EXHIBIT D
1705
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 60 / 85
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 3.72 3.72
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.62 0.62
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.62 0.62
4.6.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 3.72 3.72
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 3.72 3.72
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 3.72 3.72
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 3.72 3.72
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.62 0.62
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.62 0.62
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
EXHIBIT D
1706
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 61 / 85
4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.7.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1707
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 62 / 85
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.8.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1708
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 63 / 85
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.9.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1709
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 64 / 85
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Winter
(Max)
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetatio
n
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1710
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 65 / 85
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1711
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 66 / 85
Remove — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.4. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetatio
n
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1712
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 67 / 85
4.10.5. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.6. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1713
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 68 / 85
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
5. Activity Data
5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Demolition Demolition 1/1/2025 3/12/2025 5.00 50.0 —
Site Preparation Site Preparation 3/13/2025 4/24/2025 5.00 30.0 —
EXHIBIT D
1714
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 69 / 85
Grading Grading 4/25/2025 8/8/2025 5.00 75.0 —
Building Construction Building Construction 8/9/2025 6/10/2028 5.00 740 — Paving Paving 6/11/2028 8/27/2028 5.00 55.0 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 8/28/2028 11/13/2028 5.00 55.0 —
5.2. Off-Road Equipment
5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Demolition Excavators Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 4.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Excavators Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Scrapers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 423 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 367 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 3.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 Paving Pavers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 81.0 0.42
EXHIBIT D
1715
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 70 / 85
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48
5.2.2. Mitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Demolition Excavators Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 4.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Excavators Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Scrapers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 423 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 367 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 3.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 Paving Pavers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 81.0 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48
EXHIBIT D
1716
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 71 / 85
5.3. Construction Vehicles
5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition — — — —
Demolition Worker 15.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck — — HHDT
Site Preparation — — — —
Site Preparation Worker 17.5 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 20.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 490 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 251 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving — — — —
Paving Worker 15.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
EXHIBIT D
1717
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 72 / 85
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Architectural Coating — — — —
Architectural Coating Worker 98.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT
5.3.2. Mitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition — — — —
Demolition Worker 15.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck — — HHDT
Site Preparation — — — —
Site Preparation Worker 17.5 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 20.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 490 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
EXHIBIT D
1718
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 73 / 85
Building Construction Vendor 251 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving — — — —
Paving Worker 15.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Architectural Coating — — — —
Architectural Coating Worker 98.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT
5.4. Vehicles
5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.
5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 2,297,229 765,743 —
5.6. Dust Mitigation
5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (cy) Material Exported (cy) Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (sq. ft.) Acres Paved (acres)
EXHIBIT D
1719
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 74 / 85
Demolition 0.00 0.00 0.00 — —
Site Preparation — — 45.0 0.00 —
Grading — — 225 0.00 —
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.
5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
General Office Building 0.00 0%
5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Year and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Year kWh per Year CO2 CH4 N2O
2025 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005
2026 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005
2027 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005
2028 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year General Office
Building
16,601 3,385 1,072 4,560,579 191,406 39,023 12,360 52,581,469
EXHIBIT D
1720
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 75 / 85
5.9.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year General Office
Building
16,601 3,385 1,072 4,560,579 191,406 39,023 12,360 52,581,469
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.1.2. Mitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft) Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq ft) Non-Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
1221358.5 407,120 0.00 0.00 —
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 180
5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 180
EXHIBIT D
1721
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 76 / 85
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) General Office Building 32,419,465 204 0.0330 0.0040 36,373,237
5.11.2. Mitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) General Office Building 32,419,465 204 0.0330 0.0040 36,373,237
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) General Office Building 272,196,747 0.00
5.12.2. Mitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) General Office Building 231,367,235 0.00
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
EXHIBIT D
1722
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 77 / 85
General Office Building 1,424 —
5.13.2. Mitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
General Office Building 214 —
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced General Office Building Household refrigerators
and/or freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.02 0.60 0.00 1.00
General Office Building Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
5.14.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced General Office Building Household refrigerators
and/or freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.02 0.60 0.00 1.00
General Office Building Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
EXHIBIT D
1723
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 78 / 85
5.15.2. Mitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Year Horsepower Load Factor
5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr) Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day) Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)
5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.1.2. Mitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
EXHIBIT D
1724
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 79 / 85
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.1.2. Mitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)
5.18.2.2. Mitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which assumes GHG emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.
Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 16.2 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 2.50 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise — meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 18.8 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
EXHIBIT D
1725
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 80 / 85
Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events.
Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation 1 0 0 N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 0 0 N/A
Wildfire 1 0 0 N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 0 0 0 N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation 1 1 1 2
Sea Level Rise 1 1 1 2
Wildfire 1 1 1 2
EXHIBIT D
1726
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 81 / 85
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 37.8
AQ-PM 20.1
AQ-DPM 8.90
Drinking Water 54.0
Lead Risk Housing 4.86
Pesticides 52.7
Toxic Releases 31.9
Traffic 89.6
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 0.00
Groundwater 7.19
EXHIBIT D
1727
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 82 / 85
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 76.8
Impaired Water Bodies 23.9
Solid Waste 83.3
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 24.3
Cardio-vascular 34.2
Low Birth Weights 40.9
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 12.0
Housing 1.29
Linguistic 30.7
Poverty 8.68
Unemployment 30.9
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 88.28435776
Employed 88.70781471
Median HI 88.66931862
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 64.48094444
High school enrollment 13.5249583
Preschool enrollment 95.7141024
Transportation —
Auto Access 67.17567047
EXHIBIT D
1728
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 83 / 85
Active commuting 50.09624022
Social—
2-parent households 97.21544976
Voting 59.77158989
Neighborhood—
Alcohol availability 97.0101373
Park access 44.4629796
Retail density 7.442576671
Supermarket access 10.58642371
Tree canopy 22.91800334
Housing—
Homeownership 95.99640703
Housing habitability 93.16052868
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 71.74387271 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 74.51559091
Uncrowded housing 79.21211344
Health Outcomes—
Insured adults 80.68779674
Arthritis 73.2
Asthma ER Admissions 67.9
High Blood Pressure 95.4
Cancer (excluding skin) 45.0
Asthma 61.7
Coronary Heart Disease 87.2
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 79.3
Diagnosed Diabetes 91.2
Life Expectancy at Birth 21.4
EXHIBIT D
1729
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 84 / 85
Cognitively Disabled 80.8
Physically Disabled 85.5
Heart Attack ER Admissions 58.5
Mental Health Not Good 68.6
Chronic Kidney Disease 85.5
Obesity 69.5
Pedestrian Injuries 19.6
Physical Health Not Good 82.3
Stroke 91.3
Health Risk Behaviors—
Binge Drinking 5.9
Current Smoker 64.6
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 85.0
Climate Change Exposures—
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 32.5
Elderly 88.9
English Speaking 71.6
Foreign-born 23.2
Outdoor Workers 44.3
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity—
Impervious Surface Cover 69.4
Traffic Density 76.5
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices—
Hardship 15.1
EXHIBIT D
1730
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Decreased Commercial Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 85 / 85
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 60.4
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 18.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 88.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) No Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) No Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.
8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Operations: Vehicle Data Close to rail trip rates provided by Kittelson & Assoc, Inc.
Operations: Architectural Coatings Based on BAAQMD Reg 8 Rule 3
EXHIBIT D
1731
Appendix B-4
No Net Loss Parcels – Increase in Residential Use
EXHIBIT D
1732
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 1 / 107
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report Table of Contents
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
1.2. Land Use Types
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
2. Emissions Summary
2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
2.3. Construction Emissions by Year, Mitigated
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated
3. Construction Emissions Details
3.1. Demolition (2025) - Unmitigated
3.2. Demolition (2025) - Mitigated
EXHIBIT D
1733
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 2 / 107
3.3. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated
3.4. Site Preparation (2025) - Mitigated
3.5. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated
3.6. Grading (2025) - Mitigated
3.7. Grading (2026) - Unmitigated
3.8. Grading (2026) - Mitigated
3.9. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated
3.10. Building Construction (2026) - Mitigated
3.11. Building Construction (2027) - Unmitigated
3.12. Building Construction (2027) - Mitigated
3.13. Building Construction (2028) - Unmitigated
3.14. Building Construction (2028) - Mitigated
3.15. Building Construction (2029) - Unmitigated
3.16. Building Construction (2029) - Mitigated
3.17. Building Construction (2030) - Unmitigated
3.18. Building Construction (2030) - Mitigated
3.19. Building Construction (2031) - Unmitigated
EXHIBIT D
1734
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 3 / 107
3.20. Building Construction (2031) - Mitigated
3.21. Building Construction (2032) - Unmitigated
3.22. Building Construction (2032) - Mitigated
3.23. Paving (2032) - Unmitigated
3.24. Paving (2032) - Mitigated
3.25. Architectural Coating (2032) - Unmitigated
3.26. Architectural Coating (2032) - Mitigated
3.27. Architectural Coating (2033) - Unmitigated
3.28. Architectural Coating (2033) - Mitigated
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
4.1.2. Mitigated
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
EXHIBIT D
1735
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 4 / 107
4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.1. Unmitigated
4.3.2. Mitigated
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.1. Unmitigated
4.4.2. Mitigated
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.1. Unmitigated
4.5.2. Mitigated
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
4.6.2. Mitigated
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
4.7.2. Mitigated
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
EXHIBIT D
1736
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 5 / 107
4.8.1. Unmitigated
4.8.2. Mitigated
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
4.9.2. Mitigated
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
4.10.4. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Mitigated
4.10.5. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Mitigated
4.10.6. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Mitigated
5. Activity Data
5.1. Construction Schedule
5.2. Off-Road Equipment
5.2.1. Unmitigated
5.2.2. Mitigated
EXHIBIT D
1737
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 6 / 107
5.3. Construction Vehicles
5.3.1. Unmitigated
5.3.2. Mitigated
5.4. Vehicles
5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
5.5. Architectural Coatings
5.6. Dust Mitigation
5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
5.7. Construction Paving
5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
5.9.2. Mitigated
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
EXHIBIT D
1738
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 7 / 107
5.10.1.2. Mitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
5.11.2. Mitigated
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
5.12.2. Mitigated
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
5.13.2. Mitigated
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
5.14.2. Mitigated
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
EXHIBIT D
1739
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 8 / 107
5.15.1. Unmitigated
5.15.2. Mitigated
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
5.16.2. Process Boilers
5.17. User Defined
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.1.2. Mitigated
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.1.2. Mitigated
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
5.18.2.2. Mitigated
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
EXHIBIT D
1740
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 9 / 107
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
8. User Changes to Default Data
EXHIBIT D
1741
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 10 / 107
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Construction Start Date 1/1/2025
Operational Year 2040
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 3.00
Precipitation (days) 33.2
Location 37.70567461965193, -121.80009118943576
County Alameda
City Livermore
Air District Bay Area AQMD
Air Basin San Francisco Bay Area
TAZ 1677
EDFZ 1
Electric Utility Pacific Gas & Electric Company
Gas Utility Pacific Gas & Electric
App Version 2022.1.1.24
1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
EXHIBIT D
1742
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 11 / 107
Apartments Low
Rise
569 Dwelling Unit 35.6 603,140 0.00 0.00 1,605 —
Apartments Low
Rise
862 Dwelling Unit 53.9 913,720 0.00 0.00 2,431 —
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector Sector # Measure Title
Transportation T-4 Integrate Aordable and Below Market Rate Housing Water W-7 Adopt a Water Conservation Strategy
Waste S-1/S-2 Implement Waste Reduction Plan
2. Emissions Summary
2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 195 195 31.7 52.4 0.06 1.37 19.8 21.2 1.26 10.1 11.4 — 15,155 15,155 0.42 0.95 42.7 15,491 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 195 195 29.7 47.9 0.06 1.23 9.59 10.6 1.14 3.69 4.83 — 14,526 14,526 0.47 0.97 1.11 14,828 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 58.6 58.5 19.4 32.1 0.04 0.81 6.73 7.12 0.75 2.68 3.42 — 10,249 10,249 0.32 0.68 12.0 10,471 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1743
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 12 / 107
Unmit. 10.7 10.7 3.54 5.85 0.01 0.15 1.23 1.30 0.14 0.49 0.63 — 1,697 1,697 0.05 0.11 1.99 1,734
2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 4.00 3.37 31.7 30.8 0.06 1.37 19.8 21.2 1.26 10.1 11.4 — 6,772 6,772 0.27 0.06 0.69 6,797 2026 4.99 4.28 16.8 52.4 0.05 0.44 9.59 10.0 0.41 2.29 2.70 — 15,155 15,155 0.42 0.95 42.7 15,491 2027 4.81 4.10 15.9 49.8 0.05 0.39 9.59 9.99 0.37 2.29 2.66 — 14,914 14,914 0.40 0.95 38.9 15,245 2028 4.66 3.99 15.3 47.7 0.05 0.36 9.59 9.95 0.33 2.29 2.63 — 14,669 14,669 0.39 0.65 35.3 14,908 2029 4.47 3.78 14.4 46.0 0.05 0.33 9.59 9.93 0.28 2.29 2.58 — 14,422 14,422 0.37 0.65 31.8 14,656 2030 4.08 3.69 14.0 44.3 0.05 0.29 9.59 9.88 0.27 2.29 2.56 — 14,175 14,175 0.34 0.62 28.4 14,397 2031 3.89 3.53 13.6 42.8 0.05 0.27 9.59 9.87 0.25 2.29 2.55 — 13,946 13,946 0.34 0.62 25.2 14,165 2032 195 195 6.02 10.2 0.01 0.20 1.70 1.71 0.18 0.40 0.41 — 1,720 1,720 0.06 0.01 3.19 1,728 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 3.87 3.26 29.7 29.0 0.06 1.23 9.37 10.6 1.14 3.69 4.83 — 6,760 6,760 0.27 0.06 0.02 6,784 2026 4.89 4.16 27.3 47.9 0.06 1.12 9.59 10.5 1.03 3.69 4.72 — 14,526 14,526 0.47 0.97 1.11 14,828 2027 4.73 4.01 16.9 45.8 0.05 0.39 9.59 9.99 0.37 2.29 2.66 — 14,297 14,297 0.47 0.97 1.01 14,599 2028 4.57 3.88 15.9 43.9 0.05 0.36 9.59 9.95 0.33 2.29 2.63 — 14,064 14,064 0.44 0.94 0.91 14,356 2029 4.15 3.73 15.3 42.2 0.05 0.33 9.59 9.93 0.28 2.29 2.58 — 13,827 13,827 0.41 0.92 0.82 14,111 2030 3.99 3.57 14.6 40.5 0.05 0.29 9.59 9.88 0.27 2.29 2.56 — 13,590 13,590 0.39 0.89 0.74 13,865 2031 3.84 3.45 14.2 39.4 0.05 0.27 9.59 9.87 0.25 2.29 2.55 — 13,369 13,369 0.39 0.62 0.66 13,565 2032 195 195 13.5 38.1 0.05 0.25 9.59 9.85 0.23 2.29 2.53 — 13,148 13,148 0.39 0.59 0.58 13,335 2033 195 195 1.09 5.57 < 0.005 0.01 1.70 1.71 0.01 0.40 0.41 — 1,586 1,586 0.03 0.01 0.07 1,592
EXHIBIT D
1744
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 13 / 107
Average — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily
2025 2.51 2.11 19.4 18.5 0.03 0.81 5.84 6.65 0.75 2.68 3.42 — 3,704 3,704 0.15 0.03 0.18 3,718 2026 3.30 2.80 13.9 30.6 0.04 0.42 6.71 7.12 0.39 1.83 2.21 — 9,204 9,204 0.29 0.54 10.4 9,383 2027 3.35 2.83 11.7 32.1 0.04 0.28 6.71 6.99 0.26 1.60 1.86 — 10,249 10,249 0.32 0.68 12.0 10,471 2028 3.24 2.76 11.3 30.8 0.04 0.26 6.73 6.98 0.24 1.61 1.85 — 10,109 10,109 0.30 0.66 10.9 10,323 2029 2.94 2.62 10.6 29.6 0.04 0.24 6.71 6.95 0.20 1.60 1.80 — 9,912 9,912 0.28 0.65 9.79 10,124 2030 2.83 2.53 10.4 28.5 0.04 0.21 6.71 6.92 0.19 1.60 1.79 — 9,743 9,743 0.28 0.44 8.76 9,890 2031 2.69 2.42 9.84 27.5 0.04 0.19 6.71 6.90 0.18 1.60 1.78 — 9,584 9,584 0.26 0.44 7.77 9,731 2032 58.6 58.5 3.69 9.06 0.01 0.09 1.62 1.71 0.08 0.38 0.47 — 2,492 2,492 0.07 0.08 1.55 2,518 2033 1.14 1.14 0.01 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.37 9.37 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 9.41 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.46 0.39 3.54 3.38 0.01 0.15 1.06 1.21 0.14 0.49 0.63 — 613 613 0.02 0.01 0.03 616 2026 0.60 0.51 2.54 5.58 0.01 0.08 1.22 1.30 0.07 0.33 0.40 — 1,524 1,524 0.05 0.09 1.72 1,553 2027 0.61 0.52 2.14 5.85 0.01 0.05 1.22 1.28 0.05 0.29 0.34 — 1,697 1,697 0.05 0.11 1.99 1,734 2028 0.59 0.50 2.06 5.62 0.01 0.05 1.23 1.27 0.04 0.29 0.34 — 1,674 1,674 0.05 0.11 1.81 1,709 2029 0.54 0.48 1.94 5.40 0.01 0.04 1.22 1.27 0.04 0.29 0.33 — 1,641 1,641 0.05 0.11 1.62 1,676 2030 0.52 0.46 1.89 5.19 0.01 0.04 1.22 1.26 0.03 0.29 0.33 — 1,613 1,613 0.05 0.07 1.45 1,637 2031 0.49 0.44 1.80 5.02 0.01 0.04 1.22 1.26 0.03 0.29 0.33 — 1,587 1,587 0.04 0.07 1.29 1,611 2032 10.7 10.7 0.67 1.65 < 0.005 0.02 0.30 0.31 0.02 0.07 0.09 — 413 413 0.01 0.01 0.26 417 2033 0.21 0.21 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.55 1.55 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.56
2.3. Construction Emissions by Year, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1745
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 14 / 107
2025 4.00 3.37 31.7 30.8 0.06 1.37 19.8 21.2 1.26 10.1 11.4 — 6,772 6,772 0.27 0.06 0.69 6,797 2026 4.99 4.28 16.8 52.4 0.05 0.44 9.59 10.0 0.41 2.29 2.70 — 15,155 15,155 0.42 0.95 42.7 15,491 2027 4.81 4.10 15.9 49.8 0.05 0.39 9.59 9.99 0.37 2.29 2.66 — 14,914 14,914 0.40 0.95 38.9 15,245 2028 4.66 3.99 15.3 47.7 0.05 0.36 9.59 9.95 0.33 2.29 2.63 — 14,669 14,669 0.39 0.65 35.3 14,908 2029 4.47 3.78 14.4 46.0 0.05 0.33 9.59 9.93 0.28 2.29 2.58 — 14,422 14,422 0.37 0.65 31.8 14,656 2030 4.08 3.69 14.0 44.3 0.05 0.29 9.59 9.88 0.27 2.29 2.56 — 14,175 14,175 0.34 0.62 28.4 14,397 2031 3.89 3.53 13.6 42.8 0.05 0.27 9.59 9.87 0.25 2.29 2.55 — 13,946 13,946 0.34 0.62 25.2 14,165 2032 195 195 6.02 10.2 0.01 0.20 1.70 1.71 0.18 0.40 0.41 — 1,720 1,720 0.06 0.01 3.19 1,728 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 3.87 3.26 29.7 29.0 0.06 1.23 9.37 10.6 1.14 3.69 4.83 — 6,760 6,760 0.27 0.06 0.02 6,784 2026 4.89 4.16 27.3 47.9 0.06 1.12 9.59 10.5 1.03 3.69 4.72 — 14,526 14,526 0.47 0.97 1.11 14,828 2027 4.73 4.01 16.9 45.8 0.05 0.39 9.59 9.99 0.37 2.29 2.66 — 14,297 14,297 0.47 0.97 1.01 14,599 2028 4.57 3.88 15.9 43.9 0.05 0.36 9.59 9.95 0.33 2.29 2.63 — 14,064 14,064 0.44 0.94 0.91 14,356 2029 4.15 3.73 15.3 42.2 0.05 0.33 9.59 9.93 0.28 2.29 2.58 — 13,827 13,827 0.41 0.92 0.82 14,111 2030 3.99 3.57 14.6 40.5 0.05 0.29 9.59 9.88 0.27 2.29 2.56 — 13,590 13,590 0.39 0.89 0.74 13,865 2031 3.84 3.45 14.2 39.4 0.05 0.27 9.59 9.87 0.25 2.29 2.55 — 13,369 13,369 0.39 0.62 0.66 13,565 2032 195 195 13.5 38.1 0.05 0.25 9.59 9.85 0.23 2.29 2.53 — 13,148 13,148 0.39 0.59 0.58 13,335 2033 195 195 1.09 5.57 < 0.005 0.01 1.70 1.71 0.01 0.40 0.41 — 1,586 1,586 0.03 0.01 0.07 1,592 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 2.51 2.11 19.4 18.5 0.03 0.81 5.84 6.65 0.75 2.68 3.42 — 3,704 3,704 0.15 0.03 0.18 3,718 2026 3.30 2.80 13.9 30.6 0.04 0.42 6.71 7.12 0.39 1.83 2.21 — 9,204 9,204 0.29 0.54 10.4 9,383 2027 3.35 2.83 11.7 32.1 0.04 0.28 6.71 6.99 0.26 1.60 1.86 — 10,249 10,249 0.32 0.68 12.0 10,471 2028 3.24 2.76 11.3 30.8 0.04 0.26 6.73 6.98 0.24 1.61 1.85 — 10,109 10,109 0.30 0.66 10.9 10,323 2029 2.94 2.62 10.6 29.6 0.04 0.24 6.71 6.95 0.20 1.60 1.80 — 9,912 9,912 0.28 0.65 9.79 10,124 2030 2.83 2.53 10.4 28.5 0.04 0.21 6.71 6.92 0.19 1.60 1.79 — 9,743 9,743 0.28 0.44 8.76 9,890 2031 2.69 2.42 9.84 27.5 0.04 0.19 6.71 6.90 0.18 1.60 1.78 — 9,584 9,584 0.26 0.44 7.77 9,731
EXHIBIT D
1746
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 15 / 107
2032 58.6 58.5 3.69 9.06 0.01 0.09 1.62 1.71 0.08 0.38 0.47 — 2,492 2,492 0.07 0.08 1.55 2,518 2033 1.14 1.14 0.01 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.37 9.37 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 9.41 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.46 0.39 3.54 3.38 0.01 0.15 1.06 1.21 0.14 0.49 0.63 — 613 613 0.02 0.01 0.03 616 2026 0.60 0.51 2.54 5.58 0.01 0.08 1.22 1.30 0.07 0.33 0.40 — 1,524 1,524 0.05 0.09 1.72 1,553 2027 0.61 0.52 2.14 5.85 0.01 0.05 1.22 1.28 0.05 0.29 0.34 — 1,697 1,697 0.05 0.11 1.99 1,734 2028 0.59 0.50 2.06 5.62 0.01 0.05 1.23 1.27 0.04 0.29 0.34 — 1,674 1,674 0.05 0.11 1.81 1,709 2029 0.54 0.48 1.94 5.40 0.01 0.04 1.22 1.27 0.04 0.29 0.33 — 1,641 1,641 0.05 0.11 1.62 1,676 2030 0.52 0.46 1.89 5.19 0.01 0.04 1.22 1.26 0.03 0.29 0.33 — 1,613 1,613 0.05 0.07 1.45 1,637 2031 0.49 0.44 1.80 5.02 0.01 0.04 1.22 1.26 0.03 0.29 0.33 — 1,587 1,587 0.04 0.07 1.29 1,611 2032 10.7 10.7 0.67 1.65 < 0.005 0.02 0.30 0.31 0.02 0.07 0.09 — 413 413 0.01 0.01 0.26 417 2033 0.21 0.21 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.55 1.55 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.56
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 64.2 60.8 38.0 284 0.74 2.02 66.1 68.1 1.99 16.8 18.8 668 91,837 92,504 70.4 2.65 42.2 95,096 Mit. 63.0 59.7 37.1 273 0.71 2.00 62.3 64.3 1.98 15.8 17.8 168 88,300 88,468 20.3 2.48 40.4 89,756 %
Reduced
2% 2% 2% 4% 5% 1% 6% 6% 1% 6% 5% 75% 4% 4% 71% 6% 4% 6% Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 56.3 53.3 39.8 184 0.70 1.98 66.1 68.1 1.97 16.8 18.7 668 88,062 88,730 70.5 2.85 11.7 91,353 Mit. 55.2 52.2 38.8 174 0.67 1.97 62.3 64.3 1.95 15.8 17.8 168 84,728 84,897 20.4 2.67 11.6 86,215
EXHIBIT D
1747
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 16 / 107
% 2% 2% 3% 5% 5% 1% 6% 6% 1% 6% 5% 75% 4% 4% 71% 6% < 0.5% 6% Reduced
Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 56.0 53.8 23.5 197 0.56 0.86 57.7 58.6 0.84 14.6 15.5 668 64,750 65,418 69.9 2.48 23.0 67,927 Mit. 55.0 52.9 22.6 188 0.53 0.85 54.4 55.3 0.83 13.8 14.6 168 61,756 61,924 19.9 2.32 22.3 63,134 %
Reduced
2% 2% 4% 4% 5% 2% 6% 6% 1% 6% 5% 75% 5% 5% 72% 6% 3% 7% Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 10.2 9.82 4.29 35.9 0.10 0.16 10.5 10.7 0.15 2.67 2.83 111 10,720 10,831 11.6 0.41 3.80 11,246 Mit. 10.0 9.65 4.13 34.3 0.10 0.15 9.93 10.1 0.15 2.52 2.67 27.9 10,224 10,252 3.29 0.38 3.69 10,453 %
Reduced
2% 2% 4% 4% 5% 2% 6% 6% 1% 6% 5% 75% 5% 5% 72% 6% 3% 7%
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 20.8 19.0 15.9 193 0.60 0.26 66.1 66.4 0.24 16.8 17.0 — 61,355 61,355 1.69 2.30 31.4 62,113 Area 42.6 41.4 14.9 87.6 0.09 1.18 — 1.18 1.17 — 1.17 0.00 18,145 18,145 0.35 0.04 — 18,164 Energy 0.84 0.42 7.21 3.07 0.05 0.58 — 0.58 0.58 — 0.58 — 12,153 12,153 1.30 0.08 — 12,208 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 97.4 184 281 10.0 0.24 — 603 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 570 0.00 570 57.0 0.00 — 1,996 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 10.9 10.9
Total 64.2 60.8 38.0 284 0.74 2.02 66.1 68.1 1.99 16.8 18.8 668 91,837 92,504 70.4 2.65 42.2 95,096
EXHIBIT D
1748
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 17 / 107
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Winter
(Max)
Mobile 20.3 18.6 18.5 175 0.57 0.26 66.1 66.4 0.24 16.8 17.0 — 57,797 57,797 1.84 2.50 0.81 58,588 Area 35.1 34.3 14.1 6.01 0.09 1.14 — 1.14 1.14 — 1.14 0.00 17,928 17,928 0.34 0.03 — 17,946 Energy 0.84 0.42 7.21 3.07 0.05 0.58 — 0.58 0.58 — 0.58 — 12,153 12,153 1.30 0.08 — 12,208 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 97.4 184 281 10.0 0.24 — 603 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 570 0.00 570 57.0 0.00 — 1,996 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 10.9 10.9
Total 56.3 53.3 39.8 184 0.70 1.98 66.1 68.1 1.97 16.8 18.7 668 88,062 88,730 70.5 2.85 11.7 91,353 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 18.0 16.4 15.6 153 0.51 0.23 57.7 58.0 0.22 14.6 14.9 — 51,864 51,864 1.58 2.16 12.1 52,560 Area 37.2 37.0 0.72 40.4 < 0.005 0.05 — 0.05 0.04 — 0.04 0.00 549 549 0.01 < 0.005 — 550 Energy 0.84 0.42 7.21 3.07 0.05 0.58 — 0.58 0.58 — 0.58 — 12,153 12,153 1.30 0.08 — 12,208 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 97.4 184 281 10.0 0.24 — 603 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 570 0.00 570 57.0 0.00 — 1,996 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 10.9 10.9
Total 56.0 53.8 23.5 197 0.56 0.86 57.7 58.6 0.84 14.6 15.5 668 64,750 65,418 69.9 2.48 23.0 67,927 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 3.28 2.99 2.85 27.9 0.09 0.04 10.5 10.6 0.04 2.67 2.71 — 8,587 8,587 0.26 0.36 2.00 8,702 Area 6.79 6.75 0.13 7.37 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 0.00 90.9 90.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 91.0 Energy 0.15 0.08 1.32 0.56 0.01 0.11 — 0.11 0.11 — 0.11 — 2,012 2,012 0.21 0.01 — 2,021 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 16.1 30.4 46.6 1.66 0.04 — 99.9 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 94.4 0.00 94.4 9.44 0.00 — 330 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.80 1.80
Total 10.2 9.82 4.29 35.9 0.10 0.16 10.5 10.7 0.15 2.67 2.83 111 10,720 10,831 11.6 0.41 3.80 11,246
EXHIBIT D
1749
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 18 / 107
2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 19.6 17.9 15.0 182 0.57 0.24 62.3 62.6 0.23 15.8 16.0 — 57,845 57,845 1.59 2.17 29.6 58,561 Area 42.6 41.4 14.9 87.6 0.09 1.18 — 1.18 1.17 — 1.17 0.00 18,145 18,145 0.35 0.04 — 18,164 Energy 0.84 0.42 7.21 3.07 0.05 0.58 — 0.58 0.58 — 0.58 — 12,153 12,153 1.30 0.08 — 12,208 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 82.8 156 239 8.51 0.20 — 513 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 85.6 0.00 85.6 8.55 0.00 — 299 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 10.9 10.9
Total 63.0 59.7 37.1 273 0.71 2.00 62.3 64.3 1.98 15.8 17.8 168 88,300 88,468 20.3 2.48 40.4 89,756 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 19.2 17.5 17.4 165 0.53 0.24 62.3 62.6 0.23 15.8 16.0 — 54,491 54,491 1.73 2.35 0.77 55,237 Area 35.1 34.3 14.1 6.01 0.09 1.14 — 1.14 1.14 — 1.14 0.00 17,928 17,928 0.34 0.03 — 17,946 Energy 0.84 0.42 7.21 3.07 0.05 0.58 — 0.58 0.58 — 0.58 — 12,153 12,153 1.30 0.08 — 12,208 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 82.8 156 239 8.51 0.20 — 513 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 85.6 0.00 85.6 8.55 0.00 — 299 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 10.9 10.9
Total 55.2 52.2 38.8 174 0.67 1.97 62.3 64.3 1.95 15.8 17.8 168 84,728 84,897 20.4 2.67 11.6 86,215 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 16.9 15.5 14.7 144 0.48 0.22 54.4 54.6 0.20 13.8 14.0 — 48,898 48,898 1.49 2.04 11.4 49,553 Area 37.2 37.0 0.72 40.4 < 0.005 0.05 — 0.05 0.04 — 0.04 0.00 549 549 0.01 < 0.005 — 550 Energy 0.84 0.42 7.21 3.07 0.05 0.58 — 0.58 0.58 — 0.58 — 12,153 12,153 1.30 0.08 — 12,208 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 82.8 156 239 8.51 0.20 — 513
EXHIBIT D
1750
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 19 / 107
Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 85.6 0.00 85.6 8.55 0.00 — 299 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 10.9 10.9
Total 55.0 52.9 22.6 188 0.53 0.85 54.4 55.3 0.83 13.8 14.6 168 61,756 61,924 19.9 2.32 22.3 63,134 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 3.09 2.82 2.68 26.3 0.09 0.04 9.93 9.97 0.04 2.52 2.56 — 8,096 8,096 0.25 0.34 1.89 8,204 Area 6.79 6.75 0.13 7.37 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 0.00 90.9 90.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 91.0 Energy 0.15 0.08 1.32 0.56 0.01 0.11 — 0.11 0.11 — 0.11 — 2,012 2,012 0.21 0.01 — 2,021 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 13.7 25.9 39.6 1.41 0.03 — 84.9 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 14.2 0.00 14.2 1.42 0.00 — 49.6 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.80 1.80
Total 10.0 9.65 4.13 34.3 0.10 0.15 9.93 10.1 0.15 2.52 2.67 27.9 10,224 10,252 3.29 0.38 3.69 10,453
3. Construction Emissions Details
3.1. Demolition (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
2.86 2.40 22.2 19.9 0.03 0.92 — 0.92 0.84 — 0.84 — 3,425 3,425 0.14 0.03 — 3,437 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1751
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 20 / 107
Off-Road
Equipment
2.86 2.40 22.2 19.9 0.03 0.92 — 0.92 0.84 — 0.84 — 3,425 3,425 0.14 0.03 — 3,437 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.78 0.66 6.08 5.46 0.01 0.25 — 0.25 0.23 — 0.23 — 938 938 0.04 0.01 — 942 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.14 0.12 1.11 1.00 < 0.005 0.05 — 0.05 0.04 — 0.04 — 155 155 0.01 < 0.005 — 156 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 130 130 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.52 132 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 120 120 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 122 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
EXHIBIT D
1752
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 21 / 107
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 33.2 33.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 33.7 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.50 5.50 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 5.59 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.2. Demolition (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
2.86 2.40 22.2 19.9 0.03 0.92 — 0.92 0.84 — 0.84 — 3,425 3,425 0.14 0.03 — 3,437 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
2.86 2.40 22.2 19.9 0.03 0.92 — 0.92 0.84 — 0.84 — 3,425 3,425 0.14 0.03 — 3,437 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1753
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 22 / 107
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.78 0.66 6.08 5.46 0.01 0.25 — 0.25 0.23 — 0.23 — 938 938 0.04 0.01 — 942 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.14 0.12 1.11 1.00 < 0.005 0.05 — 0.05 0.04 — 0.04 — 155 155 0.01 < 0.005 — 156 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 130 130 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.52 132 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 120 120 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 122 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1754
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 23 / 107
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 33.2 33.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 33.7 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.50 5.50 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 5.59 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.3. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
3.94 3.31 31.6 30.2 0.05 1.37 — 1.37 1.26 — 1.26 — 5,295 5,295 0.21 0.04 — 5,314 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 19.7 19.7 — 10.1 10.1 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.65 0.54 5.20 4.96 0.01 0.22 — 0.22 0.21 — 0.21 — 870 870 0.04 0.01 — 873
