Gyms, Spas,
& Health Clubs)
1/100 (7,787 s.f.)2
Total Parking Demand
with Proposed Use
Percent of
Occupied
Parking Spaces
Parking Spaces
Available
6:00 AM 39 78 117 38% 189
7:00 AM 58 78 136 44% 170
8:00 AM 70 78 148 48% 158
9:00 AM 84 78 162 53% 144
10:00 AM 109 78 187 61% 119
11:00 AM 99 78 177 58% 129
12:00 PM 104 78 182 59% 124
1:00 PM 138 78 216 71% 90
2:00 PM 120 78 198 65% 108
3:00 PM 123 78 201 66% 105
4:00 PM 135 78 213 70% 93
5:00 PM 139 78 217 71% 89
6:00 PM 120 78 198 65% 108
7:00 PM 105 78 183 60% 123
8:00 PM 91 78 169 55% 137
9:00 PM 84 78 162 53% 144
2 Gyms, Spas, & Health Clubs are appropriate potential land uses that represent the most intense parking rate (1 space / 100 SF-GFA) for the shopping center. This rate was utilized to demonstrate the use with the greatest parking demand and by conservative measure illustrate that adequate parking is provided. In order to be conservative, the full parking demand (78 spaces) was added to the observed counts during all hours of the day. In addition, at the time of the observed parking study, a total of 4,125 square feet was vacant. The observed parking counts were not discounted due to the conversion of 3,662 square feet of uses which were occupied at the time of the survey. As a result, other potential uses with lower parking rates such as retail, medical office, restaurant, etc. can also be accommodated within the shopping center.

Table 3
Alicia Town Center 25602 Alicia Parkway, Laguna Hills
Observed Parking Survey Results With Full Occupancy Scenario Friday November 2, 2018
1 Observed parking surveys were obtained during a typical Friday and Saturday from 6AM to 9PM at one hour intervals. The study days are consistent with shopping center peak parking demand data published in the ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers) Parking Generation Manual 5th Edition.

RG:sl/rk14067TB
JN:2776-2018-01

306 Parking
Spaces
Observed Parking
Demand1
Add Vacant Retail
Use 1/200
(4,125 s.f)²
Sub-Total Parking
Demand with Proposed
Use
Add 10% Parking
Demand3
Total Parking
Demand
Percent of
Occupied Parking
Spaces
Parking Spaces
Available
6:00 AM 39 21 60 6 66 22% 240
7:00 AM 58 21 79 8 87 28% 219
8:00 AM 70 21 91 9 100 33% 206
9:00 AM 84 21 105 11 116 38% 191
10:00 AM 109 21 130 13 143 47% 163
11:00 AM 99 21 120 12 132 43% 174
12:00 PM 104 21 125 13 138 45% 169
1:00 PM 138 21 159 16 175 57% 131
2:00 PM 120 21 141 14 155 51% 151
3:00 PM 123 21 144 14 158 52% 148
4:00 PM 135 21 156 16 172 56% 134
5:00 PM 139 21 160 16 176 58% 130
6:00 PM 120 21 141 14 155 51% 151
7:00 PM 105 21 126 13 139 45% 167
8:00 PM 91 21 112 11 123 40% 183
9:00 PM 84 21 105 11 116 38% 191
³ In order to account for potential fluctuations of parking demand, 10% was added to the parking counts. 2 Retail parking code (1 space / 200 SF-GFA) for the shopping center was utilized to demonstrate full tenant occupancy based on the existing 4,125 square feet of vacant tenant use. As a result, a total of 21 spaces was added to the observed counts during all hours of the day.

Table 3A
Alicia Town Center 25602 Alicia Parkway, Laguna Hills
Observed Parking Survey Results Baseline (Full Tenant Occupancy w/ Retail) Friday November 2, 2018
1 Observed parking surveys were obtained during a typical Friday and Saturday from 6AM to 9PM at one hour intervals. The study days are consistent with shopping center peak parking demand data published in the ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers) Parking Generation Manual 5th Edition.

RG:sl/rk14067TB
JN:2776-2018-01

306 Parking
Spaces
Observed Parking
Demand1
Add Most Intense
Use (Gyms, Spas,
& Health Clubs)
1/100 (7,787 s.f.)2
Total Parking Demand
with Proposed Use
Percent of
Occupied
Parking Spaces
Parking Spaces
Available
6:00 AM 34 78 112 37% 194
7:00 AM 49 78 127 42% 179
8:00 AM 71 78 149 49% 157
9:00 AM 96 78 174 57% 132
10:00 AM 128 78 206 67% 100
11:00 AM 159 78 237 77% 69
12:00 PM 125 78 203 66% 103
1:00 PM 108 78 186 61% 120
2:00 PM 133 78 211 69% 95
3:00 PM 117 78 195 64% 111
4:00 PM 130 78 208 68% 98
5:00 PM 141 78 219 72% 87
6:00 PM 101 78 179 58% 127
7:00 PM 71 78 149 49% 157
8:00 PM 72 78 150 49% 156
9:00 PM 59 78 137 45% 169
2 Gyms, Spas, & Health Clubs are appropriate potential land uses that represent the most intense parking rate (1 space / 100 SF-GFA) for the shopping center. This rate was utilized to demonstrate the use with the greatest parking demand and by conservative measure illustrate that adequate parking is provided. In order to be conservative, the full parking demand (78 spaces) was added to the observed counts during all hours of the day. In addition, at the time of the observed parking study, a total of 4,125 square feet was vacant. The observed parking counts were not discounted due to the conversion of 3,662 square feet of uses which were occupied at the time of the survey. As a result, other potential uses with lower parking rates such as retail, medical office, restaurant, etc. can also be accommodated within the shopping center.

Table 4
Alicia Town Center 25602 Alicia Parkway, Laguna Hills
Observed Parking Survey Results With Full Occupancy Scenario Saturday November 3, 2018
1 Observed parking surveys were obtained during a typical Friday and Saturday from 6AM to 9PM at one hour intervals. The study days are consistent with shopping center peak parking demand data published in the ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers) Parking Generation Manual 5th Edition.

RG:sl/rk14067TB
JN:2776-2018-01

306 Parking
Spaces
Observed Parking
Demand1
Add Vacant Retail
Use 1/200
(4,125 s.f)²
Sub-Total Parking
Demand with Proposed
Use
Add 10% of
Parking Demand³ Total Parking Demand
Percent of
Occupied
Parking Spaces
Parking Spaces
Available
6:00 AM 34 21 55 6 61 20% 246
7:00 AM 49 21 70 7 77 25% 229
8:00 AM 71 21 92 9 101 33% 205
9:00 AM 96 21 117 12 129 42% 177
10:00 AM 128 21 149 15 164 54% 142
11:00 AM 159 21 180 18 198 65% 108
12:00 PM 125 21 146 15 161 52% 145
1:00 PM 108 21 129 13 142 46% 164
2:00 PM 133 21 154 15 169 55% 137
3:00 PM 117 21 138 14 152 50% 154
4:00 PM 130 21 151 15 166 54% 140
5:00 PM 141 21 162 16 178 58% 128
6:00 PM 101 21 122 12 134 44% 172
7:00 PM 71 21 92 9 101 33% 205
8:00 PM 72 21 93 9 102 33% 204
9:00 PM 59 21 80 8 88 29% 218
³ In order to account for potential fluctuations of parking demand, 10% was added to the parking counts. 2 Retail parking code (1 space / 200 SF-GFA) for the shopping center was utilized to demonstrate full tenant occupancy based on the existing 4,125 square feet of vacant tenant use. As a result, a total of 21 spaces was added to the observed counts during all hours of the day.

Table 4A
Alicia Town Center 25602 Alicia Parkway, Laguna Hills
Observed Parking Survey Results Baseline (Full Tenant Occupancy w/ Retail) Saturday November 3, 2018
1 Observed parking surveys were obtained during a typical Friday and Saturday from 6AM to 9PM at one hour intervals. The study days are consistent with shopping center peak parking demand data published in the ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers) Parking Generation Manual 5th Edition.