EXHIBIT D
1755
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 24 / 107
Dust — — — — — — 3.23 3.23 — 1.66 1.66 — — — — — — —
From
Material
Movement
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.12 0.10 0.95 0.91 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 144 144 0.01 < 0.005 — 145 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.59 0.59 — 0.30 0.30 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 152 152 < 0.005 0.01 0.60 154 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 23.3 23.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 23.6 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.85 3.85 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 3.91 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
EXHIBIT D
1756
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 25 / 107
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.4. Site Preparation (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
3.94 3.31 31.6 30.2 0.05 1.37 — 1.37 1.26 — 1.26 — 5,295 5,295 0.21 0.04 — 5,314 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 19.7 19.7 — 10.1 10.1 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.65 0.54 5.20 4.96 0.01 0.22 — 0.22 0.21 — 0.21 — 870 870 0.04 0.01 — 873 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 3.23 3.23 — 1.66 1.66 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.12 0.10 0.95 0.91 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 144 144 0.01 < 0.005 — 145
EXHIBIT D
1757
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 26 / 107
Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.59 0.59 — 0.30 0.30 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 152 152 < 0.005 0.01 0.60 154 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 23.3 23.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 23.6 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.85 3.85 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 3.91 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.5. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1758
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 27 / 107
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
3.80 3.20 29.7 28.3 0.06 1.23— 1.23 1.14— 1.14— 6,599 6,599 0.27 0.05— 6,622 Dust From
Material
Movement
—————— 9.20 9.20— 3.65 3.65———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
3.80 3.20 29.7 28.3 0.06 1.23— 1.23 1.14— 1.14— 6,599 6,599 0.27 0.05— 6,622 Dust From
Material
Movement
—————— 9.20 9.20— 3.65 3.65———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
1.03 0.87 8.07 7.70 0.02 0.34— 0.34 0.31— 0.31— 1,795 1,795 0.07 0.01— 1,801 Dust From
Material
Movement
—————— 2.50 2.50— 0.99 0.99———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.19 0.16 1.47 1.41 < 0.005 0.06— 0.06 0.06— 0.06— 297 297 0.01 < 0.005— 298
EXHIBIT D
1759
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 28 / 107
Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.46 0.46 — 0.18 0.18 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07 0.07 0.04 0.77 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 173 173 < 0.005 0.01 0.69 176 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.68 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 161 161 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 163 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 44.0 44.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 44.7 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.28 7.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 7.39 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.6. Grading (2025) - Mitigated
EXHIBIT D
1760
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 29 / 107
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
3.80 3.20 29.7 28.3 0.06 1.23 — 1.23 1.14 — 1.14 — 6,599 6,599 0.27 0.05 — 6,622 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 9.20 9.20 — 3.65 3.65 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
3.80 3.20 29.7 28.3 0.06 1.23 — 1.23 1.14 — 1.14 — 6,599 6,599 0.27 0.05 — 6,622 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 9.20 9.20 — 3.65 3.65 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.03 0.87 8.07 7.70 0.02 0.34 — 0.34 0.31 — 0.31 — 1,795 1,795 0.07 0.01 — 1,801 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 2.50 2.50 — 0.99 0.99 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
EXHIBIT D
1761
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 30 / 107
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.19 0.16 1.47 1.41 < 0.005 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 — 297 297 0.01 < 0.005 — 298 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.46 0.46 — 0.18 0.18 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07 0.07 0.04 0.77 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 173 173 < 0.005 0.01 0.69 176 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.68 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 161 161 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 163 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 44.0 44.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 44.7 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.28 7.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 7.39 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
EXHIBIT D
1762
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 31 / 107
3.7. Grading (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
3.62 3.04 27.2 27.6 0.06 1.12 — 1.12 1.03 — 1.03 — 6,599 6,599 0.27 0.05 — 6,621 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 9.20 9.20 — 3.65 3.65 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.56 0.47 4.21 4.26 0.01 0.17 — 0.17 0.16 — 0.16 — 1,020 1,020 0.04 0.01 — 1,024 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 1.42 1.42 — 0.56 0.56 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.10 0.09 0.77 0.78 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 169 169 0.01 < 0.005 — 169
EXHIBIT D
1763
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 32 / 107
Dust — — — — — — 0.26 0.26 — 0.10 0.10 — — — — — — —
From
Material
Movement
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 158 158 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 160 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 24.5 24.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 24.9 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.06 4.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.12 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.8. Grading (2026) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1764
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 33 / 107
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
3.62 3.04 27.2 27.6 0.06 1.12— 1.12 1.03— 1.03— 6,599 6,599 0.27 0.05— 6,621 Dust From
Material
Movement
—————— 9.20 9.20— 3.65 3.65———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.56 0.47 4.21 4.26 0.01 0.17— 0.17 0.16— 0.16— 1,020 1,020 0.04 0.01— 1,024 Dust From
Material
Movement
—————— 1.42 1.42— 0.56 0.56———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.10 0.09 0.77 0.78 < 0.005 0.03— 0.03 0.03— 0.03— 169 169 0.01 < 0.005— 169 Dust From
Material
Movement
—————— 0.26 0.26— 0.10 0.10———————
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite——————————————————
EXHIBIT D
1765
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 34 / 107
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 158 158 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 160 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 24.5 24.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 24.9 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.06 4.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.12 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.9. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.28 1.07 9.85 13.0 0.02 0.38 — 0.38 0.35 — 0.35 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,405 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
EXHIBIT D
1766
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 35 / 107
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
1.28 1.07 9.85 13.0 0.02 0.38— 0.38 0.35— 0.35— 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02— 2,405 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.72 0.60 5.52 7.26 0.01 0.21— 0.21 0.19— 0.19— 1,342 1,342 0.05 0.01— 1,346 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.13 0.11 1.01 1.32 < 0.005 0.04— 0.04 0.04— 0.04— 222 222 0.01 < 0.005— 223 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 3.42 3.08 2.21 37.3 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00— 8,753 8,753 0.16 0.33 32.2 8,889 Vendor 0.30 0.13 4.78 2.12 0.03 0.06 1.08 1.13 0.06 0.30 0.35— 4,005 4,005 0.16 0.59 10.5 4,197 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 3.33 2.97 2.90 32.8 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00— 8,121 8,121 0.20 0.36 0.84 8,233 Vendor 0.29 0.12 5.05 2.15 0.03 0.06 1.08 1.13 0.06 0.30 0.35— 4,009 4,009 0.16 0.59 0.27 4,190 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
——————————————————
EXHIBIT D
1767
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 36 / 107
Worker 1.85 1.65 1.44 17.8 0.00 0.00 4.67 4.67 0.00 1.09 1.09 — 4,576 4,576 0.10 0.19 7.78 4,642 Vendor 0.16 0.07 2.77 1.19 0.02 0.03 0.59 0.62 0.03 0.16 0.20 — 2,242 2,242 0.09 0.33 2.54 2,346 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.34 0.30 0.26 3.24 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.85 0.00 0.20 0.20 — 758 758 0.02 0.03 1.29 768 Vendor 0.03 0.01 0.51 0.22 < 0.005 0.01 0.11 0.11 0.01 0.03 0.04 — 371 371 0.02 0.06 0.42 388 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.10. Building Construction (2026) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.28 1.07 9.85 13.0 0.02 0.38 — 0.38 0.35 — 0.35 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,405 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.28 1.07 9.85 13.0 0.02 0.38 — 0.38 0.35 — 0.35 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,405 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.72 0.60 5.52 7.26 0.01 0.21 — 0.21 0.19 — 0.19 — 1,342 1,342 0.05 0.01 — 1,346
EXHIBIT D
1768
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 37 / 107
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.13 0.11 1.01 1.32 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 222 222 0.01 < 0.005 — 223 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 3.42 3.08 2.21 37.3 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00 — 8,753 8,753 0.16 0.33 32.2 8,889 Vendor 0.30 0.13 4.78 2.12 0.03 0.06 1.08 1.13 0.06 0.30 0.35 — 4,005 4,005 0.16 0.59 10.5 4,197 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 3.33 2.97 2.90 32.8 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00 — 8,121 8,121 0.20 0.36 0.84 8,233 Vendor 0.29 0.12 5.05 2.15 0.03 0.06 1.08 1.13 0.06 0.30 0.35 — 4,009 4,009 0.16 0.59 0.27 4,190 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 1.85 1.65 1.44 17.8 0.00 0.00 4.67 4.67 0.00 1.09 1.09 — 4,576 4,576 0.10 0.19 7.78 4,642 Vendor 0.16 0.07 2.77 1.19 0.02 0.03 0.59 0.62 0.03 0.16 0.20 — 2,242 2,242 0.09 0.33 2.54 2,346 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.34 0.30 0.26 3.24 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.85 0.00 0.20 0.20 — 758 758 0.02 0.03 1.29 768 Vendor 0.03 0.01 0.51 0.22 < 0.005 0.01 0.11 0.11 0.01 0.03 0.04 — 371 371 0.02 0.06 0.42 388 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
EXHIBIT D
1769
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 38 / 107
3.11. Building Construction (2027) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.23 1.03 9.39 12.9 0.02 0.34 — 0.34 0.31 — 0.31 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,405 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.23 1.03 9.39 12.9 0.02 0.34 — 0.34 0.31 — 0.31 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,405 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.88 0.74 6.71 9.24 0.02 0.24 — 0.24 0.22 — 0.22 — 1,712 1,712 0.07 0.01 — 1,718 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.16 0.13 1.22 1.69 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 283 283 0.01 < 0.005 — 284 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1770
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 39 / 107
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Worker 3.28 2.95 1.92 34.8 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00 — 8,591 8,591 0.14 0.33 29.1 8,723 Vendor 0.29 0.13 4.59 2.03 0.03 0.06 1.08 1.13 0.06 0.30 0.35 — 3,926 3,926 0.16 0.59 9.80 4,117 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 3.21 2.86 2.59 30.8 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00 — 7,971 7,971 0.20 0.36 0.76 8,083 Vendor 0.29 0.12 4.87 2.09 0.03 0.06 1.08 1.13 0.06 0.30 0.35 — 3,929 3,929 0.16 0.59 0.25 4,111 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 2.26 2.01 1.61 21.3 0.00 0.00 5.95 5.95 0.00 1.39 1.39 — 5,732 5,732 0.13 0.24 8.99 5,815 Vendor 0.21 0.09 3.41 1.47 0.02 0.04 0.76 0.80 0.04 0.21 0.25 — 2,805 2,805 0.12 0.42 3.04 2,938 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.41 0.37 0.29 3.90 0.00 0.00 1.09 1.09 0.00 0.25 0.25 — 949 949 0.02 0.04 1.49 963 Vendor 0.04 0.02 0.62 0.27 < 0.005 0.01 0.14 0.15 0.01 0.04 0.05 — 464 464 0.02 0.07 0.50 486 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.12. Building Construction (2027) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1771
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 40 / 107
Off-Road 1.23 1.03 9.39 12.9 0.02 0.34— 0.34 0.31— 0.31— 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02— 2,405 Equipment
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
1.23 1.03 9.39 12.9 0.02 0.34— 0.34 0.31— 0.31— 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02— 2,405 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.88 0.74 6.71 9.24 0.02 0.24— 0.24 0.22— 0.22— 1,712 1,712 0.07 0.01— 1,718 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.16 0.13 1.22 1.69 < 0.005 0.04— 0.04 0.04— 0.04— 283 283 0.01 < 0.005— 284 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 3.28 2.95 1.92 34.8 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00— 8,591 8,591 0.14 0.33 29.1 8,723 Vendor 0.29 0.13 4.59 2.03 0.03 0.06 1.08 1.13 0.06 0.30 0.35— 3,926 3,926 0.16 0.59 9.80 4,117 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 3.21 2.86 2.59 30.8 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00— 7,971 7,971 0.20 0.36 0.76 8,083
EXHIBIT D
1772
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 41 / 107
Vendor 0.29 0.12 4.87 2.09 0.03 0.06 1.08 1.13 0.06 0.30 0.35 — 3,929 3,929 0.16 0.59 0.25 4,111 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 2.26 2.01 1.61 21.3 0.00 0.00 5.95 5.95 0.00 1.39 1.39 — 5,732 5,732 0.13 0.24 8.99 5,815 Vendor 0.21 0.09 3.41 1.47 0.02 0.04 0.76 0.80 0.04 0.21 0.25 — 2,805 2,805 0.12 0.42 3.04 2,938 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.41 0.37 0.29 3.90 0.00 0.00 1.09 1.09 0.00 0.25 0.25 — 949 949 0.02 0.04 1.49 963 Vendor 0.04 0.02 0.62 0.27 < 0.005 0.01 0.14 0.15 0.01 0.04 0.05 — 464 464 0.02 0.07 0.50 486 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.13. Building Construction (2028) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.18 0.99 8.92 12.9 0.02 0.30 — 0.30 0.28 — 0.28 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,406 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.18 0.99 8.92 12.9 0.02 0.30 — 0.30 0.28 — 0.28 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,406 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
EXHIBIT D
1773
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 42 / 107
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.85 0.71 6.39 9.26 0.02 0.22 — 0.22 0.20 — 0.20 — 1,717 1,717 0.07 0.01 — 1,723 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.15 0.13 1.17 1.69 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 284 284 0.01 < 0.005 — 285 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 3.21 2.88 1.90 32.8 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00 — 8,439 8,439 0.14 0.07 26.1 8,488 Vendor 0.27 0.12 4.43 1.96 0.03 0.06 1.08 1.13 0.06 0.30 0.35 — 3,833 3,833 0.16 0.56 9.11 4,014 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 3.12 2.76 2.28 28.9 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00 — 7,830 7,830 0.18 0.36 0.68 7,941 Vendor 0.26 0.12 4.68 2.02 0.03 0.06 1.08 1.13 0.06 0.30 0.35 — 3,836 3,836 0.16 0.57 0.24 4,009 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 2.20 1.96 1.60 20.1 0.00 0.00 5.97 5.97 0.00 1.40 1.40 — 5,646 5,646 0.11 0.24 8.08 5,728 Vendor 0.19 0.09 3.28 1.43 0.02 0.04 0.76 0.80 0.04 0.21 0.25 — 2,746 2,746 0.11 0.40 2.83 2,872 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.40 0.36 0.29 3.67 0.00 0.00 1.09 1.09 0.00 0.26 0.26 — 935 935 0.02 0.04 1.34 948
EXHIBIT D
1774
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 43 / 107
Vendor 0.03 0.02 0.60 0.26 < 0.005 0.01 0.14 0.15 0.01 0.04 0.05 — 455 455 0.02 0.07 0.47 475 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.14. Building Construction (2028) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.18 0.99 8.92 12.9 0.02 0.30 — 0.30 0.28 — 0.28 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,406 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.18 0.99 8.92 12.9 0.02 0.30 — 0.30 0.28 — 0.28 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,406 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.85 0.71 6.39 9.26 0.02 0.22 — 0.22 0.20 — 0.20 — 1,717 1,717 0.07 0.01 — 1,723 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.15 0.13 1.17 1.69 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 284 284 0.01 < 0.005 — 285 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
EXHIBIT D
1775
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 44 / 107
Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 3.21 2.88 1.90 32.8 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00 — 8,439 8,439 0.14 0.07 26.1 8,488 Vendor 0.27 0.12 4.43 1.96 0.03 0.06 1.08 1.13 0.06 0.30 0.35 — 3,833 3,833 0.16 0.56 9.11 4,014 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 3.12 2.76 2.28 28.9 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00 — 7,830 7,830 0.18 0.36 0.68 7,941 Vendor 0.26 0.12 4.68 2.02 0.03 0.06 1.08 1.13 0.06 0.30 0.35 — 3,836 3,836 0.16 0.57 0.24 4,009 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 2.20 1.96 1.60 20.1 0.00 0.00 5.97 5.97 0.00 1.40 1.40 — 5,646 5,646 0.11 0.24 8.08 5,728 Vendor 0.19 0.09 3.28 1.43 0.02 0.04 0.76 0.80 0.04 0.21 0.25 — 2,746 2,746 0.11 0.40 2.83 2,872 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.40 0.36 0.29 3.67 0.00 0.00 1.09 1.09 0.00 0.26 0.26 — 935 935 0.02 0.04 1.34 948 Vendor 0.03 0.02 0.60 0.26 < 0.005 0.01 0.14 0.15 0.01 0.04 0.05 — 455 455 0.02 0.07 0.47 475 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.15. Building Construction (2029) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1776
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 45 / 107
Off-Road
Equipment
1.15 0.97 8.58 12.9 0.02 0.28— 0.28 0.25— 0.25— 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02— 2,405 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
1.15 0.97 8.58 12.9 0.02 0.28— 0.28 0.25— 0.25— 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02— 2,405 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.82 0.69 6.13 9.22 0.02 0.20— 0.20 0.18— 0.18— 1,712 1,712 0.07 0.01— 1,718 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.15 0.13 1.12 1.68 < 0.005 0.04— 0.04 0.03— 0.03— 283 283 0.01 < 0.005— 284 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 3.05 2.72 1.59 31.2 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00— 8,295 8,295 0.14 0.07 23.4 8,342 Vendor 0.26 0.10 4.24 1.90 0.03 0.06 1.08 1.13 0.03 0.30 0.33— 3,730 3,730 0.13 0.56 8.43 3,909 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 2.74 2.67 2.25 27.3 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00— 7,696 7,696 0.18 0.33 0.60 7,801
EXHIBIT D
1777
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 46 / 107
Vendor 0.26 0.09 4.49 1.96 0.03 0.06 1.08 1.13 0.03 0.30 0.33 — 3,734 3,734 0.13 0.56 0.22 3,905 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 1.93 1.86 1.39 19.0 0.00 0.00 5.95 5.95 0.00 1.39 1.39 — 5,535 5,535 0.11 0.24 7.19 5,616 Vendor 0.19 0.07 3.13 1.38 0.02 0.04 0.76 0.80 0.02 0.21 0.23 — 2,665 2,665 0.09 0.40 2.60 2,790 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.35 0.34 0.25 3.46 0.00 0.00 1.09 1.09 0.00 0.25 0.25 — 916 916 0.02 0.04 1.19 930 Vendor 0.03 0.01 0.57 0.25 < 0.005 0.01 0.14 0.15 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 — 441 441 0.02 0.07 0.43 462 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.16. Building Construction (2029) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.15 0.97 8.58 12.9 0.02 0.28 — 0.28 0.25 — 0.25 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,405 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.15 0.97 8.58 12.9 0.02 0.28 — 0.28 0.25 — 0.25 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,405 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
EXHIBIT D
1778
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 47 / 107
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.82 0.69 6.13 9.22 0.02 0.20 — 0.20 0.18 — 0.18 — 1,712 1,712 0.07 0.01 — 1,718 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.15 0.13 1.12 1.68 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.03 — 0.03 — 283 283 0.01 < 0.005 — 284 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 3.05 2.72 1.59 31.2 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00 — 8,295 8,295 0.14 0.07 23.4 8,342 Vendor 0.26 0.10 4.24 1.90 0.03 0.06 1.08 1.13 0.03 0.30 0.33 — 3,730 3,730 0.13 0.56 8.43 3,909 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 2.74 2.67 2.25 27.3 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00 — 7,696 7,696 0.18 0.33 0.60 7,801 Vendor 0.26 0.09 4.49 1.96 0.03 0.06 1.08 1.13 0.03 0.30 0.33 — 3,734 3,734 0.13 0.56 0.22 3,905 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 1.93 1.86 1.39 19.0 0.00 0.00 5.95 5.95 0.00 1.39 1.39 — 5,535 5,535 0.11 0.24 7.19 5,616 Vendor 0.19 0.07 3.13 1.38 0.02 0.04 0.76 0.80 0.02 0.21 0.23 — 2,665 2,665 0.09 0.40 2.60 2,790 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.35 0.34 0.25 3.46 0.00 0.00 1.09 1.09 0.00 0.25 0.25 — 916 916 0.02 0.04 1.19 930
EXHIBIT D
1779
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 48 / 107
Vendor 0.03 0.01 0.57 0.25 < 0.005 0.01 0.14 0.15 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 — 441 441 0.02 0.07 0.43 462 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.17. Building Construction (2030) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.12 0.94 8.39 12.9 0.02 0.26 — 0.26 0.24 — 0.24 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,405 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.12 0.94 8.39 12.9 0.02 0.26 — 0.26 0.24 — 0.24 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,405 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.80 0.67 5.99 9.20 0.02 0.19 — 0.19 0.17 — 0.17 — 1,712 1,712 0.07 0.01 — 1,718 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.15 0.12 1.09 1.68 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 283 283 0.01 < 0.005 — 284 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
EXHIBIT D
1780
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 49 / 107
Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 2.70 2.65 1.56 29.5 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00 — 8,159 8,159 0.11 0.07 20.7 8,203 Vendor 0.26 0.10 4.07 1.84 0.03 0.03 1.08 1.11 0.03 0.30 0.33 — 3,619 3,619 0.13 0.53 7.70 3,789 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 2.61 2.54 1.96 25.8 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00 — 7,571 7,571 0.16 0.33 0.54 7,675 Vendor 0.26 0.09 4.29 1.89 0.03 0.03 1.08 1.11 0.03 0.30 0.33 — 3,622 3,622 0.13 0.53 0.20 3,785 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 1.84 1.80 1.37 17.9 0.00 0.00 5.95 5.95 0.00 1.39 1.39 — 5,445 5,445 0.11 0.05 6.38 5,468 Vendor 0.18 0.07 3.01 1.33 0.02 0.02 0.76 0.78 0.02 0.21 0.23 — 2,586 2,586 0.09 0.38 2.38 2,704 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.34 0.33 0.25 3.27 0.00 0.00 1.09 1.09 0.00 0.25 0.25 — 901 901 0.02 0.01 1.06 905 Vendor 0.03 0.01 0.55 0.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 0.14 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 — 428 428 0.02 0.06 0.39 448 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.18. Building Construction (2030) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1781
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 50 / 107
Off-Road
Equipment
1.12 0.94 8.39 12.9 0.02 0.26— 0.26 0.24— 0.24— 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02— 2,405 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
1.12 0.94 8.39 12.9 0.02 0.26— 0.26 0.24— 0.24— 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02— 2,405 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.80 0.67 5.99 9.20 0.02 0.19— 0.19 0.17— 0.17— 1,712 1,712 0.07 0.01— 1,718 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual——————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.15 0.12 1.09 1.68 < 0.005 0.03— 0.03 0.03— 0.03— 283 283 0.01 < 0.005— 284 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite——————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 2.70 2.65 1.56 29.5 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00— 8,159 8,159 0.11 0.07 20.7 8,203 Vendor 0.26 0.10 4.07 1.84 0.03 0.03 1.08 1.11 0.03 0.30 0.33— 3,619 3,619 0.13 0.53 7.70 3,789 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Worker 2.61 2.54 1.96 25.8 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00— 7,571 7,571 0.16 0.33 0.54 7,675
EXHIBIT D
1782
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 51 / 107
Vendor 0.26 0.09 4.29 1.89 0.03 0.03 1.08 1.11 0.03 0.30 0.33 — 3,622 3,622 0.13 0.53 0.20 3,785 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 1.84 1.80 1.37 17.9 0.00 0.00 5.95 5.95 0.00 1.39 1.39 — 5,445 5,445 0.11 0.05 6.38 5,468 Vendor 0.18 0.07 3.01 1.33 0.02 0.02 0.76 0.78 0.02 0.21 0.23 — 2,586 2,586 0.09 0.38 2.38 2,704 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.34 0.33 0.25 3.27 0.00 0.00 1.09 1.09 0.00 0.25 0.25 — 901 901 0.02 0.01 1.06 905 Vendor 0.03 0.01 0.55 0.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 0.14 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 — 428 428 0.02 0.06 0.39 448 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.19. Building Construction (2031) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.10 0.92 8.12 12.8 0.02 0.24 — 0.24 0.22 — 0.22 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,405 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.10 0.92 8.12 12.8 0.02 0.24 — 0.24 0.22 — 0.22 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,405 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
EXHIBIT D
1783
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 52 / 107
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.78 0.66 5.80 9.18 0.02 0.17 — 0.17 0.16 — 0.16 — 1,712 1,712 0.07 0.01 — 1,718 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.14 0.12 1.06 1.67 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 283 283 0.01 < 0.005 — 284 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 2.56 2.51 1.54 28.2 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00 — 8,047 8,047 0.11 0.07 18.2 8,089 Vendor 0.23 0.10 3.94 1.78 0.03 0.03 1.08 1.11 0.03 0.30 0.33 — 3,502 3,502 0.13 0.53 6.97 3,671 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 2.51 2.45 1.94 24.8 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00 — 7,467 7,467 0.16 0.07 0.48 7,492 Vendor 0.22 0.09 4.16 1.83 0.03 0.03 1.08 1.11 0.03 0.30 0.33 — 3,505 3,505 0.13 0.53 0.18 3,668 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 1.75 1.70 1.15 17.1 0.00 0.00 5.95 5.95 0.00 1.39 1.39 — 5,370 5,370 0.10 0.05 5.62 5,393 Vendor 0.16 0.07 2.90 1.29 0.02 0.02 0.76 0.78 0.02 0.21 0.23 — 2,502 2,502 0.09 0.38 2.16 2,620 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.32 0.31 0.21 3.11 0.00 0.00 1.09 1.09 0.00 0.25 0.25 — 889 889 0.02 0.01 0.93 893
EXHIBIT D
1784
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 53 / 107
Vendor 0.03 0.01 0.53 0.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 0.14 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 — 414 414 0.02 0.06 0.36 434 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.20. Building Construction (2031) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.10 0.92 8.12 12.8 0.02 0.24 — 0.24 0.22 — 0.22 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,405 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.10 0.92 8.12 12.8 0.02 0.24 — 0.24 0.22 — 0.22 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,405 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.78 0.66 5.80 9.18 0.02 0.17 — 0.17 0.16 — 0.16 — 1,712 1,712 0.07 0.01 — 1,718 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.14 0.12 1.06 1.67 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 283 283 0.01 < 0.005 — 284 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
EXHIBIT D
1785
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 54 / 107
Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 2.56 2.51 1.54 28.2 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00 — 8,047 8,047 0.11 0.07 18.2 8,089 Vendor 0.23 0.10 3.94 1.78 0.03 0.03 1.08 1.11 0.03 0.30 0.33 — 3,502 3,502 0.13 0.53 6.97 3,671 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 2.51 2.45 1.94 24.8 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00 — 7,467 7,467 0.16 0.07 0.48 7,492 Vendor 0.22 0.09 4.16 1.83 0.03 0.03 1.08 1.11 0.03 0.30 0.33 — 3,505 3,505 0.13 0.53 0.18 3,668 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 1.75 1.70 1.15 17.1 0.00 0.00 5.95 5.95 0.00 1.39 1.39 — 5,370 5,370 0.10 0.05 5.62 5,393 Vendor 0.16 0.07 2.90 1.29 0.02 0.02 0.76 0.78 0.02 0.21 0.23 — 2,502 2,502 0.09 0.38 2.16 2,620 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.32 0.31 0.21 3.11 0.00 0.00 1.09 1.09 0.00 0.25 0.25 — 889 889 0.02 0.01 0.93 893 Vendor 0.03 0.01 0.53 0.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.14 0.14 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 — 414 414 0.02 0.06 0.36 434 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.21. Building Construction (2032) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1786
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 55 / 107
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.07 0.90 7.87 12.8 0.02 0.22 — 0.22 0.21 — 0.21 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,405 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.12 0.10 0.91 1.48 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.02 — 0.02 — 277 277 0.01 < 0.005 — 278 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.02 0.02 0.17 0.27 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 45.8 45.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 46.0 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 2.42 2.36 1.65 23.5 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00 — 7,361 7,361 0.16 0.07 0.41 7,386 Vendor 0.22 0.09 4.00 1.77 0.03 0.03 1.08 1.11 0.03 0.30 0.33 — 3,390 3,390 0.13 0.51 0.16 3,544 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.27 0.27 0.19 2.63 0.00 0.00 0.96 0.96 0.00 0.23 0.23 — 856 856 0.02 0.01 0.79 859 Vendor 0.03 0.01 0.45 0.20 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.12 0.13 < 0.005 0.03 0.04 — 391 391 0.01 0.06 0.31 409 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
EXHIBIT D
1787
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 56 / 107
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 142 142 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.13 142 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 64.8 64.8 < 0.005 0.01 0.05 67.8 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.22. Building Construction (2032) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.07 0.90 7.87 12.8 0.02 0.22 — 0.22 0.21 — 0.21 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,405 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.12 0.10 0.91 1.48 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.02 — 0.02 — 277 277 0.01 < 0.005 — 278 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.02 0.02 0.17 0.27 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 45.8 45.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 46.0 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1788
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 57 / 107
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 2.42 2.36 1.65 23.5 0.00 0.00 8.52 8.52 0.00 2.00 2.00 — 7,361 7,361 0.16 0.07 0.41 7,386 Vendor 0.22 0.09 4.00 1.77 0.03 0.03 1.08 1.11 0.03 0.30 0.33 — 3,390 3,390 0.13 0.51 0.16 3,544 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.27 0.27 0.19 2.63 0.00 0.00 0.96 0.96 0.00 0.23 0.23 — 856 856 0.02 0.01 0.79 859 Vendor 0.03 0.01 0.45 0.20 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.12 0.13 < 0.005 0.03 0.04 — 391 391 0.01 0.06 0.31 409 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 142 142 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.13 142 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 64.8 64.8 < 0.005 0.01 0.05 67.8 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.23. Paving (2032) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.72 0.61 6.00 9.86 0.01 0.20 — 0.20 0.18 — 0.18 — 1,511 1,511 0.06 0.01 — 1,516 Paving 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1789
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 58 / 107
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.72 0.61 6.00 9.86 0.01 0.20 — 0.20 0.18 — 0.18 — 1,511 1,511 0.06 0.01 — 1,516 Paving 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.22 0.18 1.81 2.97 < 0.005 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 — 455 455 0.02 < 0.005 — 457 Paving 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.04 0.03 0.33 0.54 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 75.4 75.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 75.6 Paving 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.39 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 115 115 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.23 116 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1790
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 59 / 107
Worker 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 107 107 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 108 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 32.5 32.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 32.7 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.38 5.38 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 5.41 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.24. Paving (2032) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.72 0.61 6.00 9.86 0.01 0.20 — 0.20 0.18 — 0.18 — 1,511 1,511 0.06 0.01 — 1,516 Paving 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.72 0.61 6.00 9.86 0.01 0.20 — 0.20 0.18 — 0.18 — 1,511 1,511 0.06 0.01 — 1,516
EXHIBIT D
1791
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 60 / 107
Paving 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.22 0.18 1.81 2.97 < 0.005 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 — 455 455 0.02 < 0.005 — 457 Paving 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.04 0.03 0.33 0.54 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 75.4 75.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 75.6 Paving 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.39 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 115 115 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.23 116 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 107 107 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 108 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 32.5 32.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 32.7
EXHIBIT D
1792
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 61 / 107
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.38 5.38 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 5.41 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.25. Architectural Coating (2032) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.11 0.09 0.77 1.10 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architect
ural
Coatings
194 194 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.11 0.09 0.77 1.10 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architect
ural
Coatings
194 194 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
EXHIBIT D
1793
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 62 / 107
Average — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily
Off-Road
Equipment
0.03 0.03 0.23 0.33 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 39.7 39.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 39.8 Architect
ural
Coatings
57.8 57.8 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.01 0.01 0.04 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 6.57 6.57 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.60 Architect
ural