RG:sl/rk14067TB
JN:2776-2018-01

Appendices

Appendix A
City of Laguna Hills Parking Code




/DJXQD+LOOV6XSS1R

,QGXVWULDO8VHV
*HQHUDOPDQXIDFWXULQJDQGSURFHVVLQJXVHV
QRW
LQFOXGLQJEXLOGLQJVXVHGH[FOXVLYHO\IRUZDUHKRXVH

SXUSRVHV

VWDOO6)RILQGXVWULDOPDQXIDFWXULQJDUHDSOXVVWDOO 6)RIRIILFHXVHSOXVVWDOO6)RIZDUHKRXVHDUHD 0LQLVWRUDJHZDUHKRXVH VWDOO6)*)$
5HFUHDWLRQDOYHKLFOHDQGERDWVWRUDJH VWDOOV

PLQLPXP
RUVWDOO6)RIVWRUDJHDUHD
ZKLFKHYHULVJUHDWHU
5HF\FOLQJFHQWHU VWDOO6)*)$RIRIILFHDUHDSOXVVWDOO6)RI ZDUHKRXVHDUHDSOXVVWDOO6)RI\DUGDUHD
5HVHDUFKDQGGHYHORSPHQW VWDOO6)*)$
7RZLQJIDFLOLWLHV±LQGRRUYHKLFOHLPSRXQGDQG
LQGRRUWRZLQJVHUYLFHEXVLQHVV±
LQGRRURQO\

VWDOOV

PLQLPXP
RUVWDOO6)RIVWRUDJHDUHD
ZKLFKHYHULVJUHDWHU
:DUHKRXVHV
XVHGH[FOXVLYHO\IRUVWRUDJH
VWDOO6)RIZDUHKRXVHDUHDSOXVVWDOO6)RIRIILFH XVH
2IILFH8VHV
%XVLQHVVDQGSURIHVVLRQDORIILFH
H[FHSWPHGLFDO
VWDOO6)*)$
)LQDQFLDOVHUYLFHV
EDQNVVDYLQJVDQGORDQVFUHGLW
XQLRQV

VWDOO6)*)$
0HGLFDODQGGHQWDORIILFH VWDOO6)*)$
9HWHULQDU\RIILFH VWDOO6)*)$
&RPPHUFLDO8VHV²5HWDLODQG6HUYLFH
$UWJDOOHULHV VWDOO6)*)$
$XWRPRELOHWUXFN59VDOHV VWDOO6)LQGRRU*)$SOXVVWDOO6)RXWGRRUUHWDLO DUHD
$XWRPRWLYHVHUYLFHDQGUHSDLU VWDOOVSOXVVWDOOVVHUYLFHED\ VHUYLFHED\VGRQRWFRXQWDV
VWDOOV
RUVWDOO6)JURVVIORRUDUHDZKHQQRED\VDUH

GHILQHG
%HGDQGEUHDNIDVW FRYHUHGDQGDVVLJQHGVWDOOVSOXVVWDOOJXHVWURRP &DUZDVK VWDOOVSHUWXQQHO
SOXVDGGLWLRQDOVWDFNLQJDQGGU\LQJDUHDVDV
QHFHVVDU\WRPDWFKFDSDFLW\

)XUQLWXUHVWRUHVDQGKRPHIXUQLVKLQJVKRZURRPV

RQO\ZKHUHLWHPVDUHRUGHUHGSULPDULO\IRUKRPH
GHOLYHU\RULQVWDOODWLRQVXFKDVFDUSHWIORRULQJ
ZLQGRZFRYHULQJVDQGZLQGRZV

VWDOO6)*)$
*DVVWDWLRQ VWDOOVSOXVDGGLWLRQDOSDUNLQJDVUHTXLUHGIRUFRQYHQLHQFH VWRUHRUDXWRVHUYLFHUHSDLUXVHV7KHJDVVWDWLRQFRQYHQLHQFH VWRUHSDUNLQJUHTXLUHPHQWVKDOOEHVWDOO6)*)$3DUNLQJ VSDFHVDEXWWLQJDLUDQGZDWHUVHUYLFHVKDOOQRWEHLQFOXGHGLQWKH WRWDOQXPEHURISDUNLQJVSDFHV
7DEOH
$
&RQWLQXHG

180%(52)3$5.,1*67$//65(48,5('
8VH 5HTXLUHG1XPEHURI6WDOOV



/DJXQD+LOOV6XSS1R

*HQHUDOUHWDLO VWDOO6)*)$
,IUHVWDXUDQWVSDFHRFFXSLHVPRUHWKDQRIWRWDO*)$RULI DQLQGLYLGXDOUHVWDXUDQWFRQWDLQVPRUHWKDQ6)WKHQ DGGLWLRQDOSDUNLQJVWDOOVVKDOOEHSURYLGHGIRUH[FHVVUHVWDXUDQW VSDFHEH\RQGWKHRU6)7KHDGGLWLRQDOSDUNLQJVKDOO EHFDOFXODWHGDWWKHUHVWDXUDQWUDWH
/DXQGURPDW VWDOO6)*)$
2XWGRRUVDOHVLQFOXGLQJOXPEHU\DUGVDQGVDOYDJH
\DUGV
VWDOO6)JURVVRXWGRRUUHWDLODUHDSOXVDGGLWLRQDO SDUNLQJDVUHTXLUHGIRULQGRRUVDOHVDUHDVHUYLFHIDFLOLWLHVDQG RWKHUXVHV
3ODQWQXUVHULHV VWDOO6)LQGRRU*)$SOXVVWDOO6)JURVVRXWGRRU UHWDLODUHDV
5HVRUWVKRWHOVDQGPRWHOV VWDOOJXHVWURRPSOXVDGGLWLRQDOSDUNLQJDVUHTXLUHGIRURWKHU DFFHVVRU\XVHV
5HVWDXUDQWV

'LQHLQ
6)*)$

6)*)$

)DVWIRRG

7DNHRXW

2XWGRRUGLQLQJDUHDVLQH[FHVVRIVHDWV

VWDOO6)*)$
VWDOOVSOXVVWDOO6)*)$DERYH6)*)$
VWDOOVRUVWDOO6)*)$ZKLFKHYHULVJUHDWHU
VWDOO6)*)$
VWDOOIRU6)RIHQWLUHRXWGRRUGLQLQJDUHD
1RWH
2XWGRRU
VHDWLQJDUHDVZLWKRUOHVVVHDWVQHHGQRWSURYLGHDGGLWLRQDO

SDUNLQJ

6HOIVHUYLFHFDUZDVK VWDOOVZDVKED\
ZDVKED\VGRQRWFRXQWDVVWDOOV

&RPPHUFLDO8VHV²3HUVRQDO6HUYLFHV
$QLPDOERDUGLQJJURRPLQJ VWDOO6)*)$
%DUEHUVKRS VWDOOVEDUEHUFKDLU
%HDXW\QDLOVDORQ VWDOOVEHDXWLFLDQFKDLU
'U\FOHDQHU VWDOO6)*)$
0DVVDJHHVWDEOLVKPHQW VWDOOVPDVVDJHVWDWLRQ
6KRHUHSDLU VWDOO6)*)$
7DLORU VWDOO6)*)$
&RPPHUFLDO5HFUHDWLRQ8VHV
$UFDGHVSRROKDOOVDQGELQJRKDOOV VWDOO6)*)$ %RZOLQJDOOH\ VWDOOVODQHSOXVRWKHUXVHVFDOFXODWHGVHSDUDWHO\ &RPPHUFLDOVWDEOHV VWDOOKRUVHV
'DQFHKDOOV VWDOO6)GDQFHIORRU
'ULYLQJUDQJH VWDOOWHHSOXVRWKHUXVHVFDOFXODWHGVHSDUDWHO\ *ROIFRXUVHV²
UHJXODWLRQDQGSLWFKDQGSXWW

VWDOOVKROHSOXVRWKHUXVHVFDOFXODWHGVHSDUDWHO\
*\PVVSDVDQGKHDOWKFOXEV VWDOO6)*)$
+DQGEDOODQGUDFTXHWEDOOFRXUWV VWDOOVFRXUWSOXVRWKHUXVHVFDOFXODWHGVHSDUDWHO\ 0LQLDWXUHJROI VWDOOVKROHSOXVRWKHUXVHVFDOFXODWHGVHSDUDWHO\ 7DEOH
$
&RQWLQXHG

180%(52)3$5.,1*67$//65(48,5('
8VH 5HTXLUHG1XPEHURI6WDOOV

Appendix B
ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers)
Parking Generation Manual 5th Edition (January 2019)
Shopping Center Peak Parking Demand Rates

Appendix C
Alicia Town Center
Observed Parking Counts

Alicia Town Center
25602 Alicia Parkway, Laguna Hills, CAFriday, November 2nd, 2018 Inventory 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 9:00 PM Zone 1 Regular 284 38 57 66 78 105 92 97 128 110 114 124 129 111 99 87 81 Handicap 6 00 1 2 2 3 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 1 0 1
Subtotal 290 38 57 67 80 107 95 101 132 114 117 127 132 114 100 87 82 Zone 2 Regular 4 01 2 4 4 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 2 1 1
Handicap 2 10 1 1 0 1 0 2 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0
Subtotal 6 354224354422 1
Zone 3 Regular 10 01 2 3 2 3 3 4 5 4 6 7 6 5 4 2
39 58 70 84 109 99 104 138 120 123 135 139 120 105 91 84 Counts Unlimited, Inc.

P.O. Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
951-268-6268

Alicia Town Center
25602 Alicia Parkway, Laguna Hills, CASaturday, November 3rd, 2018 Inventory 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 9:00 PM Zone 1 Regular 284 34 48 67 91 118 151 116 99 125 112 122 131 94 66 71 59 Handicap 6 00 1 2 4 2 2 3 2 1 2 4 3 1 1 0
Subtotal 290 34 48 68 93 122 153 118 102 127 113 124 135 97 67 72 59 Total Occupancy 290 34 48 68 93 122 153 118 102 127 113 124 135 97 67 72 59 Total Percent 12% 17% 23% 32% 42% 53% 41% 35% 44% 39% 43% 47% 33% 23% 25% 20% Inventory 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 9:00 PM Zone 2 Regular 4 01 2 2 4 2 2 3 3 1 2 2 0 1 0 0
Handicap 2 00 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
Subtotal 6 224323312211 0
Total Occupancy 601 2 2 4 3 2 3 3 1 2 2 1 1 0 0
Total Percent 0% 17% 33% 33% 67% 50% 33% 50% 50% 17% 33% 33% 17% 17% 0% 0% Inventory 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 9:00 PM Zone 3 Regular 10 00 1 1 2 3 5 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 0 0
Handicap 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Subtotal 10 112353334433 0
Total Occupancy 10 0 0 1 1 2 3 5 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 0 0
Total Percent 0% 0% 10% 10% 20% 30% 50% 30% 30% 30% 40% 40% 30% 30% 0% 0% 34 49 71 96 128 159 125 108 133 117 130 141 101 71 72 59 Counts Unlimited, Inc.