Coatings
10.5 10.5 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.49 0.48 0.25 5.37 0.00 0.00 1.70 1.70 0.00 0.40 0.40 — 1,587 1,587 0.02 0.01 3.19 1,594 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.48 0.47 0.33 4.71 0.00 0.00 1.70 1.70 0.00 0.40 0.40 — 1,472 1,472 0.03 0.01 0.08 1,477 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.14 0.14 0.10 1.35 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.12 0.12 — 441 441 0.01 < 0.005 0.41 443
EXHIBIT D
1794
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 63 / 107
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 73.0 73.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 73.3 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.26. Architectural Coating (2032) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.11 0.09 0.77 1.10 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architect
ural
Coatings
194 194 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.11 0.09 0.77 1.10 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architect
ural
Coatings
194 194 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
EXHIBIT D
1795
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 64 / 107
Average — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily
Off-Road
Equipment
0.03 0.03 0.23 0.33 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 39.7 39.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 39.8 Architect
ural
Coatings
57.8 57.8 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.01 0.01 0.04 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 6.57 6.57 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.60 Architect
ural
Coatings
10.5 10.5 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.49 0.48 0.25 5.37 0.00 0.00 1.70 1.70 0.00 0.40 0.40 — 1,587 1,587 0.02 0.01 3.19 1,594 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.48 0.47 0.33 4.71 0.00 0.00 1.70 1.70 0.00 0.40 0.40 — 1,472 1,472 0.03 0.01 0.08 1,477 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.14 0.14 0.10 1.35 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.12 0.12 — 441 441 0.01 < 0.005 0.41 443
EXHIBIT D
1796
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 65 / 107
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 73.0 73.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 73.3 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.27. Architectural Coating (2033) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.11 0.09 0.76 1.10 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architect
ural
Coatings
194 194 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.78 0.78 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.79 Architect
ural
Coatings
1.14 1.14 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1797
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 66 / 107
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.13 0.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.13 Architect
ural
Coatings
0.21 0.21 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.47 0.45 0.33 4.47 0.00 0.00 1.70 1.70 0.00 0.40 0.40 — 1,453 1,453 0.03 0.01 0.07 1,458 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.59 8.59 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 8.62 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.42 1.42 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.43 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.28. Architectural Coating (2033) - Mitigated
EXHIBIT D
1798
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 67 / 107
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.11 0.09 0.76 1.10 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architect
ural
Coatings
194 194 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.78 0.78 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.79 Architect
ural
Coatings
1.14 1.14 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.13 0.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.13 Architect
ural
Coatings
0.21 0.21 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1799
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 68 / 107
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.47 0.45 0.33 4.47 0.00 0.00 1.70 1.70 0.00 0.40 0.40 — 1,453 1,453 0.03 0.01 0.07 1,458 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.59 8.59 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 8.62 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.42 1.42 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.43 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1800
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 69 / 107
Apartme
Low Rise
20.8 19.0 15.9 193 0.60 0.26 66.1 66.4 0.24 16.8 17.0 — 61,355 61,355 1.69 2.30 31.4 62,113 Total 20.8 19.0 15.9 193 0.60 0.26 66.1 66.4 0.24 16.8 17.0 — 61,355 61,355 1.69 2.30 31.4 62,113 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
20.3 18.6 18.5 175 0.57 0.26 66.1 66.4 0.24 16.8 17.0 — 57,797 57,797 1.84 2.50 0.81 58,588 Total 20.3 18.6 18.5 175 0.57 0.26 66.1 66.4 0.24 16.8 17.0 — 57,797 57,797 1.84 2.50 0.81 58,588 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
3.28 2.99 2.85 27.9 0.09 0.04 10.5 10.6 0.04 2.67 2.71 — 8,587 8,587 0.26 0.36 2.00 8,702 Total 3.28 2.99 2.85 27.9 0.09 0.04 10.5 10.6 0.04 2.67 2.71 — 8,587 8,587 0.26 0.36 2.00 8,702
4.1.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
19.6 17.9 15.0 182 0.57 0.24 62.3 62.6 0.23 15.8 16.0 — 57,845 57,845 1.59 2.17 29.6 58,561 Total 19.6 17.9 15.0 182 0.57 0.24 62.3 62.6 0.23 15.8 16.0 — 57,845 57,845 1.59 2.17 29.6 58,561 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
19.2 17.5 17.4 165 0.53 0.24 62.3 62.6 0.23 15.8 16.0 — 54,491 54,491 1.73 2.35 0.77 55,237
EXHIBIT D
1801
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 70 / 107
Total 19.2 17.5 17.4 165 0.53 0.24 62.3 62.6 0.23 15.8 16.0 — 54,491 54,491 1.73 2.35 0.77 55,237 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
3.09 2.82 2.68 26.3 0.09 0.04 9.93 9.97 0.04 2.52 2.56 — 8,096 8,096 0.25 0.34 1.89 8,204 Total 3.09 2.82 2.68 26.3 0.09 0.04 9.93 9.97 0.04 2.52 2.56 — 8,096 8,096 0.25 0.34 1.89 8,204
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — 2,999 2,999 0.49 0.06 — 3,029
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 2,999 2,999 0.49 0.06 — 3,029 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — 2,999 2,999 0.49 0.06 — 3,029
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 2,999 2,999 0.49 0.06 — 3,029 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — 497 497 0.08 0.01 — 501
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 497 497 0.08 0.01 — 501
EXHIBIT D
1802
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 71 / 107
4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — 2,999 2,999 0.49 0.06 — 3,029
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 2,999 2,999 0.49 0.06 — 3,029 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — 2,999 2,999 0.49 0.06 — 3,029
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 2,999 2,999 0.49 0.06 — 3,029 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — 497 497 0.08 0.01 — 501
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 497 497 0.08 0.01 — 501
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1803
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 72 / 107
Apartme 0.84 0.42 7.21 3.07 0.05 0.58 — 0.58 0.58 — 0.58 — 9,154 9,154 0.81 0.02 — 9,179 nts
Total 0.84 0.42 7.21 3.07 0.05 0.58 — 0.58 0.58 — 0.58 — 9,154 9,154 0.81 0.02 — 9,179 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
0.84 0.42 7.21 3.07 0.05 0.58 — 0.58 0.58 — 0.58 — 9,154 9,154 0.81 0.02 — 9,179 Total 0.84 0.42 7.21 3.07 0.05 0.58 — 0.58 0.58 — 0.58 — 9,154 9,154 0.81 0.02 — 9,179 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
0.15 0.08 1.32 0.56 0.01 0.11 — 0.11 0.11 — 0.11 — 1,515 1,515 0.13 < 0.005 — 1,520 Total 0.15 0.08 1.32 0.56 0.01 0.11 — 0.11 0.11 — 0.11 — 1,515 1,515 0.13 < 0.005 — 1,520
4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
0.84 0.42 7.21 3.07 0.05 0.58 — 0.58 0.58 — 0.58 — 9,154 9,154 0.81 0.02 — 9,179 Total 0.84 0.42 7.21 3.07 0.05 0.58 — 0.58 0.58 — 0.58 — 9,154 9,154 0.81 0.02 — 9,179 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
0.84 0.42 7.21 3.07 0.05 0.58 — 0.58 0.58 — 0.58 — 9,154 9,154 0.81 0.02 — 9,179
EXHIBIT D
1804
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 73 / 107
Total 0.84 0.42 7.21 3.07 0.05 0.58 — 0.58 0.58 — 0.58 — 9,154 9,154 0.81 0.02 — 9,179 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
0.15 0.08 1.32 0.56 0.01 0.11 — 0.11 0.11 — 0.11 — 1,515 1,515 0.13 < 0.005 — 1,520 Total 0.15 0.08 1.32 0.56 0.01 0.11 — 0.11 0.11 — 0.11 — 1,515 1,515 0.13 < 0.005 — 1,520
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 1.65 0.83 14.1 6.01 0.09 1.14 — 1.14 1.14 — 1.14 0.00 17,928 17,928 0.34 0.03 — 17,946 Consum
er
Products
32.5 32.5 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
1.03 1.03 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt
7.44 7.05 0.75 81.6 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.03 — 0.03 — 217 217 0.01 < 0.005 — 218 Total 42.6 41.4 14.9 87.6 0.09 1.18 — 1.18 1.17 — 1.17 0.00 18,145 18,145 0.35 0.04 — 18,164 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 1.65 0.83 14.1 6.01 0.09 1.14 — 1.14 1.14 — 1.14 0.00 17,928 17,928 0.34 0.03 — 17,946
EXHIBIT D
1805
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 74 / 107
Consum 32.5 32.5 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
er
Products
Architect
ural
Coatings
1.03 1.03 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 35.1 34.3 14.1 6.01 0.09 1.14 — 1.14 1.14 — 1.14 0.00 17,928 17,928 0.34 0.03 — 17,946 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 0.01 < 0.005 0.06 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 0.00 73.2 73.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 73.3 Consum
er
Products
5.92 5.92 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
0.19 0.19 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt
0.67 0.63 0.07 7.34 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 17.7 17.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 17.8 Total 6.79 6.75 0.13 7.37 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 0.00 90.9 90.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 91.0
4.3.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 1.65 0.83 14.1 6.01 0.09 1.14 — 1.14 1.14 — 1.14 0.00 17,928 17,928 0.34 0.03 — 17,946 Consum
er
Products
32.5 32.5 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
1.03 1.03 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1806
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 75 / 107
Landsca
Equipment
7.44 7.05 0.75 81.6 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.03 — 0.03 — 217 217 0.01 < 0.005 — 218 Total 42.6 41.4 14.9 87.6 0.09 1.18 — 1.18 1.17 — 1.17 0.00 18,145 18,145 0.35 0.04 — 18,164 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 1.65 0.83 14.1 6.01 0.09 1.14 — 1.14 1.14 — 1.14 0.00 17,928 17,928 0.34 0.03 — 17,946 Consum
er
Products
32.5 32.5 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
1.03 1.03 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 35.1 34.3 14.1 6.01 0.09 1.14 — 1.14 1.14 — 1.14 0.00 17,928 17,928 0.34 0.03 — 17,946 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 0.01 < 0.005 0.06 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 0.00 73.2 73.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 73.3 Consum
er
Products
5.92 5.92 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
0.19 0.19 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt
0.67 0.63 0.07 7.34 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 17.7 17.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 17.8 Total 6.79 6.75 0.13 7.37 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 0.00 90.9 90.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 91.0
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual)
EXHIBIT D
1807
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 76 / 107
Land TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Use
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 97.4 184 281 10.0 0.24 — 603
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 97.4 184 281 10.0 0.24 — 603 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 97.4 184 281 10.0 0.24 — 603
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 97.4 184 281 10.0 0.24 — 603 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 16.1 30.4 46.6 1.66 0.04 — 99.9
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 16.1 30.4 46.6 1.66 0.04 — 99.9
4.4.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 82.8 156 239 8.51 0.20 — 513
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 82.8 156 239 8.51 0.20 — 513
EXHIBIT D
1808
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 77 / 107
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 82.8 156 239 8.51 0.20 — 513
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 82.8 156 239 8.51 0.20 — 513 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 13.7 25.9 39.6 1.41 0.03 — 84.9
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 13.7 25.9 39.6 1.41 0.03 — 84.9
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 570 0.00 570 57.0 0.00 — 1,996
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 570 0.00 570 57.0 0.00 — 1,996 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 570 0.00 570 57.0 0.00 — 1,996
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 570 0.00 570 57.0 0.00 — 1,996
EXHIBIT D
1809
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 78 / 107
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 94.4 0.00 94.4 9.44 0.00 — 330
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 94.4 0.00 94.4 9.44 0.00 — 330
4.5.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 85.6 0.00 85.6 8.55 0.00 — 299
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 85.6 0.00 85.6 8.55 0.00 — 299 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 85.6 0.00 85.6 8.55 0.00 — 299
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 85.6 0.00 85.6 8.55 0.00 — 299 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 14.2 0.00 14.2 1.42 0.00 — 49.6
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 14.2 0.00 14.2 1.42 0.00 — 49.6
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
EXHIBIT D
1810
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 79 / 107
4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 10.9 10.9
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 10.9 10.9
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 10.9 10.9
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 10.9 10.9
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.80 1.80
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.80 1.80
4.6.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1811
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 80 / 107
Apartme — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 10.9 10.9
nts
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 10.9 10.9
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 10.9 10.9
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 10.9 10.9
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.80 1.80
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.80 1.80
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1812
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 81 / 107
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.7.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1813
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 82 / 107
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.8.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1814
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 83 / 107
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.9.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetatio
n
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
EXHIBIT D
1815
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 84 / 107
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
EXHIBIT D
1816
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 85 / 107
Daily,——————————————————
Summer
(Max)
Avoided——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Remove d——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
———————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Avoided——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Remove d——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
———————————————————
Annual——————————————————
Avoided——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
Sequest
ered
——————————————————
Subtotal——————————————————
EXHIBIT D
1817
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 86 / 107
Remove — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
d
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.4. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetatio
n
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.5. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1818
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 87 / 107
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.6. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
EXHIBIT D
1819
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 88 / 107
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
5. Activity Data
5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Demolition Demolition 1/1/2025 5/21/2025 5.00 100 —
Site Preparation Site Preparation 5/22/2025 8/14/2025 5.00 60.0 — Grading Grading 8/15/2025 3/20/2026 5.00 155 —
Building Construction Building Construction 3/21/2026 2/28/2032 5.00 1,550 — Paving Paving 2/29/2032 8/1/2032 5.00 110 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 8/2/2032 1/3/2033 5.00 110 —
5.2. Off-Road Equipment
5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
EXHIBIT D
1820
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 89 / 107
Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Demolition Excavators Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 4.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Excavators Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Scrapers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 423 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 367 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 3.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 Paving Pavers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 81.0 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48
5.2.2. Mitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Demolition Excavators Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
EXHIBIT D
1821
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 90 / 107
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 4.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Excavators Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Scrapers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 423 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 367 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 3.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 Paving Pavers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 81.0 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48
5.3. Construction Vehicles
5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition — — — —
Demolition Worker 15.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
EXHIBIT D
1822
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 91 / 107
Demolition Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck—— HHDT
Site Preparation————
Site Preparation Worker 17.5 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor— 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck—— HHDT
Grading————
Grading Worker 20.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor— 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck—— HHDT
Building Construction————
Building Construction Worker 1,030 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 153 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck—— HHDT
Paving————
Paving Worker 15.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor— 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck—— HHDT
Architectural Coating————
Architectural Coating Worker 206 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor— 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck—— HHDT
EXHIBIT D
1823
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 92 / 107
5.3.2. Mitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition — — — —
Demolition Worker 15.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck — — HHDT
Site Preparation — — — —
Site Preparation Worker 17.5 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 20.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 1,030 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 153 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving — — — —
Paving Worker 15.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
EXHIBIT D
1824
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 93 / 107
Architectural Coating — — — —
Architectural Coating Worker 206 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT
5.4. Vehicles
5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.
5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
Architectural Coating 3,071,642 1,023,881 0.00 0.00 —
5.6. Dust Mitigation
5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (cy) Material Exported (cy) Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (sq. ft.) Acres Paved (acres) Demolition 0.00 0.00 0.00 — —
Site Preparation — — 90.0 0.00 —
Grading — — 465 0.00 —
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.
EXHIBIT D
1825
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 94 / 107
5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
Apartments Low Rise — 0%
Apartments Low Rise — 0%
5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Year and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Year kWh per Year CO2 CH4 N2O
2025 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005
2026 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005
2027 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005
2028 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005
2029 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005
2030 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005
2031 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005
2032 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005
2033 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year Apartments Low
Rise
2,686 1,815 1,536 874,947 29,595 20,001 16,929 9,641,392 Apartments Low
Rise
5,810 3,922 3,327 1,892,724 64,021 43,219 36,665 20,856,681
EXHIBIT D
1826
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 95 / 107
5.9.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year Apartments Low
Rise
2,532 1,711 1,448 824,900 27,902 18,857 15,961 9,089,904 Apartments Low
Rise
5,478 3,698 3,137 1,784,460 60,359 40,747 34,568 19,663,679
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
Hearth Type Unmitigated (number)
Apartments Low Rise —
Wood Fireplaces 0
Gas Fireplaces 290
Propane Fireplaces 0
Electric Fireplaces 0
No Fireplaces 279
Wood Fireplaces 0
Gas Fireplaces 440
Propane Fireplaces 0
Electric Fireplaces 0
No Fireplaces 422
Conventional Wood Stoves 0
Catalytic Wood Stoves 0
Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 0
Pellet Wood Stoves 0
EXHIBIT D
1827
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 96 / 107
Conventional Wood Stoves0
Catalytic Wood Stoves0
Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves0
Pellet Wood Stoves0
5.10.1.2. Mitigated
Hearth Type Unmitigated (number)
Apartments Low Rise—
Wood Fireplaces0
Gas Fireplaces 290
Propane Fireplaces0
Electric Fireplaces0
No Fireplaces 279
Wood Fireplaces0
Gas Fireplaces 440
Propane Fireplaces0
Electric Fireplaces0
No Fireplaces 422
Conventional Wood Stoves0
Catalytic Wood Stoves0
Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves0
Pellet Wood Stoves0
Conventional Wood Stoves0
Catalytic Wood Stoves0
Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves0
Pellet Wood Stoves0
EXHIBIT D
1828
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 97 / 107
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft) Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq ft) Non-Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
1221358.5 407,120 0.00 0.00 —
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 180
5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 180
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Apartments Low Rise 2,134,028 204 0.0330 0.0040 11,356,846 Apartments Low Rise 3,232,920 204 0.0330 0.0040 17,204,923
5.11.2. Mitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
EXHIBIT D
1829
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 98 / 107
Apartments Low Rise 2,134,028 204 0.0330 0.0040 11,356,846 Apartments Low Rise 3,232,920 204 0.0330 0.0040 17,204,923
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Apartments Low Rise 20,205,674 0.00
Apartments Low Rise 30,610,353 0.00
5.12.2. Mitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Apartments Low Rise 17,174,823 0.00
Apartments Low Rise 26,018,800 0.00
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Apartments Low Rise 421 —
Apartments Low Rise 637 —
5.13.2. Mitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Apartments Low Rise 63.1 —
Apartments Low Rise 95.6 —
EXHIBIT D
1830
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 99 / 107
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced Apartments Low Rise Average room A/C &
Other residential A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 2.50 2.50 10.0
Apartments Low Rise Household refrigerators
and/or freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.12 0.60 0.00 1.00
Apartments Low Rise Average room A/C &
Other residential A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 2.50 2.50 10.0
Apartments Low Rise Household refrigerators
and/or freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.12 0.60 0.00 1.00
5.14.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced Apartments Low Rise Average room A/C &
Other residential A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 2.50 2.50 10.0
Apartments Low Rise Household refrigerators
and/or freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.12 0.60 0.00 1.00
Apartments Low Rise Average room A/C &
Other residential A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 2.50 2.50 10.0
Apartments Low Rise Household refrigerators
and/or freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.12 0.60 0.00 1.00
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
EXHIBIT D
1831
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 100 / 107
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
5.15.2. Mitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Year Horsepower Load Factor
5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr) Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day) Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)
5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.1.2. Mitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres
EXHIBIT D
1832
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 101 / 107
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.1.2. Mitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)
5.18.2.2. Mitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which assumes GHG emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.
Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 16.2 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 2.50 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise — meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 18.8 annual hectares burned
EXHIBIT D
1833
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 102 / 107
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events.
Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation 1 0 0 N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 0 0 N/A
Wildfire 1 0 0 N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 0 0 0 N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation 1 1 1 2
Sea Level Rise 1 1 1 2
EXHIBIT D
1834
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 103 / 107
Wildfire 1 1 1 2
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 37.8
AQ-PM 20.1
AQ-DPM 8.90
Drinking Water 54.0
Lead Risk Housing 4.86
Pesticides 52.7
Toxic Releases 31.9
Traffic 89.6
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 0.00
EXHIBIT D
1835
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 104 / 107
Groundwater 7.19
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 76.8
Impaired Water Bodies 23.9
Solid Waste 83.3
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 24.3
Cardio-vascular 34.2
Low Birth Weights 40.9
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 12.0
Housing 1.29
Linguistic 30.7
Poverty 8.68
Unemployment 30.9
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 88.28435776
Employed 88.70781471
Median HI 88.66931862
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 64.48094444
High school enrollment 13.5249583
Preschool enrollment 95.7141024
Transportation —
EXHIBIT D
1836
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 105 / 107
Auto Access 67.17567047
Active commuting 50.09624022
Social—
2-parent households 97.21544976
Voting 59.77158989
Neighborhood—
Alcohol availability 97.0101373
Park access 44.4629796
Retail density 7.442576671
Supermarket access 10.58642371
Tree canopy 22.91800334
Housing—
Homeownership 95.99640703
Housing habitability 93.16052868
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 71.74387271 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 74.51559091
Uncrowded housing 79.21211344
Health Outcomes—
Insured adults 80.68779674
Arthritis 73.2
Asthma ER Admissions 67.9
High Blood Pressure 95.4
Cancer (excluding skin) 45.0
Asthma 61.7
Coronary Heart Disease 87.2
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 79.3
Diagnosed Diabetes 91.2
EXHIBIT D
1837
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 106 / 107
Life Expectancy at Birth 21.4
Cognitively Disabled 80.8
Physically Disabled 85.5
Heart Attack ER Admissions 58.5
Mental Health Not Good 68.6
Chronic Kidney Disease 85.5
Obesity 69.5
Pedestrian Injuries 19.6
Physical Health Not Good 82.3
Stroke 91.3
Health Risk Behaviors—
Binge Drinking 5.9
Current Smoker 64.6
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 85.0
Climate Change Exposures—
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 32.5
Elderly 88.9
English Speaking 71.6
Foreign-born 23.2
Outdoor Workers 44.3
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity—
Impervious Surface Cover 69.4
Traffic Density 76.5
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices—
EXHIBIT D
1838
ISNP No Net Loss Rezoning - Opt 2 Increased Residential Detailed Report, 5/31/2024 107 / 107
Hardship 15.1
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 60.4
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 18.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 88.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) No Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) No Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.
8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Operations: Vehicle Data Close to rail trip rates provided by Kittelson & Assoc, Inc.
Operations: Architectural Coatings Based on BAAQMD Reg 8 Rule 3
EXHIBIT D
1839
Appendix C
Biological Summary Memorandum and Peer Review
EXHIBIT D
1840
Appendix C-1
Biological Summary Memorandum
EXHIBIT D
1841
WRA, Inc. | 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901 (415) 454-8868 · [email protected] · www.wra-ca.com
2169 G East Francisco Blvd.
San Rafael, CA 94901
[email protected]
MEMORANDUM
TO: Bill Myers FROM: Scott Batiuk
CC: Michael Olson
DATE: February 15, 2023
SUBJECT: Summary of Biological Evaluations at the Portola Avenue/Isabel Avenue site in Livermore, Alameda County, California
EXHIBIT D
1842
WRA, Inc. | 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901 (415) 454-8868 · [email protected] · www.wra-ca.com
2 The purpose of this memorandum is to present a summary of the results of the biological evaluations that have been conducted by WRA, Inc. (WRA) within the vacant lot located southwest of the intersection of Isabel Avenue and Portola Avenue in Livermore, Alameda County, California (Study Area). This memorandum also present avoidance and mitigation measures for potential impacts to sensitive biological resources. WRA has conducted the following tasks:
• A peer review of the Delineation of Aquatic Resources report prepared by RestorCap for the Study Area
• Assessments of the presence or potential presence of special-status species within the Study Area
The peer review focused on the presence of aquatic features within the Study Area. As part of this peer review, WRA visited the Study Area on January 13, 2022, to observe site conditions.
Incidental observations were also made on October 4, 2022. The Delineation of Aquatic Resources Report prepared by RestorCap was reviewed based on the site visit and an independent review of recent and historic aerial imagery, published soils data, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ (Corps) Antecedent Precipitation Tool.
The special-status species assessment was based on the January 13, 2022, site visit as well as follow-up site visits conducted on February 1 and 15 and October 4, 2022. The February 1 and 15, 2022, site visits were focused surveys for the presence of actively nesting burrowing owls (Athene cunicularia; California Department of Fish and Wildlife [CDFW] Species of Special Concern) or native birds while simultaneously assessing potential habitat for these species. The October 4, 2022, site visit was a late-season special-status plant survey for Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii; California Rare Plant Rank 1B.1). Prior to the January 13, 2022, site visit, WRA performed a review of the following biological resources database and species occurrence resources:
• The CDFW California Natural Diversity Database
• The California Native Plant Society’s Rare Plant Inventory • The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation database
• The Consortium of California Herbaria
• The USFWS Critical Habitat Mapper
• eBird Online Database
The database searches focused on the Livermore U.S. Geological Survey 7.5-minute quadrangle maps and the surrounding eight quadrangle maps. The results of the peer review and specialstatus species assessment are provided below.
EXHIBIT D
1843
WRA, Inc. | 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901 (415) 454-8868 · [email protected] · www.wra-ca.com
3 RESULTS
DELINEATION PEER REVIEW
WRA’s January 13, 2022, site visit occurred 14 days after the most recent storm event (a negligible amount of precipitation [0.02 inches] fell 6 days prior to the site visit). Precipitation during the 3-month period prior to the site visit was normal. Except for one small area along the northern boundary, WRA observed upland conditions throughout the Study Area. WRA’s investigation included the two manmade basins in the southwestern portion of the Study Area, which are not specifically addressed in the RestorCap report. In that report, the manmade basins were classified as uplands. During the January site visit, WRA observed a small, 0.003- acre (131 square feet) stand of cattails (Typha domingensis; Attachment A) along the northern boundary in the northeastern portion of the Study Area, adjacent to the sidewalk along Portola Avenue. This feature was not described in the RestorCap report. Cattails typically only occur in areas with prolonged inundation and/or saturation and are classified as obligate wetland species by regulatory agencies such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). The location of the cattails in the Study Area was atypical. First, they were growing on sloping, nondepressional topography, and second, there were no surface structures (e.g., culvert outlets) or appropriate adjacent topography (e.g., swales, depressions, or other low spots in the landscape) present that would provide the appropriate hydrology to support a stand of cattails. In fact, no wetland hydrology indicators were observed by WRA on January 13, despite the wet season timing of the site visit. This patch of cattails was again observed during the special-status plant survey on October 4, 2022. Despite the lack of any recent precipitation, the soil was saturated at the surface throughout, and a small amount water was flowing across the sidewalk adjacent to the north of the cattails. Given the unusual landscape position, the lack of surface hydrology indicators in winter, and the presence of surface hydrology indicators in early autumn, WRA believes that the hydrology is man-induced, and likely from la leaking underground pipe or other subsurface, anthropogenic water source. The subsurface water source could be associated with irrigation from the adjacent landscaped strip. If that were the source, irrigation would not likely occur during November-April (rainy season) but would occur during May-October (dry season).
Thus, the subsurface infrastructure would not leak until that time, resulting in the observed dry soils in January and the uncharacteristically wet soils observed during the October site visit.
WRA observed the soils in the cattail patch as follows: the upper 8 inches of the soil was entirely comprised of dark grayish brown (2.5Y 4/2 on the Munsell Color chart) clay. From 8 to 16 inches, the soil matrix was comprised of grayish brown (2.5Y 5/2 on the Munsell Color chart) clay, and 25 percent of this layer contained strong brown (7.5 YR 4/6 on the Munsell Color chart) iron concentrations. Thus, this soil meets the Depleted Matrix (F3) hydric soil indicator.
Although wetland hydrology indicators were not observed in January, the Surface Water (A1) and Saturation (A3) indicators were met in October. Therefore, this cattail stand meets the Corps’ technical criteria for a wetland. This feature is not adjacent to a stream or other waterbody and would therefore not be regulated by the CDFW. However, because it meets the wetland definitions of the Corps and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), it may be considered jurisdictional by those agencies.
EXHIBIT D
1844
WRA, Inc. | 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901 (415) 454-8868 · [email protected] · www.wra-ca.com
4 As stated above, this cattail-dominated feature was not addressed in the RestorCap report.
However, upon reviewing Google Maps Street View imagery from March 2008 through March 2021, cattails were not visible at that location. The RestorCap delineation of aquatic resources occurred in March 2021, and Google Maps Street View imagery suggests that cattails were not visible in this area at the time that RestorCap conducted its delineation and drafted their report.
The fact that cattails were absent during this period of time and then colonized between March 2021 and January 2022 supports the idea that the wetland hydrology, and the associated wetland feature is man-induced. No evidence of a wetland in this location is visible on aerial photographs prior to 2020, and no substantial topographic changes to the site have occurred in more than 20 years. In conclusion, the cattail patch is a result of a leaky pipe and therefore may be exempt from jurisdiction by the Corps and RWQCB.
SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES ASSESSMENT
A table summarizing the results of the special-status species evaluation for species included in the Isabel Neighborhood Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is included as Attachment B.
Special-status Plants
Based upon a review of the biological resources database and species occurrence resources listed above, 59 special-status plant species have been documented in the vicinity of the Study Area. However, nearly all are unlikely to occur or have no potential to occur for one or more of the following reasons:
• Hydrologic conditions (e.g., tidal, riverine) necessary to support the special-status plant species are not present in the Study Area;
• Edaphic (soil) conditions (e.g., volcanic tuff, serpentine) necessary to support the specialstatus plant species are not present in the Study Area; • Topographic conditions (e.g., north-facing slope, montane) necessary to support the special-status plant species are not present in the Study Area; • Unique pH conditions (e.g., alkali scalds, acidic bogs) necessary to support the specialstatus plant species are not present in the Study Area; • Associated natural communities (e.g., interior chaparral, tidal marsh) necessary to support the special-status plant species are not present in the Study Area; • The Study Area is geographically isolated (e.g. below elevation, coastal environ) from the documented range of the special-status plant species;
• The historical landscape and/or habitat(s) of the Study Area were not suitable habitat prior to land/type conversion (e.g., reclaimed shoreline) to support the special-status plant species;
• Land use history and contemporary management (e.g., grading, intensive grazing) has degraded the localized habitat necessary to support the special-status plant species.
Three were determined in the Isabel Neighborhood Plan EIR to have potential to occur in the Isabel Neighborhood Plan Area:
• big-scale balsamroot (Balsamorhiza macrolepis; California Rare Plant Rank 1B.2) • Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii; California Rare Plant Rank 1B.1) • prostrate vernal pool navarretia (Navarretia prostrata; California Rare Plant Rank 1B.2) Of those three species, WRA has determined that only Congdon’s tarplant has moderate potential to occur within the Study Area. The other two species are unlikely or have no potential to occur for one or more of the reasons listed above. Potentially suitable habitat for Congdon’s tarplant includes seasonally mesic areas such as shallow depressions in moderately alkaline clay
EXHIBIT D
1845
WRA, Inc. | 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901 (415) 454-8868 · [email protected] · www.wra-ca.com
5 substrate. Consistent with Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-1 from the EIR, a protocol-level survey for Condgon’s tarplant was conducted in the Study Area on October 4, 2022. Prior to the survey, WRA visited a reference population in Dublin, where Congdon’s tarplant was blooming, evident, and identifiable, confirming that the timing of the survey was appropriate. Following the reference site visit, the Study Area was surveyed by walking meandering transects. No Congdon’s tarplant was observed. Based on this protocol-level survey, WRA concludes that Congdon’s tarplant is absent from the Study Area.
Special-status Wildlife
Based upon a review of the biological resources databases and species occurrence resources listed above, 29 special-status wildlife species have been documented in the vicinity of the Study Area. Most are excluded from the Study Area based on a lack of habitat features.
Features not found within the Study Area that are required to support special-status wildlife species include:
• Vernal pools
• Perennial aquatic habitats (e.g., streams, rivers or ponds) • Tidal marsh areas
• Old growth redwood or fir forest
• Dense riparian vegetation
• Caves, mine shafts, or abandoned buildings
The absence of aquatic habitats features eliminates components critical to the survival or movement of most special-status species found in the vicinity of the Study Area.
Twelve species documented in the vicinity of the Study Area were determined in the EIR to have potential to occur in the Isabel Neighborhood Specific Plan Area:
• Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii; CDFW Species of Special Concern, WBWG High Priority)
• hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus; WBWG Medium Priority)
• American badger (Taxidea taxus; CDFW Species of Special Concern) • San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica; Federal Endangered, State Threatened) • tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor; State Threatened, CDFW Species of Special Concern) • burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia; CDFW Species of Special Concern) • white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus; CDFW Fully Protected Species) • loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus; CDFW Species of Special Concern) • western pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata; CDFW Species of Special Concern) • California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense; Federal Threatened, State Threatened)
• California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii; Federal Threatened, CDFW Species of Special Concern)
• Callippe silverspot butterfly (Speyeria callippe; Federal Endangered) Of those 12 species, WRA has determined that three have moderate potential to occur in the immediate vicinity or within the Study Area: burrowing owl, white-tailed kite, and loggerhead shrike. In addition, nesting birds with protections under the California Fish and Game Code (CFGC) may occur within the Study Area. These species or guilds are discussed in greater detail
EXHIBIT D
1846
WRA, Inc. | 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901 (415) 454-8868 · [email protected] · www.wra-ca.com
6 below. The other nine species included in the EIR are unlikely to occur or have no potential to occur because of a lack of suitable habitat features, as listed above. While they are unlikely to occur or have no potential to occur in the Study Area, California tiger salamander and California red-legged frog are discussed in greater detail below due to their protection status and potential presence in the general vicinity of the Study Area.
California tiger salamander, a Federal Threatened and State Threatened species, and California red-legged frog, a Federal Threatened species and CDFW Species of Special Concern, have been documented to occur within 1 mile of the Study Area. However, the Study Area does not contain aquatic habitat to support these species. The Study Area is bordered on all sides by development, including dense commercial and residential development to the north and west and Highway 580 to the south. Isabel Avenue to the east is a four-lane road spanning greater than 100 feet in width, which is a partial barrier to dispersal from adjacent grasslands. In addition, the Study Area does not provide aquatic habitat suitable for these species and is not within a dispersal corridor between suitable aquatic habitat. As such, these species are unlikely to disperse into or through the Study Area. The evaluation of the remaining EIR species that are unlikely or have no potential to occur within the Study Area is included in Attachment B.
Burrowing owl inhabits open areas with sparse or non-existent tree or shrub canopies. This species is dependent on mammals to excavate the burrows that are characteristically used for shelter and nesting. Several burrows were observed within the site which may provide suitable habitat for this species, mainly around excavated detention basins and on the berm along the eastern site boundary. On February 1 and February 15, 2022, WRA revisited the Study Area to investigate habitat conditions as they related to burrowing owl and native nesting birds, as well as to determine if any burrowing owl or nesting birds were currently present. The site was assessed for the presence of burrowing owl in accordance with the guidelines contained within the 2012 California Department of Fish and Game Memorandum, Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. The site was traversed on foot and periodically scrutinized with binoculars and the naked eye to determine if any burrowing owl individuals could be observed. Additionally, the site was assessed for the presence of suitable burrowing owl habitat, namely burrows of California ground squirrels and other surrogate structures in areas where vegetation was less than 6 inches in height and canopy cover was minimal. Any identified habitat features (e.g., burrows) were then additionally checked for signs of burrowing owl occupation (e.g., feathers, whitewash, or pellets). No burrowing owls were observed during the surveys. Although ground squirrel burrows have been observed within the Study Area, many of the burrow locations were on relatively steep embankments or were surrounded by dense ground vegetation greater than 6 inches in height, which are not considered hospitable conditions for burrowing owl occupation. Suitably sized burrows were most common along the eastern border of the site, within the detention basin structures on the western side of the Study Area, and along the excavated linear depression. Many of these burrows are obscured by vegetation, but some could function as a wintering or nesting burrow for dispersing burrowing owl. Although burrows of suitable size for burrowing owl were present, no sign of burrowing owl occupation was observed during either site visit. This indicates that the site has likely not recently been utilized by wintering burrowing owl and had not been occupied by breeding owls during the 2022 season up to the time of the surveys.
The white-tailed kite is a resident of open to semi-open habitats throughout the lower elevations of California, including grasslands, savannahs, woodlands, agricultural areas, and wetlands. Nests are constructed mostly of twigs and placed in trees, often at habitat edges.
Nest trees are highly variable in size, structure, and immediate surroundings, ranging from
EXHIBIT D
1847
WRA, Inc. | 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901 (415) 454-8868 · [email protected] · www.wra-ca.com
7 shrubs to trees greater than 150 feet tall. Potential nest trees for this species are present at the periphery of the Study Area on adjacent properties, and the grasslands within the Study Area offer potential foraging opportunities for this species. As such, white-tailed kite is considered to have moderate potential to occur.
The loggerhead shrike is a year-round resident and winter visitor in lowlands and foothills throughout California. This species is associated with open country with short vegetation and scattered trees, shrubs, fences, utility lines, and/or other perches. Nests are typically found in trees and large shrubs and are usually placed from 3 to 10 feet off the ground. Potential nest trees for this species are present at the periphery of the Study Area on adjacent properties as well as in shrubs within the Study Area itself. The grasslands within the Study Area offer potential foraging opportunities for this species. As such, loggerhead shrike is considered to have moderate potential to occur.
In addition to the special-status burrowing owl, white-tailed kite, and loggerhead shrike, a variety of non-status native bird species protected under the CFGC may use the Study Area for nesting. On February 1 and February 15, 2022, WRA revisited the Study Area to investigate habitat conditions as they related to non-status native nesting birds as well as to determine if any birds were nesting. The Study Area was investigated for any evidence of avian territorial behavior (e.g., singing, chasing intruders out of territories, etc.), nesting bird behavior (e.g., adult birds carrying nesting material or food), or the presence of active nests with eggs present and/or pre-fledged juveniles. Observations were made with binoculars and the naked eye. To the extent feasible, large trees on neighboring parcels were also visually surveyed for the presence of large stick nests typical of raptor species. No active nests were observed within the Study Area or the immediate vicinity during the survey. Most bird behavior observed during the surveys was limited to short-distance movements and foraging. Bird nesting habitat is somewhat limited within the Study Area and is most likely to occur within coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis) shrubs located mainly in the northeast portion of the Study Area. Street trees that border the Study Area on the north and west sides could also provide nesting substrates, including for larger birds such as American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos) or various raptors. However, no large stick nests typical of these types of birds were observed in these trees that would be indicative of nesting during the previous year’s breeding seasons.
AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION MEASURES
Aquatic Features
A small, 0.003-acre (131 square feet) stand of cattails was present along the northern boundary in the northeastern portion of the Study Area, adjacent to the sidewalk along Portola Avenue. As described above, this feature is presumed to be the result of man-induced hydrology, likely the result of a leaky, below-ground irrigation pipe. According to the Corps Wetland Delineation manual, if the cattail stand is created by an anthropogenic source, it would not be jurisdictional under either the Corps’ or RWQCB’s regulations. Showing that the area is not a wetland would require identifying the source of the potential leaky pipe, repairing it, and revisiting the location to verify that the area no longer meets the wetland criteria. If repair of a leaky pipe were to eliminate wetland hydrology and cause the cattail patch to die off, the area would not be considered jurisdictional, and no Corps or RWQCB permit or mitigation would be required. If the cattail stand remains after repair of a leaky pipe, it would be assumed jurisdictional, and regulatory permits and mitigation would be required for impacts to this feature.
EXHIBIT D
1848
WRA, Inc. | 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901 (415) 454-8868 · [email protected] · www.wra-ca.com
8 If the feature is jurisdictional and cannot be avoided, the following mitigation approach should be implemented pursuant to MM-BIO-13. The project applicant shall acquire the appropriate applicable permit(s) (e.g., Section 404, Section 401) from the respective regulating agency(s) (i.e. Corps and/or RWQCB). A wetland mitigation plan shall be prepared that will establish suitable compensatory mitigation based on the concept of no net loss of wetland habitat values or acreages, to the satisfaction of the regulatory agencies. The wetland mitigation plan shall include measures for avoidance, minimization, and compensation for wetland impacts.
Avoidance and minimization measures may include the designation of buffers around wetland features to be avoided or project design measures. Compensation measures shall include the preservation and/or creation of wetlands or other waters. The final mitigation ratio (the amount of wetlands and other water created or preserved compared to the amount impacted) shall be determined by the applicable resource agency(s) and result in no net loss of wetland habitat value or acreages. The wetland mitigation plan shall follow guidelines detailed in MM-BIO-13, and include the following:
1. At least two surveys by a qualified wetland biologist, botanist, or ecologist per monitoring year;
2. Description of the wetland type and its expected functions and values;
3. Performance standards and monitoring protocol to ensure the success of the mitigation wetland(s) over a period of time to be determined by the resource agencies;
4. Engineering plans showing the location, size and configuration of the wetland(s) to be created or preserved;
5. An implementation schedule showing the construction or preservation of mitigation areas shall commence prior to or concurrently with the initiation of construction; and
6. A description of legal protection of the preserved wetland(s) (such as dedication of fee title, conservation easement, and/or an endowment held by an approved conservation organization, government agency, or mitigation bank).
Purchase of credits at a mitigation bank approved by the relevant regulatory agency(s) (i.e., Corps, RWQCB) at a minimum of a 1:1 ratio (one wetland credit purchased for each impacted wetland acre) may serve as mitigation in-lieu of the mitigation plan described above. All wetland mitigation shall be accomplished within the hydrologic unit code (HUC)-8 boundary for the watershed encompassing the Project.
Burrowing Owl
Potentially suitable habitat for burrowing owl is present in the Study Area. Impacts to burrowing owl will require mitigation. Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-3 from the EIR provides the appropriate required measures to avoid potential impacts to burrowing owl. The measure is as follows:
Prior to any construction activity planned during the fall and winter non-nesting season (September 1 through January 31) or at any time during the construction process, proponents of projects proposed within the Planning Area will retain a qualified wildlife biologist to conduct a preconstruction survey for burrowing owls.
Surveys will be conducted at each area of suitable habitat that will be disturbed no more than seven days prior to ground-disturbing activities and will cover all suitable burrowing owl habitat subject to disturbance pursuant to CDFW’s Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (California Department of Fish and Game,
EXHIBIT D
1849
WRA, Inc. | 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901 (415) 454-8868 · [email protected] · www.wra-ca.com
9 2012). If any burrowing owls are found within the disturbance area, the project proponent will notify CDFW and will proceed under CDFW direction.
If construction is planned to occur during the nesting season (February 1 through August 31), the project proponent will retain a qualified wildlife biologist to conduct a breeding season burrowing owl survey in the year prior to construction.
The survey will be conducted to determine if there is a breeding pair within approximately 500 feet of each development footprint, unless the biologist determines that a smaller survey buffer around the construction footprint is warranted based on preexisting background disturbance and conditions. Survey visits will be timed in accordance with CDFW guidelines (California Department of Fish and Game, 2012). This will provide the project team advance notice of nesting owls in the development area and allow ample time to discuss appropriate avoidance measures with CDFW. In addition, preconstruction surveys will be conducted no more than seven days prior to ground disturbance in all areas of the development footprint supporting burrowing owl habitat. If the biologist identifies the presence of a burrowing owl nest in an area scheduled to be disturbed by construction, a 660-foot no-activity buffer will be established and maintained around the nest while it is active. Surveys and buffer establishment will be performed by qualified wildlife biologists, and buffers will be coordinated with CDFW by contacting the appropriate CDFW personnel, and will be subject to CDFW review and oversight.
White-tailed Kite, Loggerhead Shrike, and Other Native Nesting Birds Vegetation removal or ground disturbance has the potential to impact nesting birds (including active nests with eggs or young) either directly or indirectly through noise or visual disturbance.
Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-2 from the EIR provides the appropriate required measures to avoid potential impacts to white tailed kite, loggerhead shrike, and other nesting native bird species.
The measure is as follows:
Proponents (or their contractors) of specific projects under the proposed Plan shall conduct construction activities outside the bird nesting season (February 1 to August 31) to the extent feasible. If construction initiation is unavoidable during this time, the project proponent or its contractor will retain a qualified wildlife biologist with demonstrated nest-searching experience to conduct preconstruction surveys for nesting birds (including raptors, but excluding burrowing owl) within 300 feet and including the near-term or longer-term improvements environmental footprints. Adjacent lands outside the development footprints will be scanned with binoculars from the limit of ground-disturbance and publicly accessible areas.
Preconstruction surveys will occur no more than three days prior to the onset of ground-disturbing activities (including clearing, grubbing, and staging) at each development area. If active nests are found in the development footprints, the biologist will establish a no-disturbance buffer around the nest and mark the buffer perimeter with high visibility fencing, flagging, or pin flags. The size of the buffer will be based on the species' sensitivity to disturbance and planned work activities in the vicinity; typical buffer sizes are 250 feet for raptors and 50 feet for other birds. The buffer will remain in place until the nest is no longer active, as determined by the biologist. Buffers for any nests found outside but within 300 feet
EXHIBIT D
1850
WRA, Inc. | 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901 (415) 454-8868 · [email protected] · www.wra-ca.com
10 of the development sites will be established based on the biologist’s best professional judgment whether the work would result in nest abandonment. If a lapse in construction activities of 15 days or longer at a previously surveyed environmental footprint occurs, another preconstruction survey will be conducted.
If structure demolition activities cannot occur outside of the nesting season, the project proponent or its contractor will remove inactive nests from the structure to be demolished and install nest exclusion measures (e.g., fine mesh netting, panels, or metal projectors) outside of the nesting season. All exclusionary devices will be monitored and maintained throughout the breeding season to ensure that they are successful in preventing the birds from accessing the cavities or nest sites. No more than three days prior to structure demolition activities, a qualified biologist will conduct a preconstruction survey of all potential nesting habitat on the structures to be demolished/modified and the surrounding areas for the presence of active nests. If active nests are found on the structures or in the affected area, then demolition/modification activities will not proceed until the biologist verifies that all nests on the structures are inactive.
After all surveys and/or nest deterrence activities are completed at each development footprint, the biologist will complete a memorandum detailing the survey effort and results and submit the memorandum to the project proponent within seven days of survey completion.
EXHIBIT D
1851
Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\32000\32012\GIS\ArcMap\AttA_Delin.mxd Isabel Avenue & Portola Avenue Site
Livermore, Alameda County, California
0 200 400
Feet
Sources: 2016 DigitalGlobe Aerial, WRA | Prepared By: SGillespie, 1/20/2022 Attachment A. Potential Man-induced Wetland Observed
±
Study Area: (43.329 ac.)
Potential Man-induced Wetland: (0.003 ac.)
EXHIBIT D
1852
ATTACHMENT B. SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES ASSESSMENT TABLE
SPECIES STATUS HABITAT REQUIREMENTS
POTENTIAL TO OCCUR IN THE
STUDY AREA
RECOMMENDATIONS
Plants
Balsamorhiza macrolepis
big-scale balsamroot
Rank 1B.2 Chaparral, cismontane woodland, valley and
foothill grassland. Elevation ranges from 150
to 5100 feet (45 to 1555 meters). Blooms
Mar-Jun.
No Potential. Chaparral
and woodland habitats
are absent from the
Study Area. Although the
Study Area contains
grass-dominated habitat,
the topography is flat and
has been highly disturbed
historically and recently
and would not support
this species. This species
is not known from valley
bottoms, instead being
typically found on
hillslopes. The nearest
occurrence of this species
is in the hills
approximately 7 miles
southeast of the Study
Area.
No further actions are
recommended for this
species.
EXHIBIT D
1853
ATTACHMENT B. SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES ASSESSMENT TABLE
SPECIES STATUS HABITAT REQUIREMENTS
POTENTIAL TO OCCUR IN THE
STUDY AREA
RECOMMENDATIONS
Centromadia parry ssp. congdonii
Congdon’s tarplant
Rank 1B.1 Coastal scrub, meadows and seeps, valley and
foothill grassland, vernal pools. Elevation
ranges from 10 to 3970 feet (3 to 1210
meters). Blooms Apr-Jul.
Moderate Potential. Not
Observed. The Study
Area contains potentially
suitable, grass-dominated
habitat and moderately
alkaline clay soils.
Additionally, this taxon is
disturbance-tolerant.
There are two
occurrences of this taxon
within 3 miles of the
Study Area (one to the
west, one to the
northeast).
This taxon was not
observed during a
protocol-level survey on
October 4, 2022, and is
assumed to be absent
from the Study Area. No
further actions are
recommended.
Navarretia prostrata
prostrate vernal pool navarretia
Rank 1B.2 Coastal scrub, meadows and seeps, valley and
foothill grassland, vernal pools. Elevation
ranges from 10 to 3970 feet (3 to 1210
meters). Blooms Apr-Jul.
No Potential. No vernal
pools or other seasonal
wetland habitats are
present in the Study Area
No further actions are
recommended for this
species.
Mammals
Townsend's western big-eared
bat
Corynorhinus townsendii
townsendii
SSC, WBWG
High
Humid coastal regions of northern and central
California. Roost in limestone caves, lava
tubes, mines, buildings etc. Will only roost in
the open, hanging from walls and ceilings.
Roosting sites limiting. Extremely sensitive to
disturbance
No Potential. No bat
roost habitat is present
within the Study Area.
No further actions are
recommended for this
species.
hoary bat
Lasiurus cinereus
WBWG
Medium
Prefers open forested habitats or habitat
mosaics, with access to trees for cover and
open areas or habitat edges for feeding.
Roosts in dense foliage of medium to large
trees. Feeds primarily on moths.
No Potential. No bat
roost habitat is present
within the Study Area.
No further actions are
recommended for this
species.
EXHIBIT D
1854
ATTACHMENT B. SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES ASSESSMENT TABLE
SPECIES STATUS HABITAT REQUIREMENTS
POTENTIAL TO OCCUR IN THE
STUDY AREA
RECOMMENDATIONS
American badger
Taxidea taxus
SSC Most abundant in drier open stages of most
shrub, forest, and herbaceous habitats, with
friable soils. Requires friable soils and open,
uncultivated ground. Preys on burrowing
rodents.
Unlikely. Soils are
generally compacted
within the Study Area and
the potential prey base is
limited.
No further actions are
recommended for this
species.
San Joaquin kit fox
Vulpes macrotis mutica
FE, ST, RP Annual grasslands or grassy open stages with scattered shrubby vegetation. Need loosetextured sandy soils for burrowing, and suitable prey base.
Unlikely. The Study Area
is surrounded by urban
development and major
roadways, which isolate
the Study Area from
known source
populations of this
species.
No further actions are
recommended for this
species.
EXHIBIT D
1855
ATTACHMENT B. SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES ASSESSMENT TABLE
SPECIES STATUS HABITAT REQUIREMENTS
POTENTIAL TO OCCUR IN THE
STUDY AREA
RECOMMENDATIONS
Birds
tricolored blackbird
Agelaius tricolor
ST, SSC Nearly endemic to California, where it is most
numerous in the Central Valley and vicinity.
Highly colonial, nesting in dense aggregations
over or near freshwater in emergent growth
or riparian thickets. Also uses flooded
agricultural fields. Abundant insect prey near
breeding areas essential.
Unlikely. No large swaths
of emergent vegetation
are present within the
Study Area to support the
establishment of a
nesting colony for this
species. May occasionally
be observed foraging
within the Study Area.
No further actions are
recommended for this
species.
burrowing owl
Athene cunicularia
SSC Year-round resident and winter visitor.
Occurs in open, dry grasslands and scrub
habitats with low-growing vegetation,
perches and abundant mammal burrows.
Preys upon insects and small vertebrates.
Nests and roosts in old mammal burrows,
most commonly those of ground squirrels.
Moderate Potential.
Suitably sized burrows to
support both breeding
and wintering by this
species are present in
localized portions of the
Study Area, mainly
around excavated
detention basins and on
the berm along the
eastern site boundary.
Vegetation in these areas
is sufficiently low to be
considered suitable as
well.
Protocol-level burrowing
owl surveys should be
conducted to determine
if wintering or nesting
birds are present.
Appropriate avoidance
buffers may be necessary
if burrowing owl are
discovered occupying
suitable burrows.
EXHIBIT D
1856
ATTACHMENT B. SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES ASSESSMENT TABLE
SPECIES STATUS HABITAT REQUIREMENTS
POTENTIAL TO OCCUR IN THE
STUDY AREA
RECOMMENDATIONS
white-tailed kite
Elanus leucurus
CFP Year-round resident in coastal and valley
lowlands with scattered trees and large
shrubs, including grasslands, marshes and
agricultural areas. Nests in trees, of which
the type and setting are highly variable. Preys
on small mammals and other vertebrates.
Moderate Potential.
Trees and larger shrubs
within or directly
adjacent to the Study
Area have some potential
to support nesting by this
species. May additionally
forage within the Study
Area.
A nesting bird survey
should be conducted to
determine if this species
is nesting within the
Study Area, and if so,
appropriate avoidance
buffers should be
established.
loggerhead shrike
Lanius ludovicianus
SSC Year-round resident in open woodland,
grassland, savannah and scrub. Prefers areas
with sparse shrubs, trees, posts, and other
suitable perches for foraging. Preys upon
large insects and small vertebrates. Nests are
well-concealed in densely-foliaged shrubs or
trees.
Moderate Potential. This
species may nest in
shrubs or trees located
within or adjacent to the
Study Area.
A nesting bird survey
should be conducted to
determine if this species
is nesting within the
Study Area, and if so,
appropriate avoidance
buffers should be
established.
EXHIBIT D
1857
ATTACHMENT B. SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES ASSESSMENT TABLE
SPECIES STATUS HABITAT REQUIREMENTS
POTENTIAL TO OCCUR IN THE
STUDY AREA
RECOMMENDATIONS
Reptiles and Amphibians
California tiger salamander
Ambystoma californiense
FT, ST Occurs in grasslands, oak savannah, and open
woodlands with a mosaic of vernal pools or
similar seasonal wetlands. Requires vernal
pools or similarly inundated waters for
breeding and larvae. Adults are fossorial
utilizing small mammal burrows for
estivation.
Unlikely. No aquatic
habitat with sufficient
hydroperiod to support
metamorphosis of this
species is present within
the Study Area. The
Study Area is sufficiently
isolated from source
populations to preclude
use of upland habitats
within the Study Area as
estivation habitat and to
make use as a movement
corridor unlikely.
No further actions are
recommended for this
species.
Pacific (western) pond turtle
Emys marmorata
SSC A thoroughly aquatic turtle of ponds,
marshes, rivers, streams and irrigation ditches
with aquatic vegetation. Require basking sites
such as partially submerged logs, vegetation
mats, or open mud banks, and suitable
upland habitat (sandy banks or grassy open
fields) for egg-laying.
No Potential. No
perennial aquatic
habitats are present
within or in the
immediate vicinity of the
Study Area.
No further actions are
recommended for this
species.
EXHIBIT D
1858
ATTACHMENT B. SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES ASSESSMENT TABLE
SPECIES STATUS HABITAT REQUIREMENTS
POTENTIAL TO OCCUR IN THE
STUDY AREA
RECOMMENDATIONS
California red-legged frog
Rana draytonii
FT, SSC, RP Lowlands and foothills in or near permanent sources of deep water with dense, shrubby or
emergent riparian vegetation. Requires 11 to
20 weeks of permanent water for larval
development. Associated with quiet
perennial to intermittent ponds, stream pools
and wetlands. Prefers shorelines with
extensive vegetation. Disperses through
upland habitats after rains.
Unlikely. No aquatic
habitat with sufficient
hydroperiod to support
metamorphosis of this
species is present within
the Study Area. The
Study Area is sufficiently
isolated from source
populations to preclude
use of upland habitats
within the Study Area as
estivation habitat and to
make use as a movement
corridor unlikely.
No further actions are
recommended for this
species.
Invertebrates
Callippe silverspot butterfly
Speyeria callippe callippe
FE Two populations in San Bruno Mountain and
the Cordelia Hills are recognized. Hostplant
is Viola pedunculata, which is found on
serpentine soils. Most adults found on eastfacing slopes; males congregate on hilltops in search of females.
No Potential. The Study
Area is outside of the
known range of this
species, and no
serpentine soils are
present that could
support host plants.
No further actions are
recommended for this
species.