P.O. Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
951-268-6268

Scale
Job No.

Date

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
Laguna Hills, CA
2022-877
01 0 40’ 80’ 2024-08-02

PROPOSED SITE SIGN PLAN / GAS & MONUMENT SIGNAGE
1” = 40’
Alicia Town Center Sign Program Amendment
D
D
M
S
S
S
S
S
D
D
M
M

M M M M

ALISO EQUITIES, LTD

ALICIA PARKWAY
RALPHS
WELLS
FARGO
SHOPS
A
D
D
B2 100’-0”
164’-0”
133’-6”
62’-0”
143’-6”
C
B
C
B
SIGN “C” LOCATION COMPLIES WITH L.H.M.C.

SECTION 9-40.160 (SIGHT VISION AREA)

PASEO DE VALENCIA

SIGNAGE LEGEND

EXISTING CENTER ID SIGN (A)

EXISTING TENANT MONUMENT SIGN (B)

PROPOSED GAS MONUMENT SIGN (C)

PROPOSED CANOPY SIGN (D)

PROPOSED KIOSK SIGN (E)
D E
E D

SIGNAGE AREA SUMMARY
MONUMENT & CENTER ID SIGNS:

EXISTING CENTER ID SIGN (A)
- 33 S.F. SIGN AREA(PER EXISTING MASTER SIGN PROGRAM)
- 50 S.F. REST OF SIGN BASE(FRONT FACE)

EXISTING TENANT MONUMENT SIGN (B)
- 14 S.F. SIGN AREA(PER FACE & PER EXISTING M.S.P.) X 6 = 84 S.F. - 20 S.F. REST OF SIGN BASE(PER FACE) X 6 = 120 S.F.

PROPOSED GAS MONUMENT SIGN (C)
- 14 S.F. SIGN AREA(PER FACE) X 4 = 56 S.F.
- 20 S.F. REST OF SIGN BASE(PER FACE) X 4 = 80 S.F.

TOTAL MONUMENT AND CENTER ID SIGNAGE = 173 S.F.

GAS CANOPY & KIOSK SIGNS:

PROPOSED CANOPY SIGN (D)
- 19.25 S.F. SIGN AREA X 4 = 77 S.F.

PROPOSED KIOSK SIGN (E)
- 4.25 S.F. SIGN AREA X 2 = 8.5 S.F.

TOTAL PROPOSED GAS CANOPY & KIOSK SIGNAGE = 85.5 S.F.

Scale
Job No.

Date

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
Laguna Hills, CA
2022-877
02 0 10’ 20’ 2024-08-02
1” = 10’
PROPOSED GAS MONUMENT SIGN - 2 TOTAL (C)
SCALE: 1/2”=1’-0”
TO MATCH EXISTING MONUMENT SIGNS.

GAS MONUMENT SIGN LOCATION PLAN / ELEVATIONS
Alicia Town Center Sign Program Amendment
REGULAR MID-GRADE DIESEL #2

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
S
D
D
S

ALISO EQUITIES, LTD

PASEO DE VALENCIA

ALICIA PARKWAY
14’
4’
14’
11’
SIGN “C” LOCATION COMPLIES WITH L.H.M.C.

SECTION 9-40.160 (SIGHT VISION AREA)

LANDSCAPE PLANTING AT BASE OF SIGN
REGULAR MID-GRADE DIESEL #2

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
REGULAR MID-GRADE DIESEL #2

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
SW #7667,
“ZIRCON”.

REGULAR MID-GRADE DIESEL #2

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
SW #8917,
“SHELL WHITE”.

REGULAR MID-GRADE DIESEL #2

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
SIGN AREA = 14 S.F.
(DASHED YELLOW LINE)

SIGNAGE AREA SUMMARY
MONUMENT & CENTER ID SIGNS:

EXISTING CENTER ID SIGN (A)
- 33 S.F. SIGN AREA (PER EXISTING MASTER SIGN PROGRAM)
- 50 S.F. REST OF SIGN BASE(FRONT FACE)

EXISTING TENANT MONUMENT SIGN (B)
- 14 S.F. SIGN AREA(PER FACE & PER EXISTING M.S.P.) X 6 = 84 S.F. - 20 S.F. REST OF SIGN BASE(PER FACE) X 6 = 120 S.F.

PROPOSED GAS MONUMENT SIGN (C)
- 14 S.F. SIGN AREA(PER FACE) X 4 = 56 S.F.
- 20 S.F. REST OF SIGN BASE(PER FACE) X 4 = 80 S.F.

TOTAL MONUMENT AND CENTER ID SIGNAGE = 173 S.F.

Scale
Job No.

Date

ALICIA TOWN CENTER
Laguna Hills, CA
2022-877
03 0 10’ 20’ 2024-08-02
1” = 10’

GAS CANOPY SIGN LOCATION PLAN / ELEVATIONS
Alicia Town Center Sign Program Amendment
TYPICAL CANOPY SIGN - 4 TOTAL (D)
SCALE: 1/4”=1’-0”
TYPICAL KIOSK SIGN - 2 TOTAL (E)
SCALE: 1/4”=1’-0”

EMERGENCY

SHUT-OFF
SWITCH

EMERGENCY

SHUT-OFF
SWITCH

EMERGENCY

SHUT-OFF
SWITCH
8’-3”(L)x2’-4”(H) = 19.25 S.F.

INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED CHANNEL LETTERS
PLEX FACED CHANNEL LETTERS, RED #2157, 5” DEEP ALUMINUM

SIDES AND BACK PAINTED BLACK, WHITE NEON ILLUMINATION
±2’
2’-3”(L)x1’-10”(H) = 4.25 S.F.

INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED CHANNEL LETTERS
PLEX FACED CHANNEL LETTERS, RED #2157, 5” DEEP ALUMINUM

SIDES AND BACK PAINTED BLACK, WHITE NEON ILLUMINATION
S
D

HANDICAP PARKING SIGN TO MATCH

ALICIA TOWN CENTER SIGN PROGRAM

HANDICAP PARKING SIGN TO MATCH

ALICIA TOWN CENTER SIGN PROGRAM

ALISO EQUITIES, LTD

PASEO DE VALENCIA

SIGNAGE AREA SUMMARY

GAS CANOPY & KIOSK SIGNS

PROPOSED CANOPY SIGN (D)
- 19.25 S.F. SIGN AREA X 4 = 77 S.F.

PROPOSED KIOSK SIGN (E)
- 4.25 S.F. SIGN AREA X 2 = 8.5 S.F.

TOTAL PROPOSED GAS CANOPY & KIOSK SIGNAGE = 85.5 S.F.

group, inc. engineering

NOISE IMPACT STUDY

ALICIA TOWN CENTER RALPH'S FUEL CENTER
City of Laguna Hills, CA

rk19133
JN:2776-2022-02
ALICIA TOWN CENTER RALPH’S FUEL CENTER

NOISE IMPACT STUDY
City of Laguna Hills, California
Prepared for:

Monique Lacher

ALISO EQUITIES, LTD
2901 W. Coast Highway, Suite 200
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Prepared by:

RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
1401 Dove Street, Suite 540
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Bryan Estrada, AICP
Becca Morrison
April 22, 2024

Table of Contents
Section Page

1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 Purpose of Analysis and Study Objectives 1-1

1.2 Site Location 1-1

1.3 Project Description 1-2

1.4 Summary of Findings 1-2

1.5 Recommended Project Design Features (DF) 1-3

2.0 Fundamentals of Noise .......................................................................... 2-1

2.1 Sound, Noise and Acoustics 2-1

2.2 Frequency and Hertz 2-1

2.3 Sound Pressure Levels and Decibels 2-1

2.4 Addition of Decibels 2-1

2.5 Human Responses to Changes in Noise Levels 2-2

2.6 Noise Descriptors 2-2

2.7 Sound Propagation 2-5

2.8 Vibration Descriptors 2-7

2.9 Vibration Perception 2-7

2.10 Vibration Propagation 2-8

2.11 Construction-Related Vibration Level Prediction 2-8

3.0 Regulatory Setting ................................................................................. 3-1

3.1 General Plan Noise Element 3-1

3.2 Municipal Code Chapter 5-24 – Noise Control 3-1

3.2.1 Exterior Noise Standards 3-1

3.2.2 Construction Noise Regulations 3-2

4.0 Study Method and Procedures .............................................................. 4-1

4.1 Noise Measurement Procedures and Criteria 4-1

4.2 Stationary Noise Source Modeling 4-2

4.2.1 Parking Lot Noise 4-2

4.2.2 HVAC Noise 4-3

5.0 Existing Noise Environment................................................................... 5-1

5.1 Noise Measurement Results ...................................................................... 5-1

Table of Contents – Cont.

6.0 Operational Noise Impacts .................................................................... 6-1

6.1 Stationary Source Noise Impacts 6-1

6.2 Traffic Noise Impacts 6-3

6.3 Construction Noise and Vibration Impacts 6-3

6.4 Airport Noise Compatibility 6-4

6.5 Project Design Features 6-4

List of Attachments
Exhibits
Location Map ........................................................................................................... A Site Plan ................................................................................................................... B Noise Monitoring Locations ...................................................................................... C Operational Day/Night Noise Levels (dBA) .................................................................. D Operational Noise Contours - Daytime ...................................................................... E Operational Noise Contours - Nighttime .................................................................... F Tables
CEQA Noise Impact Criteria ....................................................................................... 1 Vibration Annoyance Potential Criteria ...................................................................... 2 Vibration Damage Potential Threshold Criteria ........................................................... 3 Suggested “n” Values Based on Soil Classes .............................................................. 4 City of Laguna Hills Residential Exterior Noise Standards ............................................ 5 City of Laguna Hills Municipal Code Residential Exterior Noise Standards ................... 6 Referenced Noise Levels – HVAC ............................................................................... 7 24-Hour Noise Measurement Results – L-1 ................................................................ 8 24-Hour Noise Measurement Results – L-2 ................................................................ 9 Daytime Stationary Noise Source Impacts .................................................................. 10 Nighttime Stationary Noise Source Impacts .............................................................. 11 Appendices
City of Laguna Hills General Plan Noise Element and Municipal Code Chapter 5-24 – Noise Control ..................................................................................... A Field Data and Photos ............................................................................................... B SoundPLAN Calculation Worksheets .......................................................................... C

1-1

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Purpose of Analysis and Study Objectives
The purpose of this report is to evaluate the potential noise impacts from the proposed Alicia Town Center Ralph’s Fuel Center (hereinafter referred to as “project”) and provide recommendations, if necessary, to minimize any project noise impacts.

The assessment was conducted within the context of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, California Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et seq.) and the standards and methodology follow the City of Laguna Hills Municipal Code and General Plan requirements.

The following is provided in this report:
• A description of the study area and the proposed project • Information regarding the fundamentals of noise
• Identification of the regulatory setting and applicable noise standards • Establishment of the existing ambient noise environment at the project site • Analysis of the project’s operational noise impact to adjacent receptors • Summary of recommended project design features to reduce noise level impacts

1.2 Site Location
The proposed project is located within the existing Alicia Town Center shopping center at the southeast corner of Alicia Parkway and Paseo de Valencia, in the City of Laguna Hills.

The project site is currently part of the existing Ralph’s parking lot and is bounded by Paseo De Valencia to the north, the Ralph’s shopping center to the south and east, and Alicia Parkway to the west.

The nearest noise-sensitive receptors to the project site include the following:

Northern Receptors Existing residential homes located approximately 216 feet northeast of the proposed fuel center location, approximately 93 feet northeast of the centerline of Paseo de Valencia.

Eastern Receptors Existing residential land uses located approximately 322 feet east of the proposed fuel center location, approximately 79 feet south of the centerline of Paseo de Valencia.

1-2
The project site location map, including sensitive receptor locations, is provided in Exhibit A.

1.3 Project Description
The proposed project consists of a 10-vehicle fueling position (VFP) gas station (five dual sided pump islands). The project will require the removal of 39 parking spaces and will add 4 more spaces (306 total current parking spaces to 271 total spaces after the proposed project is constructed) within the existing Alicia Town Center shopping center.

The site plan used for this analysis, provided by ALISO EQUITIES, LTD, is illustrated in Exhibit B.

1.4 Summary of Findings
Table 1 provides a summary of the noise analysis results, per the CEQA impact criteria checklist.

Table 1
CEQA Noise Impact Criteria
Noise Impact Criteria Potentially
Significant
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project result in?
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
vicinity of the project in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
X
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels? X
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project expose people residing
or working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
X

1-3

1.5 Recommended Project Design Features (DF)
The following recommended project design features include standard rules and requirements, best practices, and recognized design guidelines for reducing noise levels.

Project design features are typically included as part of the conditions of approval for the project but are not considered mitigation under CEQA.

Operational Design Features
DF-1 Rooftop mounted HVAC equipment will be shielded from the line of sight of adjacent properties behind rooftop parapet walls.

Construction Design Features
DF-2 The project shall comply with City of Laguna Hills Municipal Code requirements. All construction will occur only during the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays and 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Saturdays. No construction will occur on Sundays or federal holidays.

DF-3 All construction equipment shall be equipped with mufflers and other suitable noise attenuation devices (e.g., engine shields).

DF-4 Establish an electric connection to the site to avoid the use of diesel- and gas-powered generators, to the extent feasible.

DF-5 Construction-related equipment, including heavy-duty equipment, motor vehicles, and portable equipment, shall be turned off when not in use for more than 5 minutes.

2-1

2.0 Fundamentals of Noise
This section of the report provides basic information about noise and presents some of the terms used within the report.

2.1 Sound, Noise and Acoustics
Sound is a disturbance created by a moving or vibrating source and is capable of being detected by the hearing organs. Sound may be thought of as mechanical energy of a moving object transmitted by pressure waves through a medium to a human ear. For traffic, or stationary noise, the medium of concern is air. Noise is defined as sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or unwanted.

2.2 Frequency and Hertz
A continuous sound is described by its frequency (pitch) and its amplitude (loudness).

Frequency relates to the number of pressure oscillations per second. Low-frequency sounds are low in pitch (bass sounding) and high-frequency sounds are high in pitch (squeak).

These oscillations per second (cycles) are commonly referred to as Hertz (Hz). The human ear can hear from the bass pitch starting out at 20 Hz all the way to the high pitch of 20,000 Hz.

2.3 Sound Pressure Levels and Decibels
The amplitude of a sound determines its loudness. The loudness of sound increases or decreases, as the amplitude increases or decreases. Sound pressure amplitude is measured in units of micro-Newton per square inch meter (N/m2), also called micro-Pascal (μPa).

One μPa is approximately one hundred billionths (0.00000000001) of normal atmospheric pressure. Sound pressure level (SPL or Lp) is used to describe in logarithmic units the ratio of actual sound pressures to a reference pressure squared. These units are called decibels and abbreviated dB.

2.4 Addition of Decibels
Because decibels are on a logarithmic scale, sound pressure levels cannot be added or subtracted by simple plus or minus addition. When two (2) sounds of equal SPL are combined, they will produce an SPL 3 dB greater than the original single SPL.

In other words, sound energy must be doubled to produce a 3 dB increase.

2-2
If two (2) sounds differ by approximately 10 dB the higher sound level is the predominant sound.

2.5 Human Response to Changes in Noise Levels
In general, the healthy human ear is most sensitive to sounds between 1,000 Hz and 5,000 Hz, (A-weighted scale) and it perceives a sound within that range as being more intense than a sound with a higher or lower frequency with the same magnitude. For purposes of this report as well as with most environmental documents, the A-scale weighting is typically reported in terms of A-weighted decibel (dBA). Typically, the human ear can barely perceive the change in noise level of 3 dB. A change in 5 dB is readily perceptible, and a change in 10 dB is perceived as being twice or half as loud1 . As
previously discussed, a doubling of sound energy results in a 3 dB increase in sound, which means that a doubling of sound energy (e.g. doubling the volume of traffic on a highway), would result in a barely perceptible change in sound level.

2.6 Noise Descriptors
Noise in our daily environment fluctuates over time. Some noise levels occur in regular patterns, others are random. Some noise levels are constant, while others are sporadic. Noise descriptors were created to describe the different time-varying noise levels.

Following are the most commonly used noise descriptors along with brief definitions.

A-Weighted Sound Level
The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using the A-weighted 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. A numerical method of rating human judgment of loudness.

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. 1 Source: U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration. Dec. 2011. Highway Traffic Noise: Analysis and Abatement Guidance.

2-3
Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL)
The average equivalent A-weighted sound level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of five (5) decibels to sound levels in the evening from 7:00 to 10:00 PM and after addition of ten (10) decibels to sound levels in the night before 7:00 AM and after 10:00 PM.

Decibel (dB)
A unit for measuring the amplitude of a 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 micro-pascals.
dB(A)
A-weighted sound level (see definition above).

Equivalent Sound Level (LEQ)

The sound level corresponding to a steady noise level over a given sample period with the same amount of acoustic energy as the actual time varying noise level. The energy average noise level during the sample period.

Habitable Room

Any room meeting the requirements of the Uniform Building Code or other applicable regulations which is intended to be used for sleeping, living, cooking or dining purposes, excluding such enclosed spaces as closets, pantries, bath or toilet rooms, service rooms, connecting corridors, laundries, unfinished attics, foyers, storage spaces, cellars, utility rooms, and similar spaces.