EXHIBIT D
1859
Appendix C-2
Peer Review Letter
EXHIBIT D
1860
October 9, 2023
Project No: 23-14939
Jake Potter, MUP, Senior Planner
Community Development Department
City of Livermore
1052 South Livermore Avenue
Livermore, California 94550
Via email: [email protected]
Subject: Peer Review of the Biological Resources Analysis for the Harridge Development Project, City of Livermore, Alameda County
Dear Mr. Potter:
This letter provides the results of Rincon Consultants, Inc.’s review of the Summary of Biological Evaluations (SBE) at the Portola Avenue/Isabel Avenue Site in Livermore, Alameda County, California prepared by WRA Environmental Consultants in February 2023 for the Harridge Development Project (project). This peer review was completed as part of the environmental analysis being conducted in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) by the City of Livermore. This review considers if the SBE completed for the project is adequate for the purposes of preparing an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Addendum. Rincon reviewed the SBE for completeness with respect to the following parameters:
• Methodology for conducting the SBE
• Adequate description of the project and existing conditions • Potential project impacts to protected biological resources • Adequacy of any mitigation measures
Summary of Biological Resources Analysis
The SBE provides a peer review of the Delineation of Aquatic Resources report (DAR) prepared by RestorCorp (May 7, 2021) for the Study Area and includes assessments of the presence or absence of special status species within the Study Area.
According to the SBE, the project would be located within the vacant lot located southwest of Isabel Avenue and Portola Avenue. The Study Area was 42.329 acres in area; however, a Project Area and buffer area are not defined in the SBE. Additional location information is provided in the DAR: the Study Area includes nine conjoined parcels (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 903-001004600, 903-001004700, 903-001004800, 903-0014900 [not included in the DAR], 903-001005000, 903-001005100, 903- 001005200, 903-001005300, and 903-001005400). The DAR includes conflicting Study Area acreage amounts within itself and with the SBE. These conflicting acreages and incomplete Assessor’s Parcel Numbers are not addressed in the SBE. A project description was not provided in either document. The DAR includes a description of habitat (non-native grassland) which is not referenced in the SBE and the SBE does not characterize habitat types throughout the Study Area.
The SBE determined 59 special status plants and 29 special status animal species are known within the regional vicinity of the Study Area. The Study Area was determined to lack the necessary habitat
EXHIBIT D
1861
features for presence of special status plants, except for one species: Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii). A protocol-level survey for Congdon’s tarplant conducted on October 4, 2022 had negative results; thus, it was concluded that the plant was absent from the Study Area. In addition to nesting birds, required habitat for special status wildlife is also present for three protected avian species within the Study Area: burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), and loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus). During site visits on January 13, February 1, and February 15, 2022, there were no observations of special status plant or wildlife species. The project site was determined to not provide adequate wildlife corridors or wildlife nursery sites due to the large amount of development surrounding the site and lack of aquatic habitat with sufficient hydroperiod for metamorphosis of special status amphibian species.
The SBE concludes that a wetland exists in the Study Area, and that the wetland may be exempt from regulatory agency jurisdiction due to likely being product of a leaking pipe and no evidence of an existing wetland prior to 2020. The SBE provides recommended avoidance and minimization measures as well as mitigation measures if the wetland is determined to be jurisdictional.
The SBE also provides mitigation measures to reduce potentially significant impacts to protected species with potential to occur in the Study Area to a less than significant level.
Evaluation of Adequacy
Rincon reviewed the SBE for completeness and adequacy with emphasis on biological resources assessment methodology, description of the project and existing conditions, potential project-related impacts to biological resources, and adequacy of any mitigation measures. The following recommendations for revisions to the SBE are based on this review:
• Rincon recommends adding a brief description of the proposed project to the SBE. • Rincon recommends adding a description of the Study Area land cover to the SBE. • The SBE should resolve the discrepancies regarding Study Area acreage. • Because of the urban setting, isolation caused by large roadways, and lack of suitable habitat or connectivity to habitat areas, Rincon agrees that no special status species would be expected to occur at the site; however, the full disclosure of all species known to occur in the region would result in a more defensible document. Rincon conducted a 9-quad query of the CNDDB and California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants database and identified an additional 18 animal species, and one sensitive habitat. Rincon recommends including a more robust table of special status species with notes on potential to occur in the Study Area, to more clearly represent sensitive wildlife species that may occur in or near the project site.
• Finally, evaluation of three CEQA checklist items for biological resources is needed:
o CEQA biological resources checklist item (b): Note the presence or absence of sensitive natural communities in the Study Area.
o CEQA biological resources checklist item (e): Review literature and discuss any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources (e.g., tree ordinances). o CEQA biological resources checklist item (f): Determine whether any local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans apply to the project.
Rincon found that the SBE adequately assessed the potential for species presence, avoidance, and minimization measures for protected resources, and provided adequate mitigation measures if the small wetland is determined to be jurisdictional.
EXHIBIT D
1862
Conclusion
Rincon generally agrees with the findings of the SBE but recommends that revisions be made as specified above in order to address all CEQA checklist questions. Rincon finds that, with the revisions suggested in this letter, the SBE would be adequate for the purpose of preparing a legally defensible CEQA document. Rincon Consultants is available to make these SBE revisions on behalf of the City of Livermore for an additional fee, if needed.
Sincerely,
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
Jane Anfinson, Senior Biologist Alex Hunt, Director, Natural Resources
EXHIBIT D
1863
Appendix D
Aquatic Resources Delineation
EXHIBIT D
1864
337 17th Street, Suite 200, Oakland, CA 94612
Delineation of Aquatic Resources
May 7, 2021
Travis Devan
Argent Management LLC.
2392 Morse Avenue
Irvine, CA 92614
Dear Mr. Devan,
This letter report summarizes the results of the formal jurisdictional delineation that took place on March 30, 2021 on the property (Study Area, Attachment A) located southwest of the intersection of Portola and Isabel Avenue in Livermore, Alameda County, California. The purpose of this jurisdictional delineation within the Study Area was to identify the type and extent of any jurisdictional resources as defined by the San Francisco District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).
The Study Area includes nine conjoined parcels totaling approximately 45.33 acres in size, with the following assessor’s parcel numbers: 903-001004600, 903-001004700, 903-001004800, 903 -001005000, 903-001005100, 903-001005200, 903-001005300, and 903-001005400. The Study Area is undeveloped, vegetated with a mixture of non-native grasses and forbs, and surrounded by urban development both residential and commercial. The Study Area is entirely within the U.S.
Geological Survey’s (USGS) Livermore 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle and Lower Arroyo Las Positas HUC8 (180500040203) Watershed (USGS, 2015).
Methods
The formal jurisdictional delineation conducted on March 30, 2021 within the Study Area followed the technical guidelines provided in the Corps of Engineers Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) and the USACE Arid West Regional Supplement (USACE, 2008) that included an assessment of existing vegetation, soils, and hydrology. The Study Area was examined for the presence of “waters of the U.S.” regulated under Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act and “waters of the State” regulated under the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act.
Prior to the jurisdictional delineation on March 30, 2021, reference materials were reviewed, including the following: the National Wetland Inventory data (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS], 2021), the Soil Survey of Alameda Area, California (U.S. Department of Agriculture [USDA], 1966), and historical aerial photographs (Google Earth, 2021). Biologists from RestorCap walked the entirety of the Study Area placing representative sample points into each unique habitat in addition to any areas previously identified from aerial imagery as having the potential to contain indicators of wetland conditions (vegetation, soils, and hydrology). Plant species identified in the Study Area were assigned a wetland status according to the National Wetland Plant List (Lichvar et al. 2018). Sample points were recorded using an iPad and Trimble R1 Integrated GNSS with a maximum precision of 50cm and data sheets were reported on Arid West
EXHIBIT D
1865
337 17th Street, Suite 200, Oakland, CA 94612
Supplement data forms (Attachment B). Photos were taken throughout the Study Area and are included as Attachment C.
Results
The Study Area is vegetated, undeveloped, and slightly sloping to the southwest with a large and wide depression running from east to west through the site. The surrounding area is a mixture of undeveloped parcels, residential communities, and commercial buildings, as well as associated infrastructure. The Study Area has historically been vacant apart from the installation of a 10” vitrified clay pipe prior to 2002 as part of the City of Livermore’s Isabel Neighborhood Plan to support the development to the west of the Study Area, which resulted in the aforementioned lowlying area running east to west and is observable on aerial imagery (City of Livermore, 2020).
Additionally, the southwestern corner of the Study Area was utilized for staging equipment for the adjacent development during the same time period as installation of the vitrified clay pipe (Google Earth, 2021).
Within the Study Area, four areas were sampled to represent the site in terms of the current conditions of vegetation, soil, and hydrology. Sampling locations were based on providing overall Study Area coverage, changes in aerial imagery signature, changes in local topography, and changes in plant species composition. One sample point was strategically placed within a lowlying area with a unique aerial signature that occurred as a result of the vitrified clay pipe installation. The rest of the points were placed in areas with distinct aerial signatures such as dark spots, denuded areas, or changes in vegetation density or composition.
Vegetation was dominated by non-native grasses and forbs such as black mustard (Brassica nigra, UPL), oat (Avena sp., UPL), rose clover (Trifolium hirtum, UPL), common’s stork bill (Erodium cicutarium, UPL), hairy vetch (Vicia villosa), ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus, UPL), soft brome (Bromus hordeaceus, FACU), shortpod mustard (Hirschfeldia incana, UPL), Italian rye grass (Festuca perennis, FAC), and sow thistles (Sonchus arvensis, FACU, S. oleraceus, UPL).
The Study Area is underlain by very dark grayish-brown to brown clay or clay loam soils, none of which are considered hydric (USDA, 2021). Hydrological inputs for the Study Area include precipitation, sheet flow, and runoff from the surrounding impervious surfaces (roads, commercial and residential development etc.).
The jurisdictional delineation occurred during precipitation conditions that placed rainfall at below the normal for the 30-year period, however,rainfall was considered normal for the prior month of February (Attachment D). Subsequently, clay soils within the Study Area contained no visible surface soil cracks and posed little resistance during excavation of sample soil pits, indicating rainfall permeated the soil profile. Despite rainfall permeating the soils during the month prior to the jurisdictional delineation, no indicators of wetland hydrology were observed within the sample points or overall Study Area. Likewise, no hydric soil indicators were observed within any of the sample points placed during the jurisdictional delineation.
EXHIBIT D
1866
337 17th Street, Suite 200, Oakland, CA 94612
Conclusion
The results of this formal jurisdictional delineation reflect the current conditions of the Study Area at the time of the jurisdictional delineation on March 30, 2021. Conditions of the Study Area may change over time due to external factors that could alter the results of this jurisdictional delineation. The Study Area contains no wetlands or other aquatic features that could be classified as potentially jurisdictional by either the USACE or SFRWQCB. No hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, or indicators of wetland hydrology were observed in the sample points placed within the Study Area during the jurisdictional delineation.
Sincerely,
Kari Dupler, PWS
EXHIBIT D
1867
References:
City of Livermore. Isabel Neighborhood Specific Plan. Adopted November 2020. https://www.cityoflivermore.net/citygov/cdd/bart/isabel_neighborhood_plan.htm Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
Department of the Army, Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi 39180-0631.
Google Earth. 2018. Aerial Imagery 1993 – 2021. Accessed April 2021.
Lichvar, R.W., D.L. Banks, W.N. Kirchner, and N.C. Melvin. 2016. The National Wetland Plant List: 2018 wetland ratings. Phytoneuron 2016-30: 1-17. Published 18 May 2020. ISSN 2153 733X.
USACE. 2008. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual:
Arid West Region (Version 2.0). September.
USDA. Soil Survey of Alameda Area. 1966.
nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_MANUSCRIPTS/california/CA609/0/alameda.pdf.
USDA. Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2021. Web Soil Survey. Available online at the following link: https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/. Accessed April 2021.
USFWS. 2018. National Wetlands Inventory website. U.S. Department of the Interior, USFWS, Washington, D.C. http://www.fws.gov/nwi/. Accessed: April 21.
USGS. 2015. Livermore, California 7.5-minute quadrangle.
Attachments:
Attachment A. Delineation of Aquatic Resources Figure
Attachment B. Arid West Determination Forms
Attachment C. Study Area Photographs
Attachment D. Antecedent Precipitation Tool Results
EXHIBIT D
1868
Attachment A. Delineation of Aquatic Resources Figure
EXHIBIT D
1869
EXHIBIT D
1870
Attachment B. Arid West Determination Forms
EXHIBIT D
1871
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Arid West Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is 3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status
1. 2.
3. 4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 2.
3. 4.
5. = Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 2.
3. 4.
5. 6.
7. 8.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum % Cover of Biotic Crust
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
Livermore Property Development Project Livermore/Alameda 03-30-2021 Argent Management LLC CA SP01
K. Dupler, R. Akiba-Hajim, RestorCap T3S R2E
slight depression concave 0-1
C- Mediterranean California 37.70556 -121.8006 WSGS84
Diablo clay, very deep, 3 to 15 percent slopes N/A
✔
✔✔ ✔
✔
✔
✔ ✔
-
- -
- 5'
Avena barbata 35 Yes UPL
Brassica nigra 20 Yes UPL
Trifolium hirtum 10 Yes UPL
Geranium sp.5 No UPL
70 -
-
SP01 is located within the north central portion of the Study Area and was selected based on a difference in aerial signature. SP01 did not contain hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, or wetland hydrology. Vegetation and soils were considered significantly disturbed, disturbance occurring in the late 1990s during the placement of sewer lines that support adjacent developments. Rainfall was considered drier than normal, with a majority of rainfall in the last three months falling in late February. 30 0
3 0
✔
SP01 did not pass the dominance test and therefore hydrophytic vegetation was not present.
EXHIBIT D
1872
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1
Loc2 Texture Remarks
1 Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Reduced Vertic (F18) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Red Parent Material (TF2) Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C) Depleted Matrix (F3) Other (Explain in Remarks) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D) Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Depressions (F8) 3
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Vernal Pools (F9) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Salt Crust (B11) Water Marks (B1) (Riverine) High Water Table (A2) Biotic Crust (B12) Sediment Deposits (B2) (Riverine) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Drift Deposits (B3) (Riverine) Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10) Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Drift Deposits (B3) (Nonriverine) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Other (Explain in Remarks) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
SP01
0-7 10YR 3/2 100 clay loam
7-12 10YR 3/2 90 clay loam
7-12 10YR 4/2 10 clay loam
SP01 did not contain any indicators of hydric soil and therefore hydric soil was not present. ✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
Google Earth (2021)
SP01 did not contain indicators of wetland hydrology and therefore wetland hydrology was not present.
EXHIBIT D
1873
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Arid West Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is 3.01
Morphological Adaptations1
(Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1
(Explain)
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status
1. 2.
3. 4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 2.
3. 4.
5. = Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 2.
3. 4.
5. 6.
7. 8.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum % Cover of Biotic Crust
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
Livermore Property Development Project Livermore/Alameda 03-30-2021 Argent Management LLC CA SP01
K. Dupler, R. Akiba-Hajim, RestorCap T3S R2E
slight depression concave 0-1
C- Mediterranean California 37.70556 -121.8006 WSGS84
Diablo clay, very deep, 3 to 15 percent slopes N/A
✔
✔✔ ✔
✔
✔
✔ ✔
-
- -
- 5'
Avena barbata 35 Yes UPL
Brassica nigra 20 Yes UPL
Trifolium hirtum 10 Yes UPL
Geranium sp.5 No UPL
70 -
-
SP01 is located within the north central portion of the Study Area and was selected based on a difference in aerial signature. SP01 did not contain hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, or wetland hydrology. Vegetation and soils were considered significantly disturbed, disturbance occurring in the late 1990s during the placement of sewer lines that support adjacent developments. Rainfall was considered drier than normal, with a majority of rainfall in the last three months falling in late February. 30 0
3 0
✔
SP01 did not pass the dominance test and therefore hydrophytic vegetation was not present.
EXHIBIT D
1874
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1
Loc2 Texture Remarks
1 Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Reduced Vertic (F18) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Red Parent Material (TF2) Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C) Depleted Matrix (F3) Other (Explain in Remarks) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D) Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Depressions (F8) 3
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Vernal Pools (F9) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Salt Crust (B11) Water Marks (B1) (Riverine) High Water Table (A2) Biotic Crust (B12) Sediment Deposits (B2) (Riverine) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Drift Deposits (B3) (Riverine) Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10) Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Drift Deposits (B3) (Nonriverine) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Other (Explain in Remarks) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
SP01
0-7 10YR 3/2 100 clay loam
7-12 10YR 3/2 90 clay loam
7-12 10YR 4/2 10 clay loam
SP01 did not contain any indicators of hydric soil and therefore hydric soil was not present. ✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
Google Earth (2021)
SP01 did not contain indicators of wetland hydrology and therefore wetland hydrology was not present.
EXHIBIT D
1875
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Arid West Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is 3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status
1. 2.
3. 4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 2.
3. 4.
5. = Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 2.
3. 4.
5. 6.
7. 8.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum % Cover of Biotic Crust
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
Livermore Property Development Project Livermore/Alameda 03-30-2021 Argent Management LLC CA SP01
K. Dupler, R. Akiba-Hajim, RestorCap T3S R2E
slight depression concave 0-1
C- Mediterranean California 37.70556 -121.8006 WSGS84
Diablo clay, very deep, 3 to 15 percent slopes N/A
✔
✔✔ ✔
✔
✔
✔ ✔
-
- -
- 5'
Avena barbata 35 Yes UPL
Brassica nigra 20 Yes UPL
Trifolium hirtum 10 Yes UPL
Geranium sp.5 No UPL
70 -
-
SP01 is located within the north central portion of the Study Area and was selected based on a difference in aerial signature. SP01 did not contain hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, or wetland hydrology. Vegetation and soils were considered significantly disturbed, disturbance occurring in the late 1990s during the placement of sewer lines that support adjacent developments. Rainfall was considered drier than normal, with a majority of rainfall in the last three months falling in late February. 30 0
3 0
✔
SP01 did not pass the dominance test and therefore hydrophytic vegetation was not present.
EXHIBIT D
1876
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1
Loc2 Texture Remarks
1 Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Reduced Vertic (F18) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Red Parent Material (TF2) Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C) Depleted Matrix (F3) Other (Explain in Remarks) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D) Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Depressions (F8) 3
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Vernal Pools (F9) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Salt Crust (B11) Water Marks (B1) (Riverine) High Water Table (A2) Biotic Crust (B12) Sediment Deposits (B2) (Riverine) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Drift Deposits (B3) (Riverine) Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10) Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Drift Deposits (B3) (Nonriverine) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Other (Explain in Remarks) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
SP01
0-7 10YR 3/2 100 clay loam
7-12 10YR 3/2 90 clay loam
7-12 10YR 4/2 10 clay loam
SP01 did not contain any indicators of hydric soil and therefore hydric soil was not present. ✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
Google Earth (2021)
SP01 did not contain indicators of wetland hydrology and therefore wetland hydrology was not present.
EXHIBIT D
1877
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Arid West Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is 3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status
1. 2.
3. 4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 2.
3. 4.
5. = Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 2.
3. 4.
5. 6.
7. 8.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum % Cover of Biotic Crust
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
Livermore Property Development Project Livermore/Alameda 03-30-2021 Argent Management LLC CA SP01
K. Dupler, R. Akiba-Hajim, RestorCap T3S R2E
slight depression concave 0-1
C- Mediterranean California 37.70556 -121.8006 WSGS84
Diablo clay, very deep, 3 to 15 percent slopes N/A
✔
✔✔ ✔
✔
✔
✔ ✔
-
- -
- 5'
Avena barbata 35 Yes UPL
Brassica nigra 20 Yes UPL
Trifolium hirtum 10 Yes UPL
Geranium sp.5 No UPL
70 -
-
SP01 is located within the north central portion of the Study Area and was selected based on a difference in aerial signature. SP01 did not contain hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, or wetland hydrology. Vegetation and soils were considered significantly disturbed, disturbance occurring in the late 1990s during the placement of sewer lines that support adjacent developments. Rainfall was considered drier than normal, with a majority of rainfall in the last three months falling in late February. 30 0
3 0
✔
SP01 did not pass the dominance test and therefore hydrophytic vegetation was not present.
EXHIBIT D
1878
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1
Loc2 Texture Remarks
1 Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Reduced Vertic (F18) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Red Parent Material (TF2) Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C) Depleted Matrix (F3) Other (Explain in Remarks) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D) Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Depressions (F8) 3
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Vernal Pools (F9) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Salt Crust (B11) Water Marks (B1) (Riverine) High Water Table (A2) Biotic Crust (B12) Sediment Deposits (B2) (Riverine) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Drift Deposits (B3) (Riverine) Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10) Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Drift Deposits (B3) (Nonriverine) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Other (Explain in Remarks) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
SP01
0-7 10YR 3/2 100 clay loam
7-12 10YR 3/2 90 clay loam
7-12 10YR 4/2 10 clay loam
SP01 did not contain any indicators of hydric soil and therefore hydric soil was not present. ✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
Google Earth (2021)
SP01 did not contain indicators of wetland hydrology and therefore wetland hydrology was not present.
EXHIBIT D
1879
Attachment C. Study Area Photographs
EXHIBIT D
1880
Photograph 1. Visual of upland sample point (SP01) within non-native vegetation in the Study Area, facing south. Taken March 30, 2021.
Photograph 2. Visual of upland sample point (SP01) within non-native vegetation in the Study Area, facing north. Taken March 30, 2021.
Attachment C. Study Area Photographs 1
EXHIBIT
D
1881
Photograph 3. Visual of upland sample point (SP02) within depression running east to west through the Study Area, facing northeast. Taken March 30, 2021.
Photograph 4. Visual of upland sample point (SP02) within depression running east to west through the Study Area, facing southwest. Taken March 30, 2021.
Attachment C. Study Area Photographs 2
EXHIBIT
D
1882
Photograph 5. Visual of upland sample point (SP03) within non-native vegetation in the Study Area, facing north. Taken March 30, 2021.
Photograph 6. Visual of sample point (SP03) within non-native vegetation in uplands in the Study Area, facing northwest. Taken March 30, 2021.
Attachment C. Study Area Photographs 3
EXHIBIT
D
1883
Photograph 7. Visual of upland sample point (SP04) within non-native vegetation in the Study Area, facing northeast. Taken March 30, 2021.
Photograph 8. Visual of upland sample point (SP04) within non-native vegetation in the Study Area, facing southeast. Taken March 30, 2021.
Attachment C. Study Area Photographs 4
EXHIBIT
D
1884
Photograph 9. Visual of very dark grayish brown clay loam soils observed within SP01. Taken March 30, 2021.
Photograph 10. Visual of brown to dark grayish silty brown clay loam soils observed within SP02. Taken March 30, 2021.
Attachment C. Study Area Photographs 5
EXHIBIT
D
1885
Photograph 11. Visual of brown clay loam soils observed within SP03.
Taken March 30, 2021.
Photograph 12. Visual of brown to black clay loam soils observed within SP04. Taken March 30, 2021.
Attachment C. Study Area Photographs 6
EXHIBIT
D
1886
Attachment D. Antecedent Precipitation Tool Results
EXHIBIT D
1887
EXHIBIT D
1888
Appendix E
Transportation and VMT Analysis Memorandums
EXHIBIT D
1889
Appendix E-1
Isabel Crossing Project – Focused Transportation Analysis
EXHIBIT D
1890
Focused
Transportation
Analysis
June 24, 2024
Isabel Crossings
EXHIBIT D
1891
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................................................................. i Tables ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... i Figures ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... ii Appendices ............................................................................................................................................................................................. ii Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 1 Isabel Neighborhood Specific Plan ....................................................................................................................................... 1 Project Description ...................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Study Methodology ............................................................................................................................................................................. 5 2040 Baseline No Project .......................................................................................................................................................... 7 Project Trip Generation .............................................................................................................................................................. 9 Project Trip Distribution & Assignment ............................................................................................................................11 Level of Service Analysis ..................................................................................................................................................................16 Intersection Functionality ................................................................................................................................................................19 Isabel Avenue at Gateway Avenue (#14) ..........................................................................................................................21 #19 Isabel Avenue at A Street ...............................................................................................................................................24 #3 Main Street at Gateway Avenue ....................................................................................................................................27 #4 Portola Avenue at Main Street .......................................................................................................................................29 Bicycle Circulation ..............................................................................................................................................................................31 Pedestrian Circulation .......................................................................................................................................................................34 Transit & Future Valley Link Access ............................................................................................................................................36 Transportation Demand Management & Parking.................................................................................................................38 Vehicle Parking Requirements ..............................................................................................................................................39 Bicycle Parking Requirements ...............................................................................................................................................41 Summary of Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................................44 TABLES
Table 1: Estimated Project Trip Generation ............................................................................................................................. 10 Table 2: Level of Service Definitions for Signalized Intersections .................................................................................. 17 Table 3: Level of Service Definitions for Stop Controlled Intersections ....................................................................... 18 Table 4: Intersection Level of Service Results ......................................................................................................................... 19 Table 5: 95th Percentile Queue Lengths at Isabel Avenue at Gateway Avenue ......................................................... 21 Table 6: 95th Percentile Queue Lengths at Isabel Avenue at A Street .......................................................................... 24 Table 7: 95th Percentile Queue Lengths at Portola Avenue at Main Street / Montage Drive ............................. 29
EXHIBIT D
1892
Table 8 : Vehicle Parking Standards ........................................................................................................................................... 39 Table 9: Vehicle Parking Requirements per Parcel ............................................................................................................... 40 Table 11: Bicycle Parking Standards based on the INSP.................................................................................................... 42 Table 12: Bicycle Parking Requirements per Parcel ............................................................................................................. 43
FIGURES
Figure 1: Vicinity Map ......................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2: Site Plan ................................................................................................................................................................................. 4 Figure 3: Proposed Roadway Network ........................................................................................................................................ 6 Figure 4: Baseline 2040 No Project Turning Movement Volumes .................................................................................... 8 Figure 5: Project Trip Distribution ............................................................................................................................................... 12 Figure 6: Project AM and PM Trip Assignment ..................................................................................................................... 13 Figure 7: Baseline 2040 plus Project Turning Movement Volumes ............................................................................... 15 Figure 8: Isabel Avenue & Gateway Avenue Proposed Intersection Configuration ............................................... 23 Figure 9: Isabel Avenue at A Street Proposed Intersection Configuration ................................................................. 26 Figure 10: Portola Avenue at Main Street Proposed Intersection Configuration .................................................... 28 Figure 11: Proposed Improvements at Portola Avenue at Main Street ....................................................................... 30 Figure 12: Bicycle Facilities Map .................................................................................................................................................. 33 Figure 13: Pedestrian Facilities Map........................................................................................................................................... 35 Figure 14: Transit Facilities Map .................................................................................................................................................. 37
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Livermore Isabel Transit Village Modified Project Analysis dated December 6, 2023 (revised May 14, 2024)
Appendix B: Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Worksheets
Appendix C: Synchro LOS Analysis
Appendix D: Simtraffic Queue Analysis
EXHIBIT D
1893
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this report is to provide a design-focused traffic analysis of the proposed mixed-use project, called Isabel Crossings (the Project).
The Project is located within a greater planning area called the Isabel Neighborhood, located within the City of Livermore. The Isabel Neighborhood Specific Plan (INSP) differs from the City’s General Plan and allows for an increased intensity of land uses near the proposed Isabel Valley Link transit station. The INSP included a detailed traffic analysis as part of the Draft Environmental Impact Report dated January 12, 2018.
Since the INSP included a thorough traffic impact analysis of the planning area, and the Project aligns with the land uses identified in the INSP, this traffic analysis is focused on evaluating the proposed project’s design elements such as site access, on-site circulation, parking, and conformance with transportation aspects of the INSP.
The scope of this focused traffic study was approved by City of Livermore staff on November 22, 2022 and was developed in response to a letter of incompletion dated October 25, 2022 by the City of Livermore in response to the Project’s submittal for a Development Agreement.
Isabel Neighborhood Specific Plan
The Isabel Neighborhood Specific Plan (INSP) is a regulatory framework that supersedes the City of Livermore General Plan with more specific goals and policies that guide the development of the surrounding area. The INSP was adopted in November 2020 and amended in November 2022. The INSP is of particular importance to allow for development that supports and complements the future Isabel Station for the Valley Link rail system.
The INSP allows development of 4,095 new multi-family housing units and approximately 2.1 million square feet of new office and commercial development focused on the intensity of land uses near the future Isabel Valley Link transit station. The INSP included a detailed traffic analysis to support the land use framework for the Isabel Neighborhood.
The INSP planning area covers 1,138 acres, which includes the 45 acres of the Livermore Isabel Project.
The project is located within the core area of the INSP with an objective of creating a vibrant neighborhood that supports a viable retail center and generates transit ridership. The INSP has identified a preliminary roadway network and land uses within the project area, as well as standards and requirements for development.
The INSP has conducted a thorough analysis of traffic impacts of the proposed land use changes, including intersection level of service (LOS). It has identified improvements that are needed to support
EXHIBIT D
1894
the developments as identified in the plan. Since the land uses proposed in the Project generate less traffic than what is proposed in the INSP, additional traffic impact analyses on the surrounding network is not necessary.
Project Description
The Isabel Crossings project is a proposed mixed-used development located on 45 acres at the southwest corner of Isabel Avenue and Portola Avenue in the City of Livermore. It is bordered by Isabel Avenue to the east, Portola Avenue to the north, I-580 to the south and existing office developments to the west. A vicinity map is included in Figure 1.
The Project proposes to construct 1,299 dwelling units (consisting of townhomes, condos, and mid-rise multi-family apartments) and 65,635 square feet of commercial space (a mix of retail & restaurant space) as identified in the Conceptual Plan. The commercial space is designed on the street level of multi-story buildings with residential apartments located above. Amenities within this mixed-use development include a neighborhood park, a recreation center that includes a pool, and open space at the corners of the retail-lined street including a pocket plaza, and a town square. A site plan is included in Figure 2.
The future Isabel Station for the Valley Link railway is located southeast from the project limits. The Valley Link railway is a proposed 42-mile passenger rail project that will connect the Lathrop Altamont Commuter Express (ACE) rail station with the Dublin/Pleasanton Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) station.
The entire Isabel Crossings project is located within a half-mile radius of the Isabel Station platform, some of it within a quarter-mile, which indicates that walkability to the Isabel Station is very high.
EXHIBIT D
1895
Figure 1: Vicinity Map
04/2024
N
Isabel TOD
84 84
N. Canyons Pkwy.
Portola Ave.
Gateway Ave. Isabel Ave.
Collier Canyon Rd.
Kitty Hawk Rd.
Constitution Dr.
580
Project Site
Future Isabel Valley Link Station
LEGEND
EXHIBIT D
1896
04/2024
Isabel TOD
Figure 2: Site Plan
N
ISABEL PORTOLA
OWNER, LLC
00 502 1004 2008
Main Street with Retail on Ground Fl Main Street with Retail on Ground Floor Amenity Space on Podium Level
Urban Plaza consisting of Town Square
Grocery back of house
SP-1
07-25-23 | 2022015
© 2023 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA.