L(n)
The A-weighted sound level exceeded during a certain percentage of the sample time. For example, L10 is the sound level exceeded 10 percent of the sample time. Similarly L50, L90 and L99, etc.

2-4
Noise
Any unwanted sound or sound which is undesirable because it interferes with speech and hearing, or is intense enough to damage hearing, or is otherwise annoying. The State Noise Control Act defines noise as "...excessive undesirable sound...".

Outdoor Living Area
Outdoor spaces that are associated with residential land uses typically used for passive recreational activities or other noise-sensitive uses. Such spaces include patio areas, barbecue areas, jacuzzi areas, etc. associated with residential uses; outdoor patient recovery or resting areas associated with hospitals, convalescent hospitals, or rest homes; outdoor areas associated with places of worship which have a significant role in services or other noise-sensitive activities; and outdoor school facilities routinely used for educational purposes which may be adversely impacted by noise. Outdoor areas usually not included in this definition are: front yard areas, driveways, greenbelts, maintenance areas and storage areas associated with residential land uses; exterior areas at hospitals that are not used for patient activities; outdoor areas associated with places of worship and principally used for short-term social gatherings; and, outdoor areas associated with school facilities that are not typically associated with educational uses prone to adverse noise impacts (for example, school play yard areas).

Percent Noise Levels

See L(n).

Sound Level (Noise Level)
The weighted sound pressure level obtained by use of a sound level meter having a standard frequency-filter for attenuating part of the sound spectrum.

Sound Level Meter
An instrument, including a microphone, an amplifier, an output meter, and frequency weighting networks for the measurement and determination of noise and sound levels.

2-5
Single Event Noise Exposure Level (SENEL)
The dBA level which, if it lasted for one (1) second, would produce the same A-weighted sound energy as the actual event.

2.7 Sound Propagation
As sound propagates from a source it spreads geometrically. Sound from a small, localized source (i.e., a point source) radiates uniformly outward as it travels away from the source in a spherical pattern. The sound level attenuates at a rate of 6 dB per doubling of distance.

The movement of vehicles down a roadway makes the source of the sound appear to propagate from a line (i.e., line source) rather than a point source. This line source results in the noise propagating from a roadway in a cylindrical spreading versus a spherical spreading that results from a point source. The sound level attenuates for a line source at a rate of 3 dB per doubling of distance.

As noise propagates from the source, it is affected by the ground and atmosphere. Noise models use hard site (reflective surfaces) and soft site (absorptive surfaces) to help calculate predicted noise levels. Hard site conditions assume no excessive ground absorption between the noise source and the receiver. Soft site conditions such as grass, soft dirt or landscaping attenuate noise at an additional rate of 1.5 dB per doubling of distance.

When added to the geometric spreading, the excess ground attenuation results in an overall noise attenuation of 3 dB per doubling of distance for a line source and 6.0 dB per doubling of distance for a point source.

2-6
Figure 1
Typical Sound Levels from Indoor and Outdoor Noise Sources2 2 Source: AASHSTO. 1993. Guide on Evaluation and Abatement of Traffic Noise

2-7

2.8 Vibration Descriptors
Ground-borne vibrations consist of rapidly fluctuating motions within the ground that have an average motion of zero. The effects of ground-borne vibrations typically only cause a nuisance to people, but at extreme vibration levels, damage to buildings may occur.

Although ground-borne vibration can be felt outdoors, it is typically only an annoyance to people indoors where the associated effects of the shaking of a building can be notable.

Ground-borne noise is an effect of ground-borne vibration that only exists indoors since it is produced from noise radiated from the motion of the walls and floors of a room and may also consist of the rattling of windows or dishes on shelves.

Several different methods are used to quantify vibration amplitude.

PPV
Known as the peak particle velocity (PPV) which is the maximum instantaneous peak in vibration velocity, typically given in inches per second.

RMS
Known as the root mean squared (RMS) can be used to denote vibration amplitude.

VdB
A commonly used abbreviation to describe the vibration level (VdB) for a vibration source.

2.9 Vibration Perception
Typically, developed areas are continuously affected by vibration velocities of 50 VdB or lower. These continuous vibrations are not noticeable to humans whose threshold of perception is around 65 VdB. Outdoor sources that may produce perceptible vibrations are usually caused by construction equipment, steel-wheeled trains, and traffic on rough roads, while smooth roads rarely produce perceptible ground-borne noise or vibration. To counter the effects of ground-borne vibration, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has published guidance relative to vibration impacts.

2-8

2.10 Vibration Propagation
There are three main types of vibration propagation: surface, compression, and shear waves. Surface waves, or Rayleigh waves, travel along the ground’s surface. These waves carry most of their energy along an expanding circular wavefront, similar to ripples produced by throwing a rock into a pool of water. P-waves, or compression waves, are body waves that carry their energy along an expanding spherical wavefront. The particle motion in these waves is longitudinal (i.e., in a “push-pull” fashion). P-waves are analogous to airborne sound waves. S-waves, or shear waves, are also body waves that carry energy along an expanding spherical wavefront. However, unlike P-waves, the particle motion is transverse, or side-to-side and perpendicular to the direction of propagation.

As vibration waves propagate from a source, the vibration energy decreases in a logarithmic nature and the vibration levels typically decrease by 6 VdB per doubling of the distance from the vibration source. As stated above, this drop-off rate can vary greatly depending on the soil but has been shown to be effective enough for screening purposes in order to identify potential vibration impacts that may need to be studied through actual field tests.

2.11 Construction-Related Vibration Level Prediction3
Operational activities are separated into two different categories. The vibration can be transient or continuous in nature. Each category can result in varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the equipment used on the site. Operation of equipment causes ground vibrations that spread through the ground and diminish in strength with distance.

Buildings in the vicinity of the project area site respond to these vibrations with varying results ranging from no perceptible effects at the low levels to slight damage at the highest levels. The thresholds from Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, April 2020, in the table below provide general guidelines as to the maximum vibration limits for when vibration becomes potentially annoying. 3 Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, April 2020

2-9
Table 2
Vibration Annoyance Potential Criteria
Human Response
PPV (in/sec)
Transient Sources Continuous/Frequent
Intermittent Sources
Barely perceptible 0.04 0.01
Distinctly perceptible 0.25 0.04
Strongly perceptible 0.90 0.10
Severe 2.00 0.40
Note: Transient sources create a single isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop balls. Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include impact pile drivers, pogostick compactors, crack-and-seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment.

The Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, April 2020 provides general thresholds and guidelines as to the vibration damage potential from vibratory impacts. The table below provides general vibration damage potential thresholds:

Table 3
Vibration Damage Potential Threshold Criteria
Structure and Condition
PPV (in/sec)
Transient Sources Continuous/Frequent
Intermittent Sources
Extremely fragile historic buildings ruin ancient
monuments 0.12 0.08
Fragile buildings 0.20 0.10
Historic and some old buildings 0.50 0.25
Older residential structures 0.50 0.30
New residential structures 1.00 0.50
Modern industrial/commercial buildings 2.00 0.50
Soil conditions have an impact on how vibration propagates through the ground. The Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, April 2020 provides suggested “n” values based on soil class. The table below outlines the manual’s suggested values and description.

2-10
Table 4
Suggested “n” Values Based on Soil Classes
Soil Class Description of Soil Material Suggested Value of “n” I
Weak or soft soils: loose soils, dry or partially
saturated peat and muck, mud, loose beach sand,
and dune sand.

1.4 II Most sands, sandy clays, silty clays, gravel, silts, and weathered rock. 1.3
III
Hard soils: densely compacted sand, dry
consolidated clay, consolidated glacial till, and some
exposed rock.

1.1 IV Hard, component rock: bedrock, freshly exposed
hard rock. 1.0

3-1

3.0 Regulatory Setting
The proposed project is located in the City of Laguna Hills and is subject to the standards and regulations established by the City of Laguna Hills General Plan Noise Element and Municipal Code Chapter 5-24 – Noise Control.

3.1 General Plan Noise Element
The City of Laguna Hills establishes exterior noise standards in the General Plan Noise Element. Per the General Plan, the standards represent the maximum acceptable noise levels as measured from any residential property in the City. Accordingly, it is unlawful to cause the noise level on any residential property to exceed the exterior noise standards:

1. For a cumulative period of more than 30 minutes in any hour;

2. Plus 5 dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than 15 minutes in any hour;

3. Plus 10 dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than 5 minutes in any hour;

4. Plus 15 dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than 1 minute in any hour;

5. Plus 20 dB(A) for any period of time.

Table 5 shows the noise standards established in the City of Laguna Hills General Plan. A copy of the General Plan Noise Element is provided in Appendix A.

Table 5
City of Laguna Hills Residential Exterior Noise Standards1 Land Use Daytime Noise Standards
(7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.)
Nighttime Noise Standards
(10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.)
Residential (Exterior) 55 dB(A) 50 dB(A)
1 Source: City of Laguna Hills General Plan Noise Element, Table N-2.