CONCEPTDESIGN
LIVERMORE
ISABELPROJECT LIVERMORECALIFORNIA
ILLUSTRATIVEMASTERPLAN
MASTERPLANNING
Existing Office ting Office
1.5 AC Neighborhood Park
Podium Level
Front door character alo Front door character along
street edges
Mid Block Connections Block Connections
Paseos
S2
EVA/ Trail
Trail
0.45 AC Communi 0.45 AC Community Rec Facility ty Rec Facility Pedestrian Connection Pedestrian Connection
Note: For Conceptual Illustration Purposes Only. Final Design Subject to Change Based on Landscape Design.
N2 N1
N3-A
C5
C3
S3-A
S1
C2-B
C2-C
C1-A
C1-B
TS
S4 S3-B
Portola Avenue Portola Avenue
Isabel Avenue Isabel Avenue
Shea Center Drive Shea Center Drive
Main Street Main Street
Gateway Avenue
N3-B N3-C
EXHIBIT D
1897
STUDY METHODOLOGY
The purpose of this traffic analysis is focused on evaluating the Project’s site access along the boundary of the Project, on-site circulation within the Project, on-street and private parking supply, and conformance with transportation aspects of the INSP, such a bicycle, pedestrian and transit facilities.
Evaluating the Project’s site access and on-site circulation includes conducting intersection analysis to determine appropriate intersection configuration, traffic control devices at the intersections and length of left-turn pockets. The four study intersections are as follows:
• Isabel Avenue at Gateway Avenue
• Isabel Avenue at A Street
• Portola Avenue at Main Street
• Main Street at Gateway Avenue
• Portola Avenue at Isabel Avenue (LOS analysis only)
The no project scenario is developed based on a 2040 baseline condition of build-out of the INSP without development of the project site.
The build-out scenario is the 2040 Baseline plus Project. This consists of the 2040 Baseline No Project scenario described above plus project generated trips.
The trip generation for the Project was estimated based on the published trip generation rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition). The Project trips are then distributed onto the roadway network based on regional destinations and the number of trips are assigned at each intersection to provide project turning movement counts.
The 2040 Baseline plus Project turning movement volumes are used to evaluate the level of service and intersection configuration using the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 6th Edition within the Synchro 12 software platform. SimTraffic, a microsimulation component of the Synchro software package, was used to evaluate queuing lengths at the intersections.
EXHIBIT D
1898
Mile Radius from Isabel Valley Link Station
Existing Roadway Network
Proposed Roadway Network
Isabel TOD
Figure 3: Proposed Roadway Network
N
04/2024
Project Site Limits
LEGEND
84 Portola Ave.
Isabel Ave.
Collier Canyon Rd.
Kitty Hawk Rd.
Study Intersection
Gateway Ave. Shea Center Dr.
B St.
A St.
C St.
Main St.
14 X
19 11
27 22
EXHIBIT D
1899
2040 Baseline No Project
In order to determine the long-term impact for the Project, the analysis is based on the traffic volumes identified in the traffic study for the INSP using the 2040 Cumulative plus INSP project scenario. This scenario includes complete build-out of the INSP planning area, including the Valley Link station.
However, since the Isabel Crossings project results in less traffic generation compared to the land uses proposed in the INSP, a 2040 Baseline No Project scenario was developed by subtracting the trips generated by the INSP from the 2040 Cumulative plus INSP project scenario.
The INSP trips for the Project area were identified based on a technical memo titled Livermore Isabel Transit Village Modified Project Analysis by TJKM Transportation Consultants dated December 6, 2023 and is provided in Appendix A. The same trip distribution used for the Project trips were applied to the INSP trips. The resulting trip assignment for the INSP trips were then subtracted from the 2040 Cumulative plus INSP project traffic volumes. The resulting trips are the 2040 Baseline No Project turning movement volumes as shown on Figure 6.
EXHIBIT D
1900
Shea Center Dr.
Isabel TOD
Figure 4: 2040 Baseline Turning Movement Volumes
N
04/2024
Existing Roadway Network
Proposed Roadway Network
Project Site
X Study Intersection
LEGEND
XX AM Peak Hour Volumes
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volumes
Gateway Ave.
84 Portola Ave.
Isabel Ave.
Collier Canyon Rd.
Kitty Hawk Rd.
B St.
A St.
C St.
Main St.
14 19
11 27
22 ###
83 (59)
12 (30)
492 (351)741 (427)
35 (90)
0 (27)
70 (197)
Portola Ave
Isabel Ave
Gateway Ave
Isabel Ave
2 (6)
280 (1,105) 3 (25) 13 (41)
188 (359)
424 (259)291 (221)
18 (10)
0 (66)
241 (380)
Isabel AveIsabel Ave
75 (9)
2 (6)75 (164)11 (23)43 (10)584 (944)
Portola Ave
634 (531)
310 (280)
14 (27)
A St
Isabel Ave
18 (0)548 (790)7 (18)
28 (19)
Isabel Ave
19 (52)
18 (54)
Loop Road
6 (19) 255 (159) 478 (358)
17 (18)
Isabel Ave (N/S) & Portola Ave (E/W) Isabel Ave (N/S) & Gateway Ave/Loop Road (E/W) Isabel Ave (N/S) & A St (E/W)
##
Gateway Ave 0 (0)
Montage St
Main St
894 (510) 552 (0)
102 (31)87 (69)24 (37)
127 (101)
0 (0)0 (0)0 (0)
0 (0)
27 (129) 0 (0)
Portola Ave
381 (1,189) 244 (0)
0 (82) 0 (0)
Portola Ave
Main St
Gateway Ave
10 (125)
132 (22)
9 (38)
0 (204)
0 (0)
0 (0)0 (0)
Main St/Montage St (N/S) & Portola
Ave (E/W) Main St (N/S) & Gateway Ave (E/W)
EXHIBIT D
1901
Project Trip Generation
The trips generated by the Project are shown on Table 1. Based on the ITE Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition and the Project’s land uses, the Project is expected to generate 654 trips during the weekday morning (a.m.) peak hour and 919 trips during the weekday afternoon (p.m.) peak hour, as shown in Table 1 – Estimated Trip Generation.
Due to the close proximity of the future Valley Link Isabel Station and the walkability of the designed community, a trip reduction was applied for trips taken by residents walking to transit. Based on an article entitled Vehicle Trip Reductions Impacts of Transit-Oriented Housing, in the Journal of Public Transportation, Vol. 11, No. 3, 2008, transit-oriented developments generate on average 47 percent fewer trips compared to the ITE rate. To be conservative, it is assumed that 10 percent of trips from the single family attached residences and 15 percent of trips from the multi-family residences are walk-to-transit trips. Given the half-mile radius of the project to the future Valley Link Isabel Station, these assumptions are reasonable for transit trips in a transit-oriented development in a suburban environment.
The adjusted total project vehicle trips for the a.m. peak hour is 585 and 846 for the p.m. peak hour.
EXHIBIT D
1902
Table 1: Estimated Project Trip Generation
Generation Method In Out Generation Method In Out
AM Rate/Equation PM Rate/Equation
Best Fit (LIN) 10 30 Best Fit (LIN) 29 20
T = 0.52(X) - 5.70 25% 75% T = 0.60(X) - 3.93 59% 41%
Best Fit (LIN) 5 16 Best Fit (LIN) 17 10
T = 0.52(X) - 5.70 25% 75% T = 0.60(X) - 3.93 59% 41%
Best Fit (LIN) 3 10 Best Fit (LIN) 11 7
T = 0.52(X) - 5.70 25% 75% T = 0.60(X) - 3.93 59% 41%
Best Fit (LIN) 14 41 Best Fit (LIN) 40 28
T = 0.52(X) - 5.70 25% 75% T = 0.60(X) - 3.93 59% 41%
Best Fit (LIN) 1 2 Best Fit (LIN) 5 2
T = 0.52(X) - 5.70 25% 75% T = 0.60(X) - 3.93 59% 41%
Best Fit (LIN) 8 26 Best Fit (LIN) 23 13
T = 0.44(X) - 11.61 23% 77% T = 0.39(X) + 0.34 61% 39%
Average 27 16 Average 64 66
1.73 62% 38% 5.19 49% 51%
Best Fit (LIN) 6 18 Best Fit (LIN) 18 13
T = 0.52(X) - 5.70 25% 75% T = 0.60(X) - 3.93 59% 41%
Best Fit (LIN) 8 26 Best Fit (LIN) 31 20
T = 0.44(X) - 11.61 23% 77% T = 0.39(X) + 0.34 61% 39%
Average 21 13 Average 50 52
1.73 62% 38% 5.19 49% 51%
Best Fit (LIN) 15 46 Best Fit (LIN) 27 19
T = 0.52(X) - 5.70 25% 75% T = 0.60(X) - 3.93 59% 41%
Best Fit (LIN) 50 136 Best Fit (LIN) 106 68
T = 0.44(X) - 11.61 23% 77% T = 0.39(X) + 0.34 61% 39%
Average 23 14 Average 53 56
1.73 62% 38% 5.19 49% 51%
TOTAL 654 585 191 395 919 846 473 373
174
10%
0%
43 109
PM PEAK HOUR
18 68
6 37
Adjusted
PM Trip
Total
49 27
130
31 15%
15% 50
102
46 15%
0%
0%
10%
41 22
55 33
24 10%
10%
10%
10%
10%
20 75
54 30
109
51 205
59 102
130
34 7
10%
10%
10%
10%
10%
15%
3 0% 43
10%
15%
0%
33 34
61 186
37 1000 Sq.
Ft. GLA
21.02 37 821-Shopping Plaza (40-
150k) - Supermarket-No
Dwelling
Units 524 219 221(3) - Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise)
10%
0%
15%
143 68 215(6) - Single-Family
Attached Housing
Parcel
N1
S1 & S3
S1
N2
N3-A
C5 & C3
C2-B
C2-A
C2-A
C1-A
C1-B
C1-B
S2 & S4
ITE Land Use Unit
Count
Size
Adjusted
AM Trip
Total
1000 Sq.
Ft. GLA
19.61 221(2) - Multifamily
Housing (Mid-Rise)
Dwelling
Units 62 27 215(5) - Single-Family Attached Housing
Dwelling
Units
215(3) - Single-Family
Attached Housing
Dwelling
Units 40 15 215(2) - Single-Family Attached Housing
Dwelling
Units 129 61
215 - Single-Family
Attached Housing
Dwelling
Units 98 45
34 821-Shopping Plaza (40-
150k) - Supermarket-No
Dwelling
Units
114 39 221(1) - Multifamily
Housing (Mid-Rise)
Dwelling
Units
17 3 215(4) - Single-Family
Attached Housing
1000 Sq.
Ft. GLA
25 43 821-Shopping Plaza (40-
150k) - Supermarket-No
Dwelling
Units 116 39
Dwelling
Units 56 24 215(1) - Single-Family Attached Housing
14 Split% Split%
Walk To
Transit
Percent
Reduction
Walk To
Transit
Reduction
AM PEAK HOUR
AM Trip
Sub
Total
PM Trip
Sub Total
EXHIBIT D
1903
Project Trip Distribution & Assignment
According to the proposed roadway network (shown in Figure 3), the project proposes to construct two north-south roadways, Main Street and C Street, and three east-west roadways, A Street, B Street and Gateway Avenue. There are six proposed access points to the existing roadway network, including two new intersections on Isabel Avenue (one at Gateway Avenue and one at A Street) and two intersections on Portola Avenue (at an existing traffic signal at Montage Drive / Main Street, and a right-in/right-out intersection at A Street), an extension of the existing Gateway Avenue from Shea Center Drive, and a new intersection of B Street at Shea Center Drive.
Trip distribution is a process that determines in what proportion vehicles are expected to travel between the project site and various destinations outside the project study area based on land use and regional and local travel patterns. Assignment determines the various routes that vehicles would take from the project site to each destination using the estimated trip distribution.
Figure 4 illustrates the overall trip distribution percentages developed for the proposed project. Net new trips associated with the proposed project were distributed as follows:
• 15 percent to/from Portola Avenue to the east,
• 15 percent to/from Portola Avenue/Airway Boulevard to the west, and • 69 percent to/from I-580 and SR-84 to the south of the project. • 1 percent to/from the future Valley Link station
Although an extremely small percentage of project trips may travel to/from Gateway Avenue to the west, for the purposes of this analysis, all the project trips were routed through the new intersections to evaluate a full-impact scenario.
Based on this distribution pattern, the trips were assigned through the proposed internal network to determine turning movement counts for the study intersections. See Figure 5 for the project trips peak hour assignment.
EXHIBIT D
1904
Shea Center Dr.
Isabel TOD
Figure 5: Project Trip Distribution
N
04/2024
XX% Trip Distribution
84 Portola Ave.
Isabel Ave.
Collier Canyon Rd.
Kitty Hawk Rd.
Gateway Ave.
B St.
A St.
C St.
Main St.
14 19
11 27
22 69%
1%
15%
15%
Existing Roadway Network
Proposed Roadway Network
Project Site
X Study Intersection
LEGEND
EXHIBIT D
1905
Shea Center Dr.
Isabel TOD
Figure 6: Project Trip Assignment
N
04/2024
Existing Roadway Network
Proposed Stop Sign Proposed Roadway Network
Project Site Proposed Traffic Signal
X Study Intersection
LEGEND
XX AM Peak Hour Trips
(XX) PM Peak Hour Trips
Gateway Ave.
84 Portola Ave.
Isabel Ave.
Collier Canyon Rd.
Kitty Hawk Rd.
B St.
A St.
C St.
Main St.
14 19
11 27
22 Existing Traffic Signal
##
Gateway Ave
Montage St
Main St
92 (202)
10 (24)
9 (17)17 (12)
8 (18)
Portola Ave
196 (157)
28 (60)
Portola Ave
Main St
Gateway Ave
60 (51)25 (19)
13 (15)
Main St/Montage St (N/S) & Portola
Ave (E/W) Main St (N/S) & Gateway Ave (E/W)
### 88 (194) 40 (78)
17 (16)
88 (83)
Portola Ave
Isabel Ave
Gateway Ave
Isabel Ave
22 (17) 13 (11)
3 (2)
1 (3)
39 (34)
22 (18)
188 (150)
Isabel AveIsabel Ave
11 (23)90 (84)
Portola Ave
9 (21)
19 (39)
A St
Isabel Ave
8 (16)14 (25)
Isabel Ave
1 (1)
Loop Road
39 (75)23 (21)
11 (13)
Isabel Ave (N/S) & Portola Ave (E/W) Isabel Ave (N/S) & Gateway Ave/Loop Road (E/W) Isabel Ave (N/S) & A St (E/W)
EXHIBIT D
1906
2040 Baseline plus Project
The build-out scenario is the 2040 Baseline plus Project. This consists of the 2040 Baseline No Project scenario described above plus Project generated trips. Figure 7 illustrates the Future plus Project traffic volumes for the a.m. and p.m. peak hours.
EXHIBIT D
1907
Shea Center Dr.
Isabel TOD
Figure 7: 2040 Baseline Plus Project Turning Movement Volumes N
04/2024
Existing Roadway Network
Proposed Roadway Network
Project Site
X Study Intersection
LEGEND
XX AM Peak Hour Volumes
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volumes
Gateway Ave.
84 Portola Ave.
Isabel Ave.
Collier Canyon Rd.
Kitty Hawk Rd.
B St.
A St.
C St.
Main St.
14 19
11 27
22 ###
83 (59)
12 (30)
580 (545)781 (505)
35 (90)
17 (43)
158 (280)
Portola Ave
Isabel Ave
Gateway Ave
Isabel Ave
2 (6)
302 (1,122) 6 (26) 13 (41)
191 (361)
425 (262)291 (221)
57 (44)
22 (84)
429 (530)
Isabel AveIsabel Ave
75 (9)
2 (6)75 (164)11 (23)54 (33)674 (1,028)
Portola Ave
643 (552)
329 (319)
14 (27)
A St
Isabel Ave
26 (16)562 (815)7 (18)
28 (19)
Isabel Ave
20 (53)
18 (54)
Loop Road
6 (19) 294 (234) 501 (379)
18 (21)
Isabel Ave (N/S) & Portola Ave (E/W) Isabel Ave (N/S) & Gateway Ave/Loop Road (E/W) Isabel Ave (N/S) & A St (E/W)
##
Gateway Ave 0 (0)
Montage St.
Main St
894 (510) 644 (461)
102 (31)87 (69)24 (37)
137 (125)
9 (17)0 (0)17 (12)
0 (0)
27 (129) 8 (18)
Portola Ave
381 (1,189) 440 (672)
28 (142) 0 (0)
Portola Ave
Main St
Gateway Ave
10 (125)
192 (73)
9 (38)
25 (223)
13 (15)
0 (0)0 (0)
Main St/Montage St. (N/S) & Portola
Ave (E/W) Main St (N/S) & Gateway Ave (E/W)
EXHIBIT D
1908
LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS
Level of Service (LOS) is a qualitative measure that describes operational conditions as they relate to the traffic stream and perceptions by motorists and passengers. The LOS generally describes these conditions in terms of such factors as speed and travel time, delays, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience and safety. The operational LOS are given letter designations from A to F, with A representing the free-flow operating conditions and F representing the severely congested flow with high delays. Intersections generally are the capacity-controlling locations with respect to traffic operations on arterial and collector streets. The LOS analysis is provided as information only to determine how well the intersection operates. The following sections provide detailed study methodology based on the type of intersections.
Signalized Intersections
The study intersections were analyzed using the Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition for signalized intersections (HCM 6th) which determines LOS based on average control delay per vehicle for the overall intersection during peak hour intersection operating conditions. Table 2 summarizes the relationship between the control delay and LOS for signalized intersections. The LOS assessment under all scenarios is based on proposed traffic controls and optimized signal timing including parameters for the pedestrian crossings.
EXHIBIT D
1909
Table 2: Level of Service Definitions for Signalized Intersections Level of Service Description
A
Very low control delay, up to 10 seconds per vehicle. Progression is extremely favorable, and most vehicles arrive during the green phase. Many vehicles do not stop at all. Short cycle lengths may tend to contribute to low delay values.
B
Control delay greater than 10 and up to 20 seconds per vehicle. There is good progression or short cycle lengths or both. More vehicles stop causing higher levels of delay.
C
Control delay greater than 20 and up to 35 seconds per vehicle. Higher delays are caused by fair progression or longer cycle lengths or both. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear. Cycle failure occurs when a given green phase does not serve queued vehicles, and overflow occurs. The number of vehicles stopping is significant, though many still pass through the intersection without stopping.
D
Control delay greater than 35 and up to 55 seconds per vehicle. The influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays may result from some combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high volumes. Many vehicles stop, the proportion of vehicles not stopping declines. Individual cycle failures are noticeable.
E
Control delay greater than 55 and up to 80 seconds per vehicle. The limit of acceptable delay. High delays usually indicate poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high volumes. Individual cycle failures are frequent.
F
Control delay in excess of 80 seconds per vehicle. Unacceptable to most drivers.
Oversaturation, arrival flow rates exceed the capacity of the intersection. Many individual cycle failures. Poor progression and long cycle lengths may also be contributing factors to higher delay.
Source: Transportation Research Board’s (TRB) Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition Unsignalized Intersections
LOS ratings for stop-sign controlled intersections are based on the average control delay expressed in seconds per vehicle. At one- or two-way stop controlled intersections, the control delay is calculated for each movement, not for the intersection as a whole. Table 3 summarizes the relationship between delay and LOS for stop-controlled intersections. The delay ranges for unsignalized intersections are lower than for signalized intersections, as drivers expect less delay at stop-controlled intersections.
Each of the study intersections were analyzed using Synchro Version 12 software. The LOS assessment under all scenarios is based on current traffic controls unless otherwise noted.
EXHIBIT D
1910
Table 3: Level of Service Definitions for Stop Controlled Intersections Level of Service Description
A
Very low control delay less than 10 seconds per vehicle for each movement subject to delay.
B
Low control delay greater than 10 and up to 15 seconds per vehicle for each movement subject to delay.
C
Acceptable control delay greater than 15 and up to 25 seconds per vehicle for each movement subject to delay.
D
Tolerable control delay greater than 25 and up to 35 seconds per vehicle for each movement subject to delay.
E
Limit of tolerable control delay greater than 35 and up to 50 seconds per vehicle for each movement subject to delay.
F
Unacceptable control delay in excess of 50 seconds per vehicle for each movement subject to delay.
Source: Transportation Research Board’s (TRB) Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition Level of Service Results
The intersection level of service was calculated for the five study intersections for the 2040 Baseline No Project scenario and two 2040 Baseline plus Project scenarios. The two Project scenarios evaluated was with one lane and with two lanes westbound on Gateway Avenue between Isabel Avenue and C Street.
The results are shown on Table 4.
Additionally, these LOS results were compared to the LOS results in the original INSP Traffic Study for informational purposes. Due to difference in signal timing parameters, the LOS analysis in the INSP study are not a direct match to the LOS analysis in this study.
All intersections are project to operate within acceptable LOS based on City adopted LOS standards. The City of Livermore General Plan policy for LOS is mid-level D except in the Downtown Area and near freeway interchanges. For intersections near freeway interchanges, the upper limit of acceptable level of service is LOS E. It is noted that Isabel Avenue at Gateway Avenue is projected to operate at LOS E and this is acceptable for intersections near freeway interchanges.
EXHIBIT D
1911
Table 4: Intersection Level of Service Results
1 As reported in the Traffic Study for the DEIR for INSP dated January 12, 2018 prepared by Kittleson & Associates 2 LOS result is based on three eastbound and westbound travel lanes, compared to two lanes in the other scenarios * Not studied in the Traffic Study for the DEIR for INSP
INTERSECTION FUNCTIONALITY
Four key intersections were analyzed in depth to determine appropriate traffic control types, number of travel lanes, and appropriate lengths of left turn pockets. Three of the intersections are access points to the project, and one of the intersections is the busiest internal intersection within the project. The 2040 Baseline plus Project traffic volumes, as shown in Figure 7, were used for this analysis.
A traffic signal warrant analysis is an evaluation of traffic conditions, including geometry, speed limit, and traffic volumes, to determine if a traffic signal is an appropriate traffic control device for an intersection. If a traffic signal is not warranted, then an alternative is for a stop sign controlled intersection, either an allway stop or side street stop control.
Traffic signal warrant criteria are provided in the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD) and there are nine criteria known as warrants. Since these intersections do not yet exist, some data is not available yet, such as four-hour and eight-hour traffic volumes, number of pedestrians, number of collisions, etc. Therefore, the peak hour warrant (Warrant 3) was used to evaluate three of the Delay
(sec)
LOS Delay
(sec)
LOS Delay
(sec)
LOS Delay
(sec)
LOS
AM * * 9 A 14.9 B 34.7 D
PM * * 11.5 B 30.7 D 38.9 E
AM 28.2 C 20.9 C 20.9 C 20.9 C
PM 45.4 D 24.2 C 24.5 C 24.5 C
AM 34.4 C 18.9 B 29.9 C 58.2 E
PM 52.1 D 24.4 C 74.1 E 78.9 E
AM 27.4 C 13.3 B 17.1 B 17.1 B
PM 52.0 D 19.1 B 27.7 C 27.7 C
AM 29.8 C2 21.2 C 25.9 C 25.9 C
PM 21.0 C2 44.6 D 50.2 D 50.2 D
Isabel Ave @
Gateway Ave
Isabel Ave @ A St
Portola Ave @
Main St
Intersection
Name
14 19
22 11
Isabel Ave &
Portola Ave
27 Gateway Ave @
Main St
2040 Baseline plus
Project - 1 WB Lane
Gateway
2040
Cumulative plus
Project (INSP1
)
Study
Intersection
Number
2040 Baseline
No Project
2040 Baseline plus
Project - 2 WB
Lane Gateway Peak
Hour
EXHIBIT D
1912
four study intersections, since one of the intersections is already controlled by a traffic signal. The warrant analysis is located in Appendix B.
To determine appropriate lane configurations and turn pocket lengths, the AM and PM peak hour analysis was conducted using Simtraffic component of the Synchro 12 software to determine the 95th percentile vehicular queues. Simtraffic is a microsimulation model whereas Synchro is a macrosimulation model, thus Simtraffic has the ability to be more realistic by evaluating the impact of queuing and blocking. The 95th percentile queue is the length of the line of vehicles that will not be exceeded 95 percent of the time during the peak hour. The Simtraffic analysis for the 95th percentile are provided in Appendix C.
EXHIBIT D
1913
Isabel Avenue at Gateway Avenue (#14)
Gateway Avenue is a proposed east-west street within the project, south of A Street that will intersect Isabel Avenue with a proposed traffic signal. This intersection is proposed to be 550 feet north of the existing signalized intersection of Isabel Avenue at I-580 westbound off-ramps, and 650 feet south of the proposed signalized intersection of Isabel Avenue at A Street. Gateway Avenue at the intersection approach is proposed to have three eastbound lanes, two which are right turn lanes, and one is a left turn lane. Isabel Avenue is proposed to have two through lanes, two left turn lanes, and a buffered bike lane in the northbound direction. In the southbound direction, two through lanes, one right turn lane and a buffered bike lane is proposed. There is a solid median as well as portion of painted median for a future southbound left turn lane. See Figure 8 for the proposed intersection configuration.
Based on the Warrant 3 analysis, a warrant for traffic signal is satisfied for both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours at this intersection. It is recommended that the intersection of Isabel Avenue at Gateway Avenue be controlled by a traffic signal. Signal warrant analysis worksheets are provided in Appendix B.
A Simtraffic analysis was conducted to determine the appropriate length of the turn pockets at the intersection. Table 5 shows the 95th percentile queue lengths for the approaches to the Isabel Avenue at Gateway Avenue intersection for the 2040 Baseline scenario and the 2040 Baseline plus Project scenario with one westbound through lane on Gateway Avenue and with two westbound through lanes on Gateway Avenue.
Table 5: 95th Percentile Queue Lengths at Isabel Avenue at Gateway Avenue Study
Intersection Lane Group Peak Hour
95th Queue
(ft) 2040
Baseline
95th Queue (ft)
2040 Baseline Plus
Project - One Lane
Gateway*
95th Queue (ft)
2040 Baseline Plus
Project - Two Lane
Gateway*
Proposed
Turn Bay
Length (ft)
Isabel Ave @
Gateway Ave
Northbound
Left
AM 196 484 241
205
PM 157 462 243
Southbound
Left
AM 67 91 91
120
PM 88 138 153
Eastbound
Left
AM 0 55 49
44 PM 83 88 90
Eastbound
Right
AM 72 88 91
41 PM 219 90 87
BOLD indicates that the 95th percentile queue length is estimated to exceed the proposed turn bay length
EXHIBIT D
1914
The project proposes to provide two northbound left turn pockets approximately 205 feet long. The Simtraffic analysis shows that for the 2040 Baseline plus Project with one westbound lane on Gateway Avenue, the calculated 95th percentile queue for the northbound left turn lane is 484 feet in the a.m. and 462 feet in the p.m. peak hours, which would drastically exceed the proposed turn pocket lengths. A lane utilization factor of 0.52 was utilized for the northbound left turn movement to account for the high proportion of westbound through volumes at Gateway. The westbound receiving lanes on Gateway Avenue are identified as one through lane and one right turn lane. Therefore, more vehicles will stack in the leftmost northbound left turn lane with the anticipation of continuing westbound on Gateway.
Therefore, one lane on Gateway Avenue is not recommended.
In order to appropriately accommodate the queue for the northbound left turn movement, an additional westbound through lane on Gateway Avenue, from Isabel Avenue to C Street, was evaluated. With two westbound through lanes, both northbound left-turn lanes will be more evenly utilized, and thus a 0.90 lane utilization factor was used in the analysis. The Simtraffic analysis shows that the calculated 95th percentile queue is 241 feet in the a.m. and 243 feet in the p.m. peak hours. This would still exceed the proposed turn pocket length by approximately two vehicles, and these two vehicles can be accommodated within the transitional taper so the queue would not block through traffic. It is recommended that the project provide two westbound lanes on Gateway Avenue between Isabel Avenue and C Street. At the C Street intersection, the recommended lane configuration based on the turning movement volumes is one through lane and one left-turn only lane onto southbound C Street.
For the eastbound leg of the intersection, the 95th percentile queue is calculated to be 55 feet for the left lane and 88 feet for the right lane during the a.m. peak hour and 88 feet for the left lane and 90 feet for the right lane during the p.m. peak hour. Although the eastbound queues exceed the turn pocket length, they do not extend past the proposed all-way stop intersection of Main Street. Given the low speed and low volume characteristics of Main Street and Gateway Avenue, as well as the physical constraints, this is an acceptable condition.
For the southbound left turn, the 95th percentile queue is calculated to be 153 feet during the p.m. peak hour. The proposed 120 foot long turn pocket will accommodate this peak queue within the turn pocket and the taper length.
With the recommended configuration with two westbound lanes on Gateway, the intersection operates at LOS C during the a.m. peak period and LOS E during the p.m. peak periods. Based on the City’s General Plan policy, intersections adjacent to I-580 are required to maintain a LOS of E or better.
EXHIBIT D
1915
Isabel Crossings
Figure 8: Isabel Ave & Gateway Avenue Intersection Configuration N
04/2024
EXHIBIT D
1916
Isabel Avenue at A Street (#19)
A Street is a proposed east-west street within the project that will intersect Isabel Avenue with a new traffic signal, approximately 720 feet south of the signalized intersection of Portola Avenue. A Street at this intersection is proposed to have two eastbound lanes, one right turn and one left turn and a bike lane. Isabel Avenue at this intersection is proposed to have two through lanes and bike lanes for both the northbound and southbound directions with one southbound right turn lane and one northbound left turn lane. There is a painted median for a future southbound left turn lane. See Figure 9 for the proposed intersection configuration. This intersection is expected to operate at LOS B and LOS C in the AM and PM peak period, respectively.
Based on the Warrant 3 analysis, a warrant for traffic signal is satisfied for both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Isabel Avenue north of I-580 is functionally classified as a major street in the City’s General Plan and south of I-580, Isabel Avenue is classified as a highway, as it is identified as State Route 84. Based on the major roadway classification, the 45 mile per hour speed limit and the goal of organizing traffic flow and prioritizing walkability and pedestrian access, a traffic signal is the recommended traffic control device at Isabel Avenue at A Street.
A Simtraffic analysis was conducted to determine the appropriate length of the turn pockets at the intersection. Table 6 shows the 95th percentile queue lengths for the approaches to the Isabel Avenue at A Street intersection for the 2040 Baseline scenario and the 2040 Baseline plus Project scenario, along with the queue length that is added by the project and the proposed turn bay length.
Table 6: 95th Percentile Queue Lengths at Isabel Avenue at A Street Study
Intersection Lane Group Peak Hour
95th Queue (ft)
2040 Baseline
95th Queue (ft) 2040
Baseline Plus Project -
Two Lane Gateway*
Proposed
Turn Bay
Length (ft)
Isabel Ave @
A St
Northbound
Left
AM 169 215
200
PM 151 186
Southbound
Left
AM 24 24
101
PM 38 37
Eastbound
Left
AM 26 43
95 PM 53 67
BOLD indicates that the queue length is estimated to exceed the proposed turn bay length
EXHIBIT D
1917
The project proposes to provide one northbound left turn pocket approximately 200 feet long, which can in total accommodate approximately eight vehicles. The calculated 95th percentile queue is 215 feet during the a.m. peak hour and 186 feet during the p.m. peak hour. The northbound left turn queue can be accommodated when the transitional taper of the turn pocket is included. The northbound left turn pocket is an appropriate length.
EXHIBIT D
1918
Isabel Crossings
Figure 9: Isabel Avenue & A Street Intersection Configuration N
04/2024
EXHIBIT D
1919
Main Street at Gateway Avenue (#27)
Main Street is a proposed north-south street within the project that intersects both A Street and Gateway Avenue. Both streets are proposed with one lane in each direction with Class III bicycle routes, except the east leg of Gateway Avenue has two westbound lanes, one right-turn and one through lane. See Figure 10 for the proposed intersection configuration.
The peak hour traffic signal warrant analysis, Warrant #3, was conducted at this intersection. This analysis determined that a traffic signal is not warranted at this location based on the projected turning movements during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours.
This intersection was evaluated with all-way stop sign control. With two westbound through lanes on Gateway Avenue, this intersection operates at LOS B with 14.9 seconds average delay during the AM peak hour and LOS D with 30.7 seconds of average delay during the PM peak hour. With only one westbound through on Gateway Avenue, the LOS degrades to LOS D during the a.m. peak hour and LOS E during the p.m. peak hour.
The critical queue length is for the westbound through to ensure that the queue does not extend into the adjacent intersection at Isabel Avenue. The 95th percentile westbound queue is 151 feet and 137 feet, in the AM and PM peak periods, respectively. The queue is accommodated within the 200 feet long lane and is not projected to extend into the adjacent intersection. The intersection configuration is appropriate.
Table 7: 95th Percentile Queue Lengths at Gateway Avenue at Main Street Gateway Ave
@ Main St
Eastbound
Thru-Left
AM 84 145
350
PM 153 176
Westbound
Through
AM 127 151
200
PM 100 137
Westbound
Thru-Right
AM 138 164
189
PM 109 139
BOLD indicates that the 95th percentile queue length is estimated to exceed the proposed turn bay length
EXHIBIT D
1920
Isabel Crossings
Figure 10: Main Street & Gateway Avenue Intersection Configuration N
04/2024
EXHIBIT D
1921
Portola Avenue at Main Street (#22)
The Project proposes to add a south leg to the existing signalized intersection of Portola Avenue at Main Street/Montage Drive. This intersection currently exists as a T-intersection with three eastbound and three westbound lanes with bike lanes. In the southbound direction, there is one left turn lane and one right turn lane.
In the recent INSP amendment in November 2022, Portola Avenue between Collier Canyon Road and Isabel Avenue is proposed to be reduced from six travel lanes to four travel lanes to accommodate a Class IV separated bicycle lane. The Project proposes to implement the lane reduction along with a Class IV bicycle lane along the Portola Avenue frontage of the project. See Figure 11 for the project’s proposed intersection configuration.
The Project adds left-turning vehicles to the existing westbound u-turn lane on Portola Avenue to access the project. For the westbound left turn pocket, the calculated 95th percentile queue is 133 feet during the a.m. peak hour and 131 feet during the p.m. peak hour. Based on vehicle queues, the westbound left turn pocket length of 298 feet is more than adequate.
The 95 percentile northbound left turn queue is 130 feet during the a.m. peak hour and 200 feet during the p.m. peak hour. The proposed turn bay length is 108 feet. The northbound queue would extend into the through-right turn lane, which is acceptable since the northbound left turn is the dominant movement.
As shown on Table 4, this intersection operates at LOS C with 25.9 seconds of delay in the a.m. peak hour and LOS D with 50.2 seconds of delay during the p.m. peak hour. This includes the reduction of travel lanes on Portola Avenue from three through lanes to two with the inclusion of the Class IV bike lanes on Portola Avenue. It should be noted that the LOS results from the 2040 Baseline from the INSP are based on three travel lanes on Portola Avenue so the LOS results are not a direct comparison.
Table 8: 95th Percentile Queue Lengths at Portola Avenue at Main Street / Montage Drive Study
Intersection Lane Group Peak Hour
95th Queue (ft)
2040 Baseline
95th Queue (ft) 2040
Baseline Plus Project
- Two Lane Gateway*
Proposed Turn
Bay Length (ft)
Main St/
Montage Dr
@ Portola
Northbound
Left
AM 103 130
108
PM 65 200
Westbound
Left
AM 120 133
298
PM 103 131
BOLD indicates that the 95th percentile queue length is estimated to exceed the proposed turn bay length
EXHIBIT D
1922
Isabel Crossings
Figure 11: Portola Avenue & Main Street Intersection Configuration N
04/2024
EXHIBIT D
1923
BICYCLE CIRCULATION
The INSP identifies several existing and proposed bicycle facilities in the vicinity of the project as shown on Figure 12. Although the project’s proposed roadway network does not exactly match the layout in the INSP, the key east-west and north-south running roadways correlate with the appropriate bicycle facility designation.
A Street is the northern east-west roadway and is proposed to accommodate Class IIB buffered bicycle lanes with a two-foot striped buffer and a five-foot bike lane, which conforms to the INSP.
Gateway Avenue is the southern east-west roadway and is proposed to accommodate Class III bicycle route, which conforms to the INSP. The project plans indicate Class III Shared Lane pavement markings at the beginning of each intersection and at 250 foot intervals for all Class III Bike Routes per California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD) Section 9C.07.
B Street is a partial east-west roadway at the southern edge of the project and is proposed to accommodate Class III bicycle route.
C Street is a partial north-south roadway that connects A Street to Gateway Avenue and C Street. It is proposed to accommodate Class III bicycle route, which conforms to the INSP.
Shea Center Drive is the designated north-south roadway with a Class II bike lane designation in the INSP.
The Project proposes to provide Class II bicycle lanes on Shea Center Drive along with a center two-way left turn lane.
Main Street is the eastern north-south roadway and it is proposed to accommodate a Class III bicycle route. It should be noted that bicycle designations on roadways with angled parking can cause potential conflicts; however, since this short roadway is designed with bulb-outs to reduce vehicle speeds, a bicycle route designation is an acceptable design.
There is some research that indicates that back-in angle parking reduces this conflict by increasing visibility to bicyclists and approaching vehicles (Federal Highway Administration Technical Document titled On-Street Motor Vehicle Parking and the Bikeway Selection Process dated February 2021). A back-in angled parking maneuver is easier than a parallel parking maneuver and it is much easier to exit. Back-in angled parking can be considered on Main Street between A Street and Gateway Avenue.
EXHIBIT D
1924
In the recent INSP amendment in November 2022, Portola Avenue between Collier Canyon Road and Isabel Avenue was proposed to be reduced from six travel lanes to four travel lanes to accommodate a Class IV separated bicycle lane. This proposed Class IV bicycle lane is proposed to continue east and west along Portola, as well as south along Isabel Avenue to the intersection of I-580 westbound off-ramp. The Project proposes to implement the lane reduction along with a Class IV bicycle lane along the Portola Avenue frontage of the project. The project also proposes to modify Isabel Avenue to provide a Class IV separated bike lane in the southbound direction.
EXHIBIT D
1925
Existing Class II Bike Lane
Existing Class I Multi-Use Trail
Proposed Class II Bike Lane
Proposed Class III Bike Route
Proposed Class I Multi-Use Trail
Isabel TOD
Figure 12: Existing Bicycle Facilities Map
N
TJKM
089-402 | 03/2023
Project Site
LEGEND
N. Canyons Pkwy.
Campus Loop
Portola Ave
Gateway Ave. Isabel Ave.
Campus Hill Dr.
Collier Canyon Rd.
Kitty Hawk Rd.
Airway Blvd.
Constitution Dr.
580
84 84
Future Isabel Valley Link Station
B St.
A St.
Main St.
14 19
11 22
27 EXHIBIT D
1926
PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION
A key marker of a successful transit-oriented multi-use development is vibrant, pedestrian-friendly design.
The INSP identifies several proposed pedestrian facilities in the vicinity of the project area, such as pedestrian streets, trails, and pedestrian undercrossings, as shown on Figure 13. The proposed project is within the 10-minute walkshed of the Isabel Valley Link Station.
Pedestrian streets are identified as the main walking routes through the neighborhood and are designed to be comfortable for pedestrians with wider sidewalks and landscape strips, traffic calming measures (such as corner bulb-outs), and small block sizes for ease of crossing the street.
Gateway Avenue from Shea Center Drive to Isabel Avenue and C Street from A Street to the south limits of the project are designated pedestrian streets in the INSP. Gateway Avenue is designed per the standard in the INSP with six-foot wide public utility easements, a six-foot wide sidewalk, a six-foot wide landscape strip, an eight-foot wide parking lane, and ten-foot wide travel lanes.
INSP Policy P-TRA-1 requires short block lengths to create a walkable street grid. Block sizes should have a maximum length of 600 feet, and where block lengths exceed 400 feet, mid-block crossings shall be installed. Six blocks within the project are closer to 600 feet in length. Mid-block crosswalks with chokers are proposed on these blocks. Landscaping should not exceed 30 inches in height in this mid-block bulbout area to maintain proper sight distance.
All the sidewalks within the project meet the INSP design standard with a minimum of six-foot wide sidewalks and six-foot wide landscape strips. Main Street between Gateway Avenue and A Street is designed with a 12-foot sidewalk, designated as four feet as store frontage and eight feet of walkable area, along with the four-foot landscape strip.
INSP Policy P-TRA-11 requires the incorporation of traffic calming measures to slow vehicle speeds and increase the visibility of pedestrian crossings. All of the internal roadway intersections are designed with intersection curb bulb-outs that bring the curb to the edge of the travel lane. This minimizes the pedestrian roadway crossing distance, increases pedestrian visibility, and reduces vehicle speeds through the intersection. The mid-block crosswalk chokers also act as a traffic calming measure.
Based on the above features, all the internal roadways are designed as pedestrian streets based on the standards in the INSP.
INSP Policy P-TRA-8 requires four-legged crosswalks at new signalized or stop-controlled intersections.
All internal intersections are proposed to install four-legged crosswalks. The project proposes crosswalks across all legs of new intersections. At the intersection of Isabel Avenue at Gateway, the project proposes 15 foot extra-wide crosswalks with protected median refuges.
EXHIBIT D
1927
Mile Radius from Isabel Valley Link Station
Proposed Sidewalk
Proposed Crosswalks
Isabel TOD
Figure 13: Proposed Crosswalks
N
04/2024
Project Site Limits
LEGEND
X Study Intersection
84 Portola Ave.
Isabel Ave.
Collier Canyon Rd.
Kitty Hawk Rd.
Gateway Ave. Shea Center Dr.
B St.
A St.
C St.
Main St.
14 19
11 22
27 EXHIBIT D
1928
TRANSIT & FUTURE VALLEY LINK ACCESS
The project vicinity is currently served by one bus line, the 30R, operated by the Livermore-Amador Valley Transit Authority, which serves Dublin, Pleasanton and Livermore. This rapid line with service every 15 minutes on weekdays connects the Lawrence Livermore Lab, the Livermore Transit Center, which also serves as an ACE station, the Las Positas Community College and the East Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station.
Valley Link is a future rail transit service to bridge the gap between BART and the Altamont Commuter Express (ACE) rail lines. It also is to improve connections between the greater San Francisco Bay Area and San Joaquin County with a station starting in Lathrop and ending with a connection to the East Dublin/Pleasanton BART station. Isabel Valley Link Station is adjacent to the East Dublin/Pleasanton BART station. Valley Link is proposed to include train service every 12 minutes during the peak commuter periods and every 24 minutes during the off-peak periods. Based on the INSP, the percentage of expected riders that will arrive to the station by driving and parking at the station is 46 percent and 54 percent will either walk, bike, transfer from bus, or be dropped off.
It is anticipated that with the development of the Isabel Valley Link Station, additional bus routes may be added to service this station. The INSP identifies a potential bus route along Gateway Avenue, from the loop road that accesses Isabel Valley Link Station access on the north side of I-580 through the proposed project. Figure 12 identifies existing transit facilities.
Gateway Avenue is also a designated pedestrian corridor in the INSP with ten-foot wide vehicle travel lanes adjacent to an eight-foot parking strip. Based on Caltrans Design Standards, a low volume street that services buses should be at least 11 feet wide. It is noted that a bus can be physically accommodated on a 10-foot wide street at a low speed, which continues to prioritize walkability. However, this is a challenging balance.
However, with the intersection curb bulb-outs, there is not sufficient width for the bus to turn from Gateway Avenue. Based on the current proposed design, the bus route is limited to straight through movements on Gateway Avenue to Collier Canyon Road.
Isabel Avenue is also a designated bus route per the INSP. Typically, bus stops are provided at the egress of a signalized intersection to minimize stops. Bus turnouts are proposed along Isabel Avenue at the A Street intersection. As shown on Figure 9, the project proposes a northbound bus turnout just north of the intersection and a southbound bus turnout just south of the intersection.
EXHIBIT D
1929
Isabel TOD
Figure 14: Transit Facilities Map
N
TJKM
089-402 | 03/2023
Project Site
LEGEND
Route 30R
Bus Stop
Future Isabel Valley Link Station
84 84
N. Canyons Pkwy.
Portola Ave.
Gateway Ave. Isabel Ave.
Collier Canyon Rd.
Kitty Hawk Rd.
Constitution Dr.
580
EXHIBIT D
1930
TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT & PARKING
Transportation demand management (TDM) is a set of strategies aimed at encouraging and facilitating walking, bicycling, and transit use with the aim of reducing solo occupant vehicles. TDM strategies tend to be operational in nature, however, they work in tandem with strategic land use and community design.
Examples of strategies include identifying a TDM coordinator, education on available transportation alternatives, parking management, transit or ridesharing passes, or subsidies and preferential parking for carpools. It is recommended that this project develop a complete TDM plan to be enacted upon occupancy.
Parking management is a complex strategy in balancing the parking needs of the mixed-use development while not providing too much parking, such that active modes and transit use are encouraged. Parking will need to be monitored as part of the TDM program.
The INSP identifies specific parking requirements for both vehicles and bicycles based on the development size.
EXHIBIT D
1931
Vehicle Parking Requirements
The INSP identifies vehicle parking requirements within the project area based on the various types of residential and commercial developments as shown in Table 8.
Table 9: Vehicle Parking Standards
Source: Isabel Neighborhood Specific Plan document
Residential Land Use Size
Minimum Parking
Space per Unit
Maximum Parking
Spaces per Unit
Studio/1 Bedroom 1.00 1.25
2 Bedroom 1.50 2.00
3+ Bedrooms 2.00 2.50
Visitor Parking 0.13 0.25
Studio 0.75 1.00
1 Bedroom 1.00 1.50
2+ Bedrooms 1.25 2.00
Visitor Parking 0.13 0.25
Studio / 1 Bedroom 0.75 1.00
2 Bedroom 1.25 1.50
3+ Bedrooms 1.25 1.50
Visitor Parking 0.00 0.00
Non-Residential Land
Use
Minimum of One
Parking Space per
Square Foot
Maximum of One
Parking Space per
Square Foot
Neighborhood
Commercial 600 300
Transition and Village
Residential Center and
Core
AB2345 Density Bonus
Affordable Housing
EXHIBIT D
1932
Table 9 shows the minimum and maximum number of parking spaces required for each parcel of development within the proposed project.
Table 10: Vehicle Parking Requirements per Parcel
Residential Parking Commercial Parking
Parcel Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum
N1 208 269.5
N2 119 154
N3-A 85 110
C1-A 132 171
C1-B 117 177 33 65
C2-A 128 197 42 83
C2-B 36 47
C3 96 124
C5 179 231
S1 191 293 53 84
S2 182 246
S3-A 245 290
S3-B 154 192
S4 50 79
Total 1920 2579 127 233
The parking provided by the project meets the minimum requirements of 2,047 spaces by providing 2,291 spaces and does not exceed the maximum of 2,812 spaces.
It should be noted that the parking included by the project also consists of public on-street parallel and angled parking. This parking should be monitored to determine if parking is being used as spill-over parking from the Isabel Valley Link Station. Additionally, the parking on Main Street should allow for adequate turn-over to service the retail components of the project. A typical threshold for implementing parking management strategies is 85 percent occupancy. Typical parking management strategies include time limited parking, paid parking or parking permit programs. This could be a component of the TDM Plan.
The parking proposed by the project is adequate and appropriate. It is recommended that as the details of each parcel are developed, the parking design should continue to be evaluated for placement of visitor and resident parking, in addition to retail and commercial parking spaces.
EXHIBIT D
1933
Bicycle Parking Requirements
Bicycle parking standards are outlined in the INSP, with an update adopted in November 2022. The bicycle parking standards are shown in Table 5. There are two types of bicycle parking, long-term bike parking and short-term bike parking.
Long-term bike parking is defined as a secure enclosed space, either in a private residential garage, a secure enclosed bicycle locker, or an indoor, secure room dedicated to store bicycles. Long-term bike parking is aimed for residents in the residential areas or for employees of commercial space.
Short-term bike parking is defined as a secure bicycle parking space, usually bike racks, usually located near the entrance to the destination. Short-term bike parking is aimed for visitors of residents and visitors or customers of the commercial space.
EXHIBIT D
1934
Table 11: Bicycle Parking Standards based on the INSP
Land Use
Number of Bike Parking Spaces
Required
Residential Transition and Village
One Long Term Bike Parking per Unit
One Short Term Bike Parking per 20 Units
Residential Center and Core
One Long Term Bike Space per Four Bedrooms
One Short Term Bike Parking per 20 Units
Neighborhood Commercial One per 1,400 square feet
General Commercial One per 2,800 square feet with at least 25% Long term and 25% Short term
Office-Core One per 1,600 square feet with at least
25% Long Term and 25% Short Term
Office and Business Park One per 3,200 square feet with at least 25% Long Term and 25% Short Term
Source: Isabel Neighborhood Specific Plan document
EXHIBIT D
1935
Table 12: Bicycle Parking Requirements per Parcel
Parcel Zone Residential
Units Bedrooms
Neighborhood
Commercial
Sq. Ft.
Long Term Bike
Parking
Short Term
Bike Parking
N1 Village 98 362 98 5
N2 Village 56 224 56 3
N3-A Transition 40 160 40 2
C1-A Village 62 217 62 3
C1-B Center 114 183 19,610 53 13
C2-A Core 116 220 25000 64 15
C2-B Transition 17 68 68 1
C3 Transition 45 171 171 2
C5 Transition 84 320 320 4
S1 Core 172 328 21020 90 16
S2 Transition 102 236 236 5
S3-A Core 200 272 68 10
S3-B Core (Affordable) 152 280 70 8
S4 Core 41 97 24 2
Total 1299 3138 65630 1321 83
Table 12 lists the bicycle parking required for each parcel based on the proposed land uses and the bicycle parking standards. It is recommended that the proposed project identify how the bicycle parking standards will be met, including identifying the location of long-term and short-term bicycle parking within each parcel for all the land use types.
Additionally, the recreational and open space areas, such as the plazas, recreational center, and a neighborhood park, should provide short-term bicycle parking near the entrances to each amenity.
EXHIBIT D
1936
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
This section summarizes all of the recommendations for changes to the proposed project based on the traffic analysis and conformance to the INSP.
1. It is recommended that westbound Gateway Avenue at Main Street consist of two westbound through lanes.
2. It is recommended that the intersection of Main Street and Gateway Avenue be operated with all-way stop-sign control.
3. It is recommended that the signal timing for Isabel Avenue at Gateway Avenue and Isabel Avenue at A Street is optimized to reduce northbound left-turn queue lengths during the a.m. and p.m. peak hour.
4. It is recommended that this project develop a complete TDM plan to be enacted upon occupancy.
5. It is recommended that as the details of each parcel are developed, the parking design should continue to be evaluated for placement of visitor and resident parking, in addition to retail and commercial parking spaces.
6. It is recommended that the proposed project identify how the bicycle parking standards will be met, including identifying the location of long-term and short-term bicycle parking within each parcel for all the land use types.
EXHIBIT D
1937
Appendix A
Livermore Isabel Transit Village Modified Project Analysis
EXHIBIT D
1938
CALIFORNIA | FLORIDA | TEXAS
Corporate Office 4305 Hacienda Drive, Suite 550, Pleasanton, CA 94588 925.463.0611 www.TJKM.com 1 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
The purpose of this technical memorandum is to determine if the potential transportation impacts of the modifications to the Isabel Neighborhood Specific Plan (INSP) proposed by the Livermore Transit Village project (Modified Project) require “major revisions” to the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) certified on May 14, 2018 and Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) dated September 30, 2020 for the INSP. Major revisions to the EIR and SEIR would be required if the Modified Project causes a new, previously unidentified significant transportation effect or if it increases the severity of previously identified significant transportation effects in the EIR and SEIR. If no major revisions are required, no further CEQA transportation analysis would be required for the Modified Project. As analyzed below, the Modified Project reduces the development size and density of the INSP. As a result, the Modified Project produces fewer trips than identified in the INSP. Because fewer trips are produced, no major revisions are needed to be made to the EIR and SEIR.
ISABEL NEIGHBORHOOD SPECIFIC PLAN
The INSP is a specific plan that provides policy objectives, land use regulations, and development standards within approximately 1,138-acres in northwest Livermore, approximately 2.5 miles from the City’s downtown neighborhood. The INSP was adopted in November 2020 and amended in November 2022. The INSP plans for development that supports and complements the future Isabel Station for the Valley Link rail system.
The INSP allows the development of up to 4,095 new multi-family housing units and approximately
2.1 million square feet of new office and commercial development.
The EIR and SEIR included and relied on a traffic study prepared by Kittleson & Associates (Traffic Study). The Traffic Study evaluated the INSP’s potential transportation impacts on intersection level of service, freeway segments, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, transit service and emergency access, as well as conformance with adopted plans, policies and programs related to the performance and safety of the circulation system, taking in account all available modes of travel. Relying on the Traffic Study, the SEIR determined that the INSP would result in significant and unavoidable impacts on roadway circulation systems and freeway and arterial segments in the vicinity of the INSP.
Date: July 17, 2023 (revised May 14, 2024)
To: Bill Myers
Harridge Development Group
From: Anna Vickroy, PE, TE
Senior Transportation Engineer, TJKM
Subject: Livermore Isabel Transit Village Modified Project Analysis
EXHIBIT D
1939
2 MODIFIED PROJECT
The Modified Project is a proposed mixed-used development located on approximately 45 acres at the southwest corner of Isabel Avenue and Portola Avenue in the City of Livermore (Site). It is bordered by Isabel Avenue to the east, Portola Avenue to the north, I-580 to the south and existing office developments to the west. A vicinity map is included in Figure 1.
The Modified Project would be constructed within and would modify Subareas 3b and 3c of the INSP.
Subareas 3b and 3c are core areas of the INSP with a general objective of creating a vibrant residential neighborhood with retail uses that generate transit ridership. The Modified Project proposes to construct 1,299 dwelling units (townhomes and mid-rise multi-family apartments) and approximately 65,635 square feet of neighborhood serving commercial space on the 45-acre Site within the core of the INSP. The commercial space is designed on the street level of multi-story buildings with residential apartments located above. Amenities within this mixed-use development include a neighborhood park, a recreation center that includes a pool, and open space at the corners of the retail-lined street including a pocket plaza, and a town square. A site plan is included in Figure 2.
The proposed future Isabel Station for the Valley Link railway is located a quarter mile to the southeast of the Site. The Valley Link railway is a proposed 42-mile passenger rail project that will connect the Lathrop Altamont Commuter Express (ACE) rail station with the Dublin/Pleasanton Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) station. The Modified Project is located within a half-mile of the proposed Isabel Station platform.
EXHIBIT D
1940
Figure 1: Vicinity Map
04/2024
N
Isabel TOD
84 84
N. Canyons Pkwy.
Portola Ave.
Gateway Ave. Isabel Ave.
Collier Canyon Rd.
Kitty Hawk Rd.
Constitution Dr.
580
Project Site
Future Isabel Valley Link Station
LEGEND
EXHIBIT D
1941
04/2024
Isabel TOD
Figure 2: Site Plan
N
ISABEL PORTOLA
OWNER, LLC
00 502 1004 2008
Main Street with Retail on Ground Fl Main Street with Retail on Ground Floor Amenity Space on Podium Level
Urban Plaza consisting of Town Square
Grocery back of house
SP-1
07-25-23 | 2022015
© 2023 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA.
CONCEPTDESIGN
LIVERMORE
ISABELPROJECT LIVERMORECALIFORNIA
ILLUSTRATIVEMASTERPLAN
MASTERPLANNING
Existing Office ting Office
1.5 AC Neighborhood Park
Podium Level
Front door character alo Front door character along
street edges
Mid Block Connections Block Connections
Paseos
S2
EVA/ Trail
Trail
0.45 AC Communi 0.45 AC Community Rec Facility ty Rec Facility Pedestrian Connection Pedestrian Connection
Note: For Conceptual Illustration Purposes Only. Final Design Subject to Change Based on Landscape Design.
N2 N1
N3-A
C5
C3
S3-A
S1
C2-B
C2-C
C1-A
C1-B
TS
S4 S3-B
Portola Avenue Portola Avenue
Isabel Avenue Isabel Avenue
Shea Center Drive Shea Center Drive
Main Street Main Street
Gateway Avenue
N3-B N3-C
EXHIBIT D
1942
5 METHODOLOGY
To determine whether the Modified Project would require major revisions to the EIR and SEIR as a result of causing new or increased significant transportation effects, traffic generation from the size, density and mix of land uses proposed by the Modified Project are directly compared to the mix, size and density of land uses proposed in Subareas 3b and 3c by the INSP using the same methods and data to ensure a valid “apples to apples” comparison.
This comparative trip generation analysis utilizes the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (ITE Manual). If the Modified Project results in reduced trip generation overall using ITE Manual trip rates, the Modified Project would not cause new unidentified or increase the severity of previously identified significant and unavoidable transportation effects caused by the INSP.
RESIDENTIAL LAND USES
Table 2-6 of the INSP identifies the residential performance measures by subarea. The maximum number of housing units identified for Subareas 3b and 3c is 1,717 units with a target number of 1477 residential units. The minimum number of housing units is 1,236. The target number of 1,477 residential units will be used to compare to 1,299 residential units proposed in the Modified Project.
The Modified Project proposes to construct 1,299 residential units within Subareas 3b and 3c. The comparative breakdown of residential unit types as between the original INSP and the Modified Project is set forth in the comparative Trip Generation analysis in Table 1. The breakdown for each residential unit type in the INSP was estimated based on the land area identified for each type along with the density for each type identified on Figure 2-3 of the INSP. The results of this estimation are 545 multifamily attached townhouse dwelling units, 288 multi-family stacked flat units and 466 multi-family apartment units. Land use sizes are further separated out by block within the study area, based on the proposed distribution of uses in the Modified Project and Figure 2-3 of the INSP.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL LAND USES
The INSP designates certain areas within Subareas 3a, 3b and 3c as having a “Neighborhood Commercial” or Ground Floor Retail/Flex Space land use designation. The Neighborhood Commercial land use is identified as 167,185 square feet on INSP Table 2-7 - Estimated Net New Development in 2040. This includes both Neighborhood Commercial and Ground Floor Retail/Flex Spaces within the INSP. We estimate, based on land area in the three subareas with the “Neighborhood Commercial” designation, that the INSP proposes 142,107 square feet of “Neighborhood Commercial” with Subareas 3b and 3c.
The Modified Project proposes to construct 65,635 square feet of retail commercial floor area. This is less than the 142,107 square feet that is proposed in the INSP for Subareas 3b and 3c.
EXHIBIT D
1943
6 OFFICE LAND USES
Table 2-7 Estimated Net New Development in 2040 in the INSP identifies 1,578,000 square feet of office space. Based on a proportional land use analysis using the maps from the INSP, we estimate that the office area within subarea 3c contains 10% of the total office area in the INSP, which would result in the construction of 157,800 square feet of office land uses within Subarea 3c of the INSP. No office uses are proposed by the INSP in Subarea 3b.
The Modified Project does not propose to construct any offices uses. Any potential future office uses would occur within the existing proposed commercial use areas discussed above. Therefore, this analysis accounts for the reduction in trips that would occur where all planned office uses in Subarea 3c of the INSP are eliminated in the Modified Project.
TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON
As detailed in Table 1 - Trip Generation Comparison, AM and PM peak hour trips are calculated for all the land uses described above. ITE trip generation rates are identified for the weekday AM and PM peak hours. The General Urban/Suburban setting/location types was used for each land use type.1
The table also identifies the recommended ITE rate as either an average rate or a best fit equation.
Applying the ITE trip rate for the AM or PM peak period to the size of the project results in the Trips SubTotal.
Due to the close proximity of the future Valley Link Isabel Station and the walkability of the designed community, a conservative trip reduction was applied for trips taken by residents walking to transit.
Based on an article entitled Vehicle Trip Reductions Impacts of Transit-Oriented Housing, in the Journal of Public Transportation, Vol. 11, No. 3, 2008, transit-oriented developments generate on average 47 percent fewer trips compared to the ITE rate. To be conservative, it is assumed that 10 percent of trips from the multi-family townhouse residences and 15 percent of trips from the multi-family stacked flat and apartment residences are walk-to-transit trips. Given the half-mile radius of the project to the future Valley Link Isabel Station, these assumptions are reasonable for transit trips in a transit-oriented development in a suburban environment.
As shown in Table 1, the Modified Project is projected to generate 585 AM peak hour trips and 859 PM peak hour trips. The land uses in the INSP for the Subareas 3b and 3c are projected to generate 996 AM peak hour trips and 1,626 PM peak hour trips. The Modified Project results in 411 fewer trips in the a.m. peak hour and 767 fewer trips during the p.m. peak hour. This is 41 percent less during the a.m. peak hour and 47 percent less during the p.m. peak hour.
Notably, the reduction in commercial retail uses could also potentially decrease allowances for trip reductions as part of the ITE trip generation internal trip capture methodology outlined in the Trip
1 For the Project’s proposed multi-family townhouse uses, the closest analogue under the ITE categories is ITE Land Use 215, which applies to Single Family Attached Housing.