3.2 Municipal Code Chapter 5-24 – Noise Control

3.2.1 Exterior Noise Standards
The City of Laguna Hills establishes city-wide noise standards in Chapter 5-24 of their Municipal Code. Per the Municipal Code, it is unlawful for any person at any location

3-2
within the city to create any noise, or to allow the creation of any noise on property owned, leased, occupied, or otherwise controlled by such person, when the foregoing causes of the noise level, when measured on any other property, either incorporated or unincorporated, to exceed the sound level standards set forth in the ordinance.

It should be noted that Municipal Code Chapter 5-24 – Noise Control is not intended to establish thresholds of significance for the purpose of any analysis required by the California Environmental Quality Act.

Table 6 shows the sound level standards established in the City of Laguna Hills Municipal Code, as they pertain to land uses on and adjacent to the project site. The City’s Municipal Code Chapter 5-24 is provided in Appendix A.

Table 6
City of Laguna Hills Municipal Code Residential Exterior Noise Standards1 Land Use Daytime Noise Standards
(7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.)
Nighttime Noise Standards
(10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.)
Residential 55 dB(A) 50 dB(A)
1 Source: City of Laguna Hills Municipal Code Section 5-24.050 – Exterior Noise Standards.

3.2.2 Construction Noise Regulations
Per the City’s Municipal Code Section 5-24.070 – Special Provisions, noise sources associated with construction, repair, remodeling, or grading of any real property shall be exempted from the provisions of Chapter 5.24, provided said activities do not take place between the hours of eight p.m. and seven a.m. on weekdays, eight p.m. and eight a.m. on Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a federal holiday.

4-1

4.0 Study Method and Procedures
The following section describes the noise measurement procedures and locations, noise modeling procedures, and assumptions used in this analysis.

4.1 Noise Measurement Procedures and Criteria
Noise measurements are taken to determine the existing noise levels. A noise receiver or receptor is any location in the noise analysis in which noise might produce an impact. The following criteria are used to select measurement locations and receptors:
• Locations expected to receive the highest noise impacts, such as the first row of houses
• Locations that are acoustically representative and equivalent to the area of concern • Human land usage
• Sites clear of major obstruction and contamination
RK conducted the sound level measurements in accordance with Caltrans technical noise specifications. All measurement equipment meets American National Standards Institute (ANSI) specifications for sound level meters (ANSI S1.4: Specification for Sound Level Meter, 1983)
Piccolo-II Type 2 integrating-averaging level meters were used to conduct noise measurements at the project site and property boundaries.

The Leq, Lmin, Lmax, L2, L8, L25, and L50 statistical data were recorded over the measurement time intervals and the information was utilized to define the noise characteristics for the project. The following gives a brief description of the procedures for sound level measurements:
• Microphones for sound level meters were placed five (5) feet above the ground for long-term noise measurements
• Sound level meters were calibrated before each measurement • Following the calibration of equipment, a windscreen was placed over the microphone
• Frequency weighting was set on “A” and slow response
• Temperature and sky conditions were observed and documented

4-2
Appendix B includes photos, field sheets, and measured noise data.

4.2 Stationary Noise Source Modeling
On-site stationary noise source impacts are analyzed using SoundPLANTM noise modeling software. SoundPLANTM is a standards-based program that incorporates more than twenty national and international noise modeling guidelines.

Projected noise levels from SoundPLANTM are based on the following key parameters:
• Developing three-dimensional noise models of the project, • Predicting the project noise levels at the selected community locations, and • Comparing the predicted noise with the existing community ambient noise levels at the receptor locations.

The sides of buildings, walls, etc. were modeled as reflective surfaces and as diffractive bodies.

Most of the area surrounding the project site consists of roadways, residential properties, and commercial land uses and has been run as a hard site (Ground Factor=0). The elevation profile for the project site is derived from Google Earth, and all the receptors are placed at 5 feet above ground level.

Sound Power and Sound Pressure Level
Sound power level is the acoustic energy emitted by a source that produces a sound pressure level at some distance. While the sound power level of a source is fixed, the sound pressure level depends upon the distance from the source and the acoustic characteristics of the area in which it is located.

SoundPLAN requires that the source noise level be input using sound power level and which must be back-calculated based on a measured sound pressure level. The sound power level is calculated using SoundPLAN software by calibrating the source noise level to equal the sound pressure level at an equal distance from the source in which the referenced measurement was taken.

4.2.1 Parking Lot Noise
Parking lot noise would occur from vehicles entering and exiting the site, fueling activity, idling, exhaust, doors slamming, tires screeching, general loading activities, people talking,

4-3
and the occasional horn honking. Parking lot noise would occur throughout the site and is assessed by using referenced noise levels in the SoundPLAN model. Referenced noise levels for parking lot activities are based on the SoundPLANTM standard Parkplatzlärmstudie 2007. Key inputs for parking lot noise include the parking lot type, size of the area source, number of movements per hour, type of vehicles, and number of parking spaces within each lot. The parking lot movements per hour used for this study are based on the Alicia Town Center Ralph’s Fuel Center REVISED Traffic Impact Analysis Scoping Agreement, performed by RK Engineering Group in May 2023.

4.2.2 HVAC Noise
The project will include one HVAC unit on the roof of the fuel center building. Noise resulting from the HVAC unit is assessed using referenced noise levels measured by RK. Table 7 below provides the referenced noise levels for on-site HVAC noise.

Table 7
Referenced Noise Levels – HVAC
Project Noise Source Distance from Source (feet) Noise Level (dBA Leq)1 HVAC Units 5.0 77.4
1 Noise level is representative of a single unit.

To estimate the future noise levels during typical operational conditions, noise levels are input into SoundPLAN and projected to the nearest sensitive receptor locations. Adjusted noise levels are based on the distance of the receptor location relative to the noise source, local topography, and physical barriers including buildings and sound walls. The noise levels assume that the HVAC unit is operating continuously during daytime and nighttime hours, when in reality it will likely operate only intermittently throughout the day.

5-1

5.0 Existing Noise Environment
The existing noise environment for the project site and surrounding areas has been established based on noise measurement data collected by RK. The project setting is residential, and the primary environmental noise impacting the project site is roadway noise from adjacent streets.

5.1 Noise Measurement Results
To determine the existing noise level environment, RK conducted two 24-hour noise measurements near the project site and adjacent residential noise receptors.

Noise levels were measured on June 1, 2023, using Piccolo-II Type 2 integrating-averaging sound level meters. The information was utilized to establish the noise characteristics of the existing ambient environment.

The noise monitoring locations were selected based on the proximity and location of adjacent sensitive receptors. Exhibit C graphically illustrates the location of the noise measurements.
• Noise Monitoring Location 1 (L-1) was taken at the northern boundary of the project site, approximately 52 feet north of the proposed fuel center location and approximately 67 feet south of the centerline of Paseo de Valencia. Ambient noise sources at the project site included operational activity at the Ralph’s shopping center, residential activity at the homes adjacent to the site, and roadway activity along Paseo de Valencia and Alicia Parkway.
• Noise Monitoring Location 2 (L-2) was taken approximately 378 feet east of the proposed fuel center and approximately 61 feet south of the centerline of Paseo de Valencia. Ambient noise sources at the project site included operational activity at the Ralph’s shopping center, residential activity at the homes adjacent to the site, and roadway activity along Paseo de Valencia and Alicia Parkway.

The 24-hour noise measurement results represent the existing ambient noise levels near the adjacent noise sensitive land uses. Results of the long-term measurements are shown in Tables 8 and 9. Appendix B includes photographs, field sheets, and measured noise data.

5-2
Table 8
24-Hour Noise Measurement Results – L-11

Time Leq (dBA) Time Leq (dBA)
12:00 AM 58.7 12:00 PM 69.8
1:00 AM 57.9 1:00 PM 69.9
2:00 AM 56.5 2:00 PM 69.9
3:00 AM 57.5 3:00 PM 72.0
4:00 AM 60.8 4:00 PM 72.5
5:00 AM 64.4 5:00 PM 71.1
6:00 AM 66.2 6:00 PM 69.5
7:00 AM 68.8 7:00 PM 68.9
8:00 AM 70.1 8:00 PM 73.1
9:00 AM 68.6 9:00 PM 67.5
10:00 AM 69.5 10:00 PM 65.1
11:00 AM 69.2 11:00 PM 62.5
24-Hour CNEL 72.1
1 L-1 was recorded on 06/01/2023.

Table 9
24-Hour Noise Measurement Results – L-21
Time Leq (dBA) Time Leq (dBA)
12:00 AM 55.6 12:00 PM 67.8
1:00 AM 55.3 1:00 PM 67.9
2:00 AM 53.2 2:00 PM 67.3
3:00 AM 54.1 3:00 PM 67.9
4:00 AM 57.1 4:00 PM 68.3
5:00 AM 58.7 5:00 PM 68.4
6:00 AM 61.9 6:00 PM 67.5
7:00 AM 66.3 7:00 PM 63.5
8:00 AM 68.1 8:00 PM 64.4
9:00 AM 66.1 9:00 PM 64.1
10:00 AM 66.5 10:00 PM 61.9
11:00 AM 67.1 11:00 PM 59.4
24-Hour CNEL 68.1
1 L-2 was recorded on 06/01/2023.

6-1

6.0 Operational Noise Impacts
This assessment analyzes the anticipated noise levels generated by the project and compares them to the standards established in the City of Laguna Hills General Plan Noise Element.

The primary sources of operational noise include parking lot activity (including fuel delivery and transfer from trucks) and HVAC mechanical equipment.

6.1 Stationary Source Noise Impacts
The City of Laguna Hills General Plan establishes residential noise standards for the maximum allowable exterior noise level. SoundPLANTM noise modeling software is used to predict project-related noise impacts at each of the sensitive receptor locations during daytime and nighttime hours. The predicted noise levels are then compared to the City’s noise standards to determine whether the project will result in a significant impact.

This analysis considers all project noise sources operating simultaneously during daytime hours (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and nighttime hours (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.).

Daytime Stationary Source Noise Impacts
Noise levels generated by the project are not expected to exceed the City’s daytime noise standards at any of the sensitive receptor locations. The daytime residential noise standard is established to be 55 dBA Leq.

The results of the daytime noise impact analysis are shown in Table 10 and are graphically illustrated in Exhibits D and E. SoundPLAN calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix C.

6-2
Table 10
Daytime Stationary Noise Source Impacts
Sensitive
Receptor Location
SoundPLAN
Receiver
Exterior Project
Noise Level
(dBA)
General Plan Noise
Standard
(dBA)
Exceeds Standard
(?)
Northern Receptors
1 44.7
55 No
2 47.2 No
3 45.0 No
4 43.6 No
Eastern Receptors
5 32.5 No
6 34.1 No
7 32.6 No
Nighttime Stationary Source Noise Impacts
Noise levels generated by the project are not expected to exceed the City’s nighttime noise standards at any of the sensitive receptor locations. The nighttime residential noise standard is established to be 50 dBA Leq.

The results of the nighttime noise impact analysis are shown in Table 11 and are graphically illustrated in Exhibits D and F. SoundPLAN calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix C.

Table 11
Nighttime Stationary Noise Source Impacts
Sensitive
Receptor Location
SoundPLAN
Receiver
Exterior Noise Level
(dBA)
General Plan Noise
Standard
(dBA)
Exceeds Standard
(?)
Northern Receptors
1 44.6
50 No
2 47.0 No
3 44.9 No
4 43.5 No
Eastern Receptors
5 32.3 No
6 34.0 No
7 32.6 No

6-3

6.2 Traffic Noise Impacts
The project is not expected to cause a substantial increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the site as a result of increased traffic volumes along adjacent roadways.

Typically, it takes a doubling of traffic volume along a roadway to cause a significant increase in ambient noise levels of more than 3 dBA.

The project is expected to generate a total of approximately 1,720 average daily trips (ADT), of which 430 are considered pass-by trips (i.e., existing traffic already on the road)4 .

Per the City’s General Plan Mobility Element, both Paseo de Valencia and Alicia Parkway are classified as major arterial roadways, which can accommodate between 30,000 and 45,000 vehicle trips per day. Hence, the amount of traffic generated by the project will not double the amount of traffic along Paseo de Valencia or Alicia Parkway, either directly or cumulatively, and therefore the increase in roadway noise levels as a result of the project will be less than significant.

6.3 Construction Noise and Vibration Impacts
The project is not expected to cause a substantial temporary increase in noise levels, excessive groundborne vibration, or excessive groundborne noise levels during construction. Per the City of Laguna Hills Municipal Code Section 5-24.070 – Special Provisions, noise sources associated with construction, repair, remodeling, or grading of any real property shall be exempted from the City’s established noise standards, provided said activities do not take place between the hours of eight p.m. and seven a.m. on weekdays, eight p.m. and eight a.m. on Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a federal holiday.

To ensure compliance with the City of Laguna Hills Municipal Code and to reduce potential noise and vibration impacts, several design features will be implemented during construction, as described in Section 6.5 of this report. By implementing the recommended design features, the project’s temporary noise and vibration impacts can be presumed to be less than significant without the need for further analysis. 4 ADT volumes are referenced from the Alicia Town Center Ralph’s Fuel Center REVISED Traffic Impact Analysis Scoping Agreement, RK Engineering Group, May 2023.

6-4

6.4 Airport Noise Compatibility
The John Wayne Airport, located in Santa Ana, California, is the nearest airport to the proposed project site at a distance of approximately 11 miles. The project site is not located within the vicinity of the John Wayne Airport or any others’ private airstrip or airport land use plan, nor is it within two miles of a public or private use airport. Therefore, the project will have no impact on airport-adjacent land uses.

6.5 Project Design Features
The following recommendations are provided to help ensure the proposed project meets the City of Laguna Hills and State of California requirements for residential exterior noise exposure:

Operational Design Features
DF-1 Rooftop mounted HVAC equipment will be shielded from the line of sight of adjacent properties behind rooftop parapet walls.

Construction Design Features
DF-2 The project shall comply with City of Laguna Hills Municipal Code requirements. All construction will occur only during the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays and 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Saturdays. No construction will occur on Sundays or federal holidays.

DF-3 All construction equipment shall be equipped with mufflers and other suitable noise attenuation devices (e.g., engine shields).

DF-4 Establish an electric connection to the site to avoid the use of diesel- and gas-powered generators, to the extent feasible.

DF-5 Construction-related equipment, including heavy-duty equipment, motor vehicles, and portable equipment, shall be turned off when not in use for more than 5 minutes.

Exhibits

engineering group, inc. ALICIA TOWN CENTER RALPH'S FUEL CENTER NOISE IMPACT STUDY, City of Laguna Hills, CA 2776-2022-02 Location Map Exhibit A Legend: = Alicia Town Center Boundary = Fuel Center Location N ~216' ~322' Northern Receptors Eastern Receptors = Project Site Boundary

engineering group, inc. ALICIA TOWN CENTER RALPH'S FUEL CENTER NOISE IMPACT STUDY, City of Laguna Hills, CA 2776-2022-02 Site Plan Exhibit B N

engineering group, inc. ALICIA TOWN CENTER RALPH'S FUEL CENTER NOISE IMPACT STUDY, City of Laguna Hills, CA 2776-2022-02 Noise Monitoring Locations Exhibit C Legend: = Alicia Town Center Boundary = Fuel Center Location N 1 = Noise Monitoring Location 2 1 = Project Site Boundary

engineering group, inc. ALICIA TOWN CENTER FUEL CENTER NOISE IMPACT STUDY, City of Laguna Hills, CA 2776-2022-02 Operational Day/Night Noise Levels (dBA) Exhibit D N

engineering group, inc. ALICIA TOWN CENTER FUEL CENTER NOISE IMPACT STUDY, City of Laguna Hills, CA 2776-2022-02 Operational Noise Contours - Daytime Exhibit E N

engineering group, inc. ALICIA TOWN CENTER FUEL CENTER NOISE IMPACT STUDY, City of Laguna Hills, CA 2776-2022-02 Operational Noise Contours - Nighttime Exhibit F N

Appendices

Appendix A

City of Laguna Hills
General Plan Noise Element and
Municipal Code Chapter 5-24 – Noise Control

Introduction
Noise is unwanted sound that interferes with
living, working, and enjoying daily life. Exposure
to excessive noise can affect general well-being and
contributes to annoyance and undue stress. The
Noise Element is intended to reduce unwanted
sounds for the health, safety, and welfare of the
community. Removing or reducing significant
sources of noise where feasible will improve the
quality of life for Laguna Hills residents, workers,
and visitors.

Purpose and Scope
of the Noise Element
The purpose of the Noise Element is to identify and
assess existing noise sources in the community, and
to discuss the City’s role in ensuring comfortable
and safe noise levels in the future. As a part
of the General Plan process, citizens and City
officials identified goals for the future relating to
balancing land uses in the City, in part to minimize
incompatibilities and exposure to excessive noise
Noise
while providing the range of uses needed to maintain
a high quality of life. The goals, policies, and
programs will assist in achieving noise compatibility
between land uses.

The State of California recognizes the relationship
between noise and noise sensitive uses and has
adopted guidelines for noise elements that have been
followed in the preparation of this Element.

Background
Laguna Hill is located in an urbanized and developed
area and is subject to numerous noise sources,
primarily vehicular traffic on major roadways. The
City is also subject to typical urban noise sources
such as construction, police and fire department
sirens, landscaping equipment, barking dogs, and car
alarms.

Major noise sources in the City include traffic on
Interstate 5 (I‑5), State Route 73 (SR‑73), and
major arterials throughout the City. Truck traffic
is prevalent on these roadways and generates higher
noise levels relative to other vehicle types that travel

City of Laguna Hills General Plan Noise
N-2
on local roadways. Train traffic on the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe Railway (AT&SF) rail line, which runs parallel to I-5, is another source of noise in the City. The AT&SF rail line traffic includes daily passenger (Amtrak), transit (Metrolink), and freight service. The nearest airport is John Wayne International Airport, approximately 10 miles northwest of Laguna Hills. The distance from the airport results in no noise impact from aircraft overflight.

The City has land uses that are sensitive to noise and may be significantly affected by interference from noise. Noise sensitive land uses include residences, schools, churches, hospitals, convalescent (nursing) homes, hotels, and certain parks. Excessive noise exposure to human receptors can cause adverse physical and psychological responses, in addition to interfering with speech and concentration, and diminishing the quality of life.

In addition to humans, protected animal species and their habitats may be considered sensitive receptors if located near construction and operational noise sources, especially during the species’ breeding seasons.

The City of Laguna Hills is located within a region where there is the potential habitat for noise sensitive bird species, such as the coastal California gnatcatcher and least Bell’s vireo, that nest or forage in upland scrub vegetation.

Effects of Noise on People
The effects of noise on people can include general annoyance, interference with speech communication, sleep disturbance, and in the extreme, hearing impairment or loss. While physical damage to the ear from an intense noise is rare, degradation of auditory acuity can occur within a community noise environment. Hearing loss occurs mainly due to chronic exposure to excessive noise, but it may be due to a single event such as an explosion. Table N-1 provides typical instantaneous noise levels of common activities.

Noise is generally defined as unwanted
sound. Its effects can range from
annoyance to health problems.

City of Laguna Hills General Plan Noise
N-3
Table N-1
Common Noise Levels
Noises Sound Level (dBA)
Threshold of Pain 140
Rock Band, Leaf Blower, Car Horn 110
Gas Lawn Mower, Train Approaching (Engines) 90
Diesel Truck, Food Blender 80
Gas Lawn Mower, Vacuum Cleaner 70
Normal Conversation, Heavy Traffic at 300 feet 60
Large Business Office, Dishwasher in Next Room 50
Quiet residential area 40
Library 30
Normal Breathing 10
Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing 0
These are typical noise levels. Distance from the source will reduce the noise level. A 10 dB increase doubles perceived loudness. Continued exposure to noise above 85 dB can cause hearing loss. A single exposure to 140 dB noise can cause some hearing loss.

Noise Plan
As Laguna Hills and surrounding communities continue to grow, noise levels associated with transportation‑ and nontransportation-related noise continue to increase. The City seeks ways to safeguard the community from excessive noise as the ambient noise level in the community rises.

The goals, policies, and the Plan in this section describe the means to reduce the negative effects of noise in the City. Programs addressing noise, contained in the Implementation Program section of the General Plan, are an extension of the Noise Plan and contain specific actions that the City uses to protect the community from excessive noise.

Noise Measurement
Evaluating noise is complex. Noise levels are measured as decibels (dB) on a logarithmic scale that quantifies sound intensity in a manner similar to the Richter scale used for earthquake magnitudes. Thus, doubling the energy of a noise source (e.g., traffic volume) would not double the noise level.

The human ear is not equally sensitive to all frequencies within the sound spectrum. The most common method to characterize sound is the “A‑weighted” sound level, or dB(A), which filters out noise frequencies not audible to the human ear, thereby weighting the audible frequencies.

Therefore, the dBA is used for noise measurements and standards involving the human perception of noise.

City of Laguna Hills General Plan Noise
N-4
In addition to instantaneous noise levels, noise levels measured over a period of time are used to assess noise limits and impacts. Noise levels measured over 1 hour are usually expressed as dBA Leq, the equivalent 1-hour noise level. Time of day is also an important factor for noise assessment; noise levels that may be acceptable during the day may interfere with the ability to sleep during evening or nighttime hours. Therefore, 24-hour noise levels are used. The community noise equivalent level (CNEL) is the cumulative noise exposure in a community during a 24‑hour period, which adds 5 dB(A) to evening sound levels (between 7:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m.), and 10 dB(A) to the nighttime sound levels (between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.). The day/ night average sound level (Ldn) is the same as the CNEL, except the 3-hour evening period is considered part of the daytime period.

In addition to noise measurement, traffic noise levels for freeways and arterials can be modeled using a traffic noise model with traffic volumes, mix, and speed characteristics.

Noise and Land Use Planning
Accumulation of noise from transportation and nontransportation sources determine the overall noise environment within a community.

Transportation noise refers to noise from automobile use, trucking, airport operations and rail operations. Nontransportation noise typically refers to noise from stationary sources such as commercial establishments, machinery, air conditioning systems, compressors, and landscape maintenance equipment.

Regardless of the type of noise, noise levels are highest near the source and substantially decrease with distance. Most noise impacts can be avoided when noise sources, sensitive land uses, and information about the future noise environment are considered in land use planning and development decisions. Land uses that generate significant noise should be separated from uses that are particularly sensitive to noise.

To establish the compatibility of various land uses with exterior noise levels, the City uses CNEL in its planning guidelines. CNEL takes into account heightened sensitivity of persons to noise during evening and nighttime periods.

Figure N-1 illustrates Laguna Hills’ land use compatibility guidelines.

Noise levels can be estimated and represented as noise contour lines, which indicate the area subject to a particular noise level. Figures N-2 and N-3 show the estimated existing and projected future noise contours in Laguna Hills, based on traffic volume counts and projected 2030 traffic volumes on the City’s arterials.

City of Laguna Hills General Plan Noise
N-5
Figure N-1
Land Use Compatibility
Guidelines

City of Laguna Hills General Plan Noise
N-6
The noise contours are used as a guide for land use and development decisions. Land uses within contours of 60 dB(A) or greater may be noise impacted depending on the use. When noise sensitive land uses are proposed within these contours, an acoustical analysis may be required. For a project to be approved in a noise impacted area, the analysis must demonstrate that the project is designed to attenuate noise to meet the City’s noise standards as defined in Table N-1. If the project is not designed to meet the noise standards, mitigation measures can be recommended in the analysis. If the analysis demonstrates that the noise standards can be met with implementation of the mitigation measures, the project can be approved with the mitigation measures required as conditions of project approval.

Noise Standards
Table N-2 summarizes the City of Laguna Hills exterior and interior noise standards. The standards represent the maximum acceptable noise levels as measured from any residential property in the City. Accordingly, it is unlawful to cause the noise level on any residential property to exceed the exterior noise standards:

1. for a cumulative period of more than 30 minutes in any hour;

2. plus 5 dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than 15 minutes in any hour;

3. plus 10 dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than 5 minutes in any hour;

4. plus 15 dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than 1 minute in any hour; or

5. plus 20 dB(A) for any period of time.

In addition, it is unlawful to cause the noise level on any residential property to exceed the interior noise standards (see Table N-2):

1. for a cumulative period of more than 5 minutes in any hour;

2. plus 5 dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than 1 minute in any hour; or

3. plus 10 dB(A) for any period of time.

Table N-2
Residential Noise Standards
Daytime Noise Standards
(7:00 am to 10:00 pm)
Nighttime Noise Standards
(10:00 pm to 7:00 am)
Exterior Noise Standards 55 dB(A) 50 dB(A)
Interior Noise Standards 55 dB(A) 45 dB(A)
Source: Laguna Hills Municipal Code Chapter 5-24.

Note: Standards are based on measurements taken from any residential property in the City.

City of Laguna Hills General Plan Noise City of Laguna Hills General Plan Noise N-7
Figure N-2 Existing Noise Contours
To be provided
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
Lake Forest Dr
Irvine Center Dr
Ridge Route Dr
El Toro Rd
El Toro Rd
Glenwood Dr
Alicia Pkwy
!"^$
!"^$
Greenfield Dr
Pa seo de Valencia
Laguna Hills D r
Oso Pkwy
La Paz Rd
Ridge Route Dr
Pkwy
A¥
Santa M aria Ave
Avenida de La Carlota
Crown Valley
Los Ali sos Blvd
Muirlands Blvd
Jeronimo Rd
Aliso Creek B lvd
2 1
3 4
7 9
6 5
8 10
11 LAGUNA NIGUEL

MISSION

VIEJO LAGUNA WOODS
IRVINE

LAKE FOREST
¹
0 0.25 0.5 1
Miles
Mo ulton
Pkwy
Noise Contours 2008
Figure N - 2
Noise Contours
Local Streets
City Boundary Major Streets
Freeway/ Toll Road
Source: Urban Crossroads, 2008.

CNEL 70
CNEL 65
CNEL 60
!! Measurement Locations
Note: Noise Contours are based
on flat terrain and hard surfaces.

City of Laguna Hills General Plan Noise
N-8
Figure N-3 Future Noise Contours
To be provided
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
Lake Forest Dr
Irvine Center Dr
Ridge Route Dr
El Toro Rd
El Toro Rd
Glenwood Dr
Alicia Pkwy
!"^$
!"^$
Greenfield Dr
Pa seo de Valencia
Laguna Hills D r
Oso Pkwy
La Paz Rd
Ridge Route Dr
Pkwy
A¥
Santa M aria Ave
Avenida de La Carlota
Crown Valley
Los Alisos Blvd
Muirlands Blvd
Jeronimo Rd
Aliso Creek B lvd
2 1
3 4
7 9
6 5
10 11

LAGUNA NIGUEL

MISSION

LAGUNA WOODS VIEJO
IRVINE

LAKE FOREST
¹
0 0.25 0.5 1
Miles
Mo ulton
Pkwy
Noise Contours 2030
Figure N - 3
Noise Contours
Source: Urban Crossroads, 2008
Note: Noise Contours are based
on flat terrain and hard surfaces.

Local Streets
City Boundary Major Streets
Freeway/ Toll Road
CNEL 70
CNEL 65
CNEL 60
!! Measurement Locations