EXHIBIT D
1944
7 Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition. Trip reductions are applied to INSP residential uses as a result of internal trip from residential trips to commercial uses remaining within the project, thus resulting in additional trips outside of the Modified Project Site and the INSP. However, this potential increase in trips from reduced trip reduction credits would be minor compared to the overall reduction in trips due to the reduced size of the Modified Project as compared to the development proposed in Subareas 3b and 3c of the INSP.
Table 1: Trip Generation Comparison
MODIFIED PROJECT AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR
ITE Land Use Unit
Count Size
Generation
Method Trips
Sub
Total
Percent
Reduction AM
Total
Trips
Generation
Method Trips
Sub
Total
Percent
Reduction PM
Total
AM Rate Trips
/Equation
Walk to
Transit
PM Rate
/Equation
Walk to
Transit
215 - SingleFamily
Attached
Housing
Dwelling
Units 98
Best Fit (LIN)
45 10% 41
Best Fit (LIN)
55 10% 49 T = 0.52(X)
- 5.70
T = 0.60(X)
- 3.93
215 - SingleFamily
Attached
Housing
Dwelling
Units 56
Best Fit (LIN)
23 10% 21
Best Fit (LIN)
30 10% 27 T = 0.52(X)
- 5.70
T = 0.60(X)
- 3.93
215 - SingleFamily
Attached
Housing
Dwelling
Units 40
Best Fit (LIN)
15 10% 14
Best Fit (LIN)
20 10% 18 T = 0.52(X)
- 5.70
T = 0.60(X)
- 3.93
215 - SingleFamily
Attached
Housing
Dwelling
Units 129
Best Fit (LIN)
61 10% 55
Best Fit (LIN)
73 10% 66 T = 0.52(X)
- 5.70
T = 0.60(X)
- 3.93
215 - SingleFamily
Attached
Housing
Dwelling
Units 17
Best Fit (LIN)
3 10% 3
Best Fit (LIN)
6 10% 6
T = 0.52(X)
- 5.70
T = 0.60(X)
- 3.93
215 - SingleFamily
Attached
Housing
Dwelling
Units 62
Best Fit (LIN)
27 10% 24
Best Fit (LIN)
33 10% 30 T = 0.52(X)
- 5.70
T = 0.60(X)
- 3.93
215 - SingleFamily
Attached
Housing
Dwelling
Units 143
Best Fit (LIN)
69 10% 62
Best Fit (LIN)
82 10% 74 T = 0.52(X)
- 5.70
T = 0.60(X)
- 3.93
221 -
Multifamily
Housing
(Mid-Rise)
Dwelling
Units 116
Best Fit (LIN)
39 15% 34
Best Fit (LIN)
45 15% 38 T = 0.44(X)
- 11.61
T = 0.39(X)
+ 0.34
EXHIBIT D
1945
8 221 -
Multifamily
Housing
(Mid-Rise)
Dwelling
Units 114
Best Fit (LIN)
39 15% 33
Best Fit (LIN)
44 15% 38 T = 0.44(X)
- 11.61
T = 0.39(X)
+ 0.34
221 -
Multifamily
Housing
(Mid-Rise)
Dwelling
Units 524
Best Fit (LIN)
219 15% 186
Best Fit (LIN)
204 15% 173 T = 0.44(X)
- 11.61
T = 0.39(X)
+ 0.34
821 -
Shopping
Plaza
1000 Sq.
Ft. GLA 25.00
Average
43 0% 43
Average
130 0% 130
1.73 5.19
821 -
Shopping
Plaza
1000 Sq.
Ft. GLA 19.61
Average
34 0% 34
Average
102 0% 102
1.73 5.19
821 -
Shopping
Plaza
1000 Sq.
Ft. GLA 21.02
Average
36 0% 36
Average
109 0% 109
1.73 5.19
PROPOSED PROJECT Total 585 859
INSP SUBAREAS 3b & 3c AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR
ITE Land Use Unit
Count Size
Generation
Method Trips
Sub
Total
Percent
Reduction AM
Total
Trips
Generation
Method Trips
Sub
Total
Percent
Reduction PM
Total
AM Rate Trips
/Equation
Walk to
Transit
PM Rate
/Equation
Walk to
Transit
215 - SingleFamily
Attached
Housing
Dwelling
Units 161
Best Fit (LIN)
78 10% 70
Best Fit (LIN)
T = 0.52(X) 93 10% 83
- 5.70
T = 0.60(X)
- 3.93
221 -
Multifamily
Housing
(Mid-Rise)
Dwelling
Units 300
Best Fit (LIN)
120 15% 102
Best Fit (LIN)
T = 0.44(X) 117 15% 99
- 11.61
T = 0.39(X)
+ 0.34
221 -
Multifamily
Housing
(Mid-Rise)
Dwelling
Units 195
Best Fit (LIN)
74 15% 63
Best Fit (LIN)
T = 0.44(X) 76 15% 64
- 11.61
T = 0.39(X)
+ 0.34
220 -
Multifamily
Housing
(Low-Rise)
Dwelling
Units 350
Best Fit (LIN)
131 15% 112
Best Fit (LIN)
T=0.31(X) + 171 0% 171
22.85 T = 0.43(X)
+ 20.55
220 -
Multifamily
Housing
(Low-Rise)
Dwelling
Units 350
Best Fit (LIN)
131 15% 112
Best Fit (LIN)
T=0.31(X) + 171 0% 171
22.85 T = 0.43(X)
+ 20.55
EXHIBIT D
1946
9 220 -
Multifamily
Housing
(Low-Rise)
Dwelling
Units 121
Best Fit (LIN)
60 15% 51
Best Fit (LIN)
T=0.31(X) + 73 0% 73
22.85 T = 0.43(X)
+ 20.55
710 - General
Office
Building
1000 Sq.
Ft. GLA 157.8
Average
240 0% 240
Average
227 0% 227
1.5 1.4
821 -
Shopping
Plaza
1000 Sq.
Ft. GLA 142.1
Average
246 0% 246
Average
737 0% 737
1.73 5.19
INSP SUBAREAS 3b & 3c Total 996 1626
DIFFERENCE -411 -767
Source - Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition
CONCLUSION
The Modified Project produces fewer trips than what was proposed in the INSP during the AM and PM peak hour. Therefore, the changes to the development completed in the INSP by the Modified Project would not require major revisions to the EIR or SEIR.
EXHIBIT D
1947
ATTACHMENTS
EXCERPTS FROM THE
ISABEL NEIGHBORHOOD SPECIFIC PLAN
EXHIBIT D
1948
5 ac.
1/2 Mile Radius
1/4 Mile Radius 0 500 1000 2000
FEET
Residential
Transition: 15-25 du/ac
Village: 25-40 du/ac
Center: 40-60 du/ac
Core: 60-100 du/ac
Non-Residential
Neighborhood Commercial
General Commercial
Office Core
Office
Business Park
Airway Business Park
Educational/Institutional
Open Space
Ground Floor Retail/
Overlay Flex Space
K-12 School Overlay
Parking Overlay
New Neighborhood Park/Plaza
Circulation
Valley Link
Existing Street
Proposed Street
Pedestrian Streetscape
Valley Link Pedestrian Bridge
Urban Growth Boundary
Planning Area
S
COLLIER CANYON RD
PORTOLA AVE
ISABEL AVE
NORTH CANYONS PKWY
NORTH CANYONS PKWY
CONSTITUTION DR
INDEPENDENCE DR
AIRWAY BLVD
KITTY HAWK RD
LINDBERGH DR
N RD NESSI
ARMSTRON TS G AIRWAY BLVD
E. AIRWAY BLVD
ISABEL AVE
PORTOLA AVE
E. AIRWAY BLVD
RUTAN DR
DOOLAN RD
INTERSTATE 580
580
Las Positas
College
Valley Link to Isabel Station
A rr o y o L a s Po s i t a s
Livermore Municipal Airport
A r r o y o L a s P o s i t a s
C o l l i e r C a n y o n C r e e k
A r ro y o L a s P o s i t a s
P
Innova tion
Hub
GATEWAY AVE
HTLAETS TS
RETTUS TS
RETNEC AEHS D R
Cayetano
Park
TS NIAM
S
C a y e t a n o C r e e k
S
Figu )LJXUH re 2-1: 1
/DQG8VH'LDJUDP LAND USE DIAGRAM
EXHIBIT D
1949
Figure 2-3: SUBAREA DIAGRAM
5 ac.
1/2 Mile Radius
1/4 Mile Radius 0 500 1000 2000
FEET
Residential
Transition: 15-25 du/ac
Village: 25-40 du/ac
Center: 40-60 du/ac
Core: 60-100 du/ac
Non-Residential
Neighborhood Commercial
General Commercial
Office Core
Office
Business Park
Airway Business Park
Educational/Institutional
Open Space
Ground Floor Retail/
Overlay Flex Space
K-12 School Overlay
Parking Overlay
New Neighborhood Park/Plaza
Circulation
Valley Link
Existing Street
Proposed Street
Pedestrian Streetscape
Valley Link Pedestrian Bridge
Urban Growth Boundary
Planning Area
S
Subareas
COLL EI R CANYON RD
PORTOLA AVE
ISABEL AVE
NORTH CANYONS PKWY
NORTH CANYONS PKWY
CONSTITUTION DR
INDEPENDENCE DR
AIRWAY BLVD
KITTY HAWK RD
LINDBERGH DR
NISSEN DR
ARMSTRONG ST AIRWAY BLVD
E. AIRWAY BLVD
ISABEL AVE
PORTOLA AVE
E. AIRWAY BLVD
RUTAN DR
DOOLAN RD
INTERSTATE 580
580
Las Positas
College
Valley Link to Isabel Station
A rr o y o L a s Po s i t a s
Livermore Municipal Airport
A r r o y o L a s P o s i t a s
C o l l i e r C a n y o n C r e e k
A r ro y o L a s P o s i t a s
P
I nnovation
Hub
STEALTH ST
SUTTER ST
SHEA CENTER DR
Cayetano
Park
MAIN ST
S
C a y e t a n o C r e e k
S
GATEWAY AVE
1d
2c
3f
2d
3d
3e
2b
3c
3b
3a
2a
1e
1a
4 1b
1c
1 EXHIBIT D
1950
Land Use 2-27
Table 2-6: PERFORMANCE MEASURES BY SUBAREA
Subarea
Minimum
Housing
Units
Target
Housing
Units1
Maximum
Housing
Units Performance Measures
1a 138 184 230 a) Provide at least two residential product types. 2a 163 201 240 a) Provide at least two residential product types. 2b 299 361 422
a) Provide at least two residential product types.
b) Limit the building heights of units directly facing the adjacent Montage development to 45 feet above existing grade (three stories).
c) Limit building heights on the remainder of the site to 50 feet above existing grade or Scenic Corridor limit, whichever is stricter.
2c 268 327 386
a) Provide at least two residential product types.
b) Limit building heights to 50 feet above existing grade or Scenic Corridor limit, whichever is stricter. 2d 200 243 286
a) Provide at least two residential product types.
b) Limit building heights to 50 feet above existing grade or Scenic Corridor limit, whichever is stricter. 3a 162 244 326
a) Provide at least two residential product types.
b) The exact location of new streets is flexible, as long as they align with the proposed intersections shown on the Plan figures.
3b 1,054 1,267 1,480
a) Provide at least three residential product types.
b) Concentrate the tallest buildings along Gateway Avenue and transition downward in scale along Portola. c) With the exception of Gateway Avenue, Shea Center Drive, and Main Street, the exact location of the new streets is flexible.
3c 182 210 237
a) Provide at least two residential product types.
b) Provide the tallest buildings along Gateway Avenue and transition downward in scale for housing along Portola Avenue.
3d 197 238 279
a) Provide at least two residential product types.
b) For sites outside of the Scenic Corridor exception area, limit building heights to 40 feet above existing grade (or Scenic Corridor limit, whichever is stricter).
4 660 793 926
a) Provide at least three residential product types.
b) Limit building heights along Sutter Street and adjacent to existing residential uses to three stories. c) Locate the tallest buildings closest to the Valley Link station. d) The exact location of new streets is flexible, as long as they align with the proposed intersection with the Valley Link station and there is at least one connection to Sutter Street. e) If development is phased such that redevelopment of the self-storage site occurs after development of the G&M Farms property, the first phase shall plan for future street connections with the second phase.
Notes:
1. The target unit count is based on a variety of factors including density averages, development constraints, and market conditions.
EXHIBIT D
1951
2-44 Isabel Neighborhood Specific Plan
and public services over the long-term (see the
Isabel Neighborhood Specific Plan Draft EIR and
Chapters 3, 4, and 7 of this Plan).
For planning and environmental review purposes,
it is assumed buildout will occur by the year 2040,
although it may take longer to fully realize the
vision for the Isabel Neighborhood. Ultimately,
private property owners are responsible for initiating development or redevelopment of their land, which often depends on market conditions.
Table 2-7 shows the estimated net new development under buildout of the Isabel Neighborhood Specific Plan. The development potential was
2.6 DEVELOPMENT
POTENTIAL
This section summarizes the overall development
potential under build-out of the Plan. Build-out
refers to the future scenario in which development has occurred on all properties envisioned for development under the Plan. The buildout
scenario provides estimates as to the number of
new households, residents, and jobs in the Neighborhood, and serves as the overall capacity for new development under the Plan. The City and partner
agencies use these estimates to analyze environmental impacts and plan needed infrastructure TABLE 2-7: ESTIMATED NET NEW DEVELOPMENT IN 2040
Within ½ mile radius
of Valley Link station
Outside ½ mile
radius
Planning Area Total
Residential (housing units) 3,525 570 4,095
Non-residential (square feet)
Office 1,578,0001 152,500 1,730,500
Business Park 73,590 106,800 180,390
Neighborhood Commercial 167,1852 0 167,185
General Commercial 107,200 52,500 159,700
General Industrial3 (270,175) 0 (270,175)
Total 1,655,800 311,800 1,967,600
Jobs 8,000 1,200 9,200
Notes:
1. Includes existing LAM property
2. Includes Ground Floor Retail/Flex Space
3. As build out of the Planning Area occurs, General Industrial uses will be replaced with Office, Business Park, Neighborhood Commercial, and General Commercial uses.
calculated by applying the development standards
(including average densities for the residential
categories) applied to the Change Areas shown on
Figure 2-2. The table also breaks down the net new
development within and outside of the half-mile
radius of the Valley Link station.
MARKET ANALYSIS
The market analysis prepared for the Isabel Neighborhood Specific Plan studied the potential for residential, office, and retail development in the
Neighborhood based on the current real estate
market in the Tri-Valley and forecasts of future
economic conditions.4
The market analysis concluded that there is
currently strong demand for multi-family
residential development in the Isabel Neighborhood. With the introduction of Valley Link and a broader mix of housing formats and price points,
average annual residential demand will likely be
even stronger in the future.
The study concluded that development of new
office space is a long-term opportunity, based
on current market conditions and regional competition. However, the Valley Link project, new amenities, and implementation of economic
development strategies would increase the
4. The market study considered demand for three major
land use categories: residential, office, and retail; it did not consider demand for the full range of land uses
that would be allowed under the Isabel Neighborhood
Specific Plan.
EXHIBIT D
1952
Appendix B
Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Worksheets
EXHIBIT D
1953
Isabel Avenue & Gateway Avenue
EXHIBIT D
1954
Isabel Avenue & A Street
EXHIBIT D
1955
Gateway Avenue at Main Street
EXHIBIT D
1956
Appendix D
Synchro LOS Analysis Worksheets
EXHIBIT D
1957
HCM 6th AWSC 2040 Baseline
1: Gateway Avenue & Main Street Timing Plan: AM Peak
Isabel TOD Synchro 12 Report
TJKM 05/01/2024
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 9
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 228 552 0 16 9
Future Vol, veh/h 0 228 552 0 16 9
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 248 600 0 17 10
Number of Lanes 012010
Approach EB WB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB
Opposing Lanes 2 1 0
Conflicting Approach Left SB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 0 2
Conflicting Approach Right SB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 0 1 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 9.7 8.7 8.6
HCM LOS A A A
Lane EBLn1 WBLn1 WBLn2 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 0% 0% 0% 64%
Vol Thru, % 100% 100% 100% 0%
Vol Right, % 0% 0% 0% 36%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 228 276 276 25
LT Vol 0 0 0 16
Through Vol 228 276 276 0
RT Vol 0009
Lane Flow Rate 248 300 300 27
Geometry Grp 4a 5 5 2
Degree of Util (X) 0.315 0.392 0.247 0.041
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.57 4.704 2.966 5.378
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 791 756 1182 668
Service Time 2.57 2.494 0.754 3.39
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.314 0.397 0.254 0.04
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 9.7 10.6 6.8 8.6
HCM Lane LOS ABAA
HCM 95th-tile Q 1.4 1.9 1 0.1
EXHIBIT D
1958
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 Baseline
11: Isabel & Portola Timing Plan: AM Peak
Isabel TOD Synchro 12 Report
TJKM 05/01/2024
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 2 280 188 310 634 75 424 291 18 11 75 2 Future Volume (veh/h) 2 280 188 310 634 75 424 291 18 11 75 2 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 2 304 204 337 689 82 461 316 20 12 82 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 9 685 538 724 1062 126 592 1197 534 48 685 306 Arrive On Green 0.00 0.19 0.19 0.14 0.33 0.33 0.17 0.34 0.34 0.03 0.19 0.19 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 2790 5023 3198 380 3456 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 2 304 204 337 382 389 461 316 20 12 82 2 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1395 1674 1777 1802 1728 1777 1585 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.1 4.7 4.0 3.8 11.4 11.4 7.9 4.0 0.5 0.4 1.2 0.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.1 4.7 4.0 3.8 11.4 11.4 7.9 4.0 0.5 0.4 1.2 0.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.21 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 9 685 538 724 590 598 592 1197 534 48 685 306 V/C Ratio(X) 0.23 0.44 0.38 0.47 0.65 0.65 0.78 0.26 0.04 0.25 0.12 0.01 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 258 2398 1883 1453 1456 1477 1111 2821 1258 343 2387 1065 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 30.8 22.2 21.9 24.4 17.7 17.7 24.7 15.0 13.9 29.7 20.8 20.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.8 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.9 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 1.9 1.2 1.4 4.3 4.4 3.1 1.5 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 35.7 22.3 22.0 24.6 18.1 18.1 25.5 15.1 13.9 30.6 20.8 20.3 LnGrp LOS D C C C B B C B B C C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 510 1108 797 96
Approach Delay, s/veh 22.3 20.1 21.1 22.0
Approach LOS CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.7 26.3 13.0 17.3 14.7 17.3 4.3 26.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.3 4.0 5.3 4.0 * 5.3 4.0 5.3 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 12.0 49.4 18.0 42.0 20.0 * 42 9.0 51.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.4 6.0 5.8 6.7 9.9 3.2 2.1 13.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.5 0.6 1.8 0.7 0.3 0.0 3.4 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 20.9
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
EXHIBIT D
1959
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 Baseline
14: Isabel & Gateway Avenue Timing Plan: AM Peak
Isabel TOD Synchro 12 Report
TJKM 05/01/2024
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 3 241 83 17 18 492 741 35 19 584 43 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 3 241 83 17 18 492 741 35 19 584 43 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 0 264 90 18 20 535 805 38 21 635 47 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 3 0 506 115 240 267 722 1602 76 35 868 64
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.06 0.30 0.30 0.23 0.46 0.46 0.02 0.26 0.26 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 0 3055 1781 798 886 3206 3448 163 1781 3347 247 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 0 264 90 0 38 535 415 428 21 337 345 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1528 1781 0 1684 1603 1777 1834 1781 1777 1818 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 4.4 2.8 0.0 0.9 8.7 9.1 9.1 0.7 9.7 9.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 4.4 2.8 0.0 0.9 8.7 9.1 9.1 0.7 9.7 9.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.53 1.00 0.09 1.00 0.14
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 3 0 506 115 0 507 722 825 852 35 461 471 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.00 0.52 0.78 0.00 0.07 0.74 0.50 0.50 0.59 0.73 0.73 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 127 0 1745 159 0 992 2404 1808 1867 159 634 649 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 21.3 25.8 0.0 14.0 20.2 10.5 10.5 27.2 19.0 19.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.8 15.6 0.0 0.1 1.5 0.5 0.5 14.7 2.7 2.7 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 0.0 1.5 1.6 0.0 0.3 2.9 2.7 2.8 0.4 3.7 3.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 22.2 41.5 0.0 14.0 21.7 11.0 10.9 42.0 21.7 21.7 LnGrp LOS C D B C B B D C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 264 128 1378 703
Approach Delay, s/veh 22.2 33.3 15.1 22.3
Approach LOS C C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.1 30.0 7.6 13.3 16.6 18.5 0.0 20.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 57.0 5.0 32.0 42.0 20.0 4.0 33.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.7 11.1 4.8 6.4 10.7 11.7 0.0 2.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 5.5 0.0 1.1 1.9 2.4 0.0 0.2 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 18.9
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
EXHIBIT D
1960
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 Baseline
19: Isabel Ave & A Street Timing Plan: AM Peak
Isabel TOD Synchro 12 Report
TJKM 05/01/2024
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 13 70 28 14 6 255 478 12 7 548 18 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 13 70 28 14 6 255 478 12 7 548 18 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.96 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 14 76 30 15 7 277 520 13 8 596 20 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 4 28 150 50 284 132 355 1654 41 15 982 419
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.03 0.24 0.24 0.20 0.47 0.47 0.01 0.28 0.28 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 242 1315 1781 1194 557 1781 3539 88 1781 3554 1515 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 0 90 30 0 22 277 261 272 8 596 20 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1557 1781 0 1751 1781 1777 1851 1781 1777 1515 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.7 0.0 0.4 6.2 3.8 3.8 0.2 6.1 0.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.7 0.0 0.4 6.2 3.8 3.8 0.2 6.1 0.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.84 1.00 0.32 1.00 0.05 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 4 0 178 50 0 416 355 830 865 15 982 419 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.00 0.51 0.60 0.00 0.05 0.78 0.31 0.31 0.53 0.61 0.05 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 170 0 1190 170 0 1338 723 1442 1502 170 1782 760 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 17.4 20.1 0.0 12.3 15.9 7.0 7.0 20.7 13.2 8.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.0 2.2 10.9 0.0 0.1 3.8 0.2 0.2 25.8 0.6 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.4 0.0 0.1 2.3 0.9 0.9 0.2 1.8 0.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 19.7 31.0 0.0 12.4 19.7 7.2 7.2 46.4 13.8 8.4 LnGrp LOS B C B B A A D B A
Approach Vol, veh/h 90 52 810 624
Approach Delay, s/veh 19.7 23.1 11.4 14.0
Approach LOS B C B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.4 23.6 5.2 8.8 12.3 15.6 0.0 14.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 34.0 4.0 32.0 17.0 21.0 4.0 32.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 5.8 2.7 4.3 8.2 8.1 0.0 2.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.9 0.0 0.5 0.5 3.0 0.0 0.1 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 13.3
HCM 6th LOS B
EXHIBIT D
1961
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 Baseline
22: Main Street/Montage Dr & Portola Timing Plan: AM Peak Isabel TOD Synchro 12 Report
TJKM 05/01/2024
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 10 381 0 127 894 27 132 9 0 24 87 102 Future Volume (veh/h) 10 381 0 127 894 27 132 9 0 24 87 102 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 11 414 0 138 972 29 143 10 0 26 95 111 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 20 1191 0 166 1469 44 184 467 0 43 134 157
Arrive On Green 0.01 0.34 0.00 0.09 0.42 0.42 0.10 0.25 0.00 0.02 0.17 0.17 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3647 0 1781 3523 105 1781 1870 0 1781 786 919 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 11 414 0 138 490 511 143 10 0 26 0 206 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 0 1781 1777 1851 1781 1870 0 1781 0 1705 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.3 4.7 0.0 4.1 11.9 11.9 4.2 0.2 0.0 0.8 0.0 6.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.3 4.7 0.0 4.1 11.9 11.9 4.2 0.2 0.0 0.8 0.0 6.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.54
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 20 1191 0 166 741 772 184 467 0 43 0 290 V/C Ratio(X) 0.55 0.35 0.00 0.83 0.66 0.66 0.78 0.02 0.00 0.61 0.00 0.71 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 133 1191 0 166 741 772 299 1254 0 166 0 1016 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 26.4 13.4 0.0 23.9 12.6 12.6 23.5 15.2 0.0 26.0 0.0 21.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 21.2 0.8 0.0 28.7 4.6 4.4 6.9 0.0 0.0 13.2 0.0 3.2 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.2 1.7 0.0 2.8 4.6 4.7 2.0 0.1 0.0 0.5 0.0 2.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 47.7 14.2 0.0 52.6 17.2 17.0 30.4 15.2 0.0 39.2 0.0 24.2 LnGrp LOS D B D B B C B D C
Approach Vol, veh/h 425 1139 153 232
Approach Delay, s/veh 15.1 21.4 29.4 25.9
Approach LOS B C C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.0 22.0 9.5 13.1 4.6 26.4 5.3 17.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 18.0 9.0 32.0 4.0 19.0 5.0 36.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.1 6.7 6.2 8.1 2.3 13.9 2.8 2.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.9 0.1 1.3 0.0 2.6 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 21.2
HCM 6th LOS C
EXHIBIT D
1962
HCM 6th AWSC 2040 Baseline
1: Gateway Avenue & Main Street Timing Plan: PM Peak
Synchro 12 Report
05/01/2024
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 11.5
Intersection LOS B
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 455 379 0 16 21
Future Vol, veh/h 0 455 379 0 16 21
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 495 412 0 17 23
Number of Lanes 012010
Approach EB WB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB
Opposing Lanes 2 1 0
Conflicting Approach Left SB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 0 2
Conflicting Approach Right SB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 0 1 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 14.5 8.2 8.9
HCM LOS B A A
Lane EBLn1 WBLn1 WBLn2 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 0% 0% 0% 43%
Vol Thru, % 100% 100% 100% 0%
Vol Right, % 0% 0% 0% 57%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 455 190 190 37
LT Vol 0 0 0 16
Through Vol 455 190 190 0
RT Vol 0 0 0 21
Lane Flow Rate 495 206 206 40
Geometry Grp 4a 5 5 2
Degree of Util (X) 0.617 0.286 0.183 0.061
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.494 4.996 3.2 5.473
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 806 721 1104 654
Service Time 2.508 2.715 0.969 3.508
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.614 0.286 0.187 0.061
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 14.5 9.7 6.7 8.9
HCM Lane LOS BAAA
HCM 95th-tile Q 4.3 1.2 0.7 0.2
EXHIBIT D
1963
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 Baseline
11: Isabel & Portola Timing Plan: PM Peak
Synchro 12 Report
05/01/2024
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 6 1105 359 280 531 9 259 221 10 23 164 6 Future Volume (veh/h) 6 1105 359 280 531 9 259 221 10 23 164 6 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 7 1201 390 304 577 10 282 240 11 25 178 7 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 29 1447 1136 551 1789 31 379 741 330 85 521 232 Arrive On Green 0.02 0.41 0.41 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.11 0.21 0.21 0.05 0.15 0.15 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 2790 5023 3574 62 3456 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 7 1201 390 304 287 300 282 240 11 25 178 7 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1395 1674 1777 1859 1728 1777 1585 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.3 24.8 7.9 4.7 7.9 7.9 6.5 4.7 0.5 1.1 3.7 0.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.3 24.8 7.9 4.7 7.9 7.9 6.5 4.7 0.5 1.1 3.7 0.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.03 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 29 1447 1136 551 890 931 379 741 330 85 521 232 V/C Ratio(X) 0.24 0.83 0.34 0.55 0.32 0.32 0.74 0.32 0.03 0.29 0.34 0.03 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 196 1822 1430 1655 1301 1362 464 1666 743 304 1813 809 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 39.8 21.8 16.7 34.6 12.2 12.2 35.4 27.5 25.8 37.7 31.4 30.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.6 2.2 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.1 3.7 0.1 0.0 0.7 0.1 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 10.1 2.4 1.9 2.9 3.1 2.9 2.0 0.2 0.5 1.6 0.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 41.4 24.0 16.8 34.9 12.3 12.3 39.1 27.6 25.9 38.4 31.6 30.0 LnGrp LOS D C B C B B D C C D C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1598 891 533 210
Approach Delay, s/veh 22.3 20.0 33.6 32.3
Approach LOS C B C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.9 22.4 13.0 38.7 13.0 17.3 5.3 46.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.3 4.0 5.3 4.0 * 5.3 4.0 5.3 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 14.0 38.4 27.0 42.0 11.0 * 42 9.0 60.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.1 6.7 6.7 26.8 8.5 5.7 2.3 9.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.1 0.6 6.6 0.2 0.8 0.0 2.4 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 24.2
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
EXHIBIT D
1964
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 Baseline
14: Isabel & Gateway Avenue Timing Plan: PM Peak
Synchro 12 Report
05/01/2024
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 66 25 380 59 18 54 351 427 90 52 944 10 Future Volume (veh/h) 66 25 380 59 18 54 351 427 90 52 944 10 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 72 0 431 64 20 59 382 464 98 57 1026 11 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 92 0 634 82 82 241 514 1389 291 72 1292 14
Arrive On Green 0.05 0.00 0.21 0.05 0.20 0.20 0.16 0.48 0.48 0.04 0.36 0.36 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 0 3070 1781 407 1200 3206 2904 608 1781 3601 39 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 72 0 431 64 0 79 382 282 280 57 506 531 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1535 1781 0 1607 1603 1777 1736 1781 1777 1862 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.8 0.0 9.1 2.5 0.0 2.9 7.9 6.9 7.0 2.2 17.9 17.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.8 0.0 9.1 2.5 0.0 2.9 7.9 6.9 7.0 2.2 17.9 17.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.75 1.00 0.35 1.00 0.02
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 92 0 634 82 0 322 514 850 830 72 638 668 V/C Ratio(X) 0.78 0.00 0.68 0.78 0.00 0.25 0.74 0.33 0.34 0.79 0.79 0.79 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 153 0 1316 153 0 689 1512 1524 1488 178 863 905 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 32.8 0.0 25.6 33.0 0.0 23.5 28.0 11.3 11.3 33.3 20.1 20.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 13.2 0.0 1.3 15.0 0.0 0.4 2.2 0.2 0.2 17.0 3.7 3.5 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.5 0.0 3.3 1.4 0.0 1.1 2.9 2.3 2.2 1.2 6.9 7.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 46.0 0.0 26.9 48.1 0.0 23.9 30.2 11.5 11.6 50.3 23.8 23.6 LnGrp LOS D C D C C B B D C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 503 143 944 1094
Approach Delay, s/veh 29.7 34.7 19.1 25.1
Approach LOS C C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.8 37.5 7.2 18.5 15.2 29.1 7.6 18.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 7.0 60.0 6.0 30.0 33.0 34.0 6.0 30.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.2 9.0 4.5 11.1 9.9 19.9 4.8 4.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.4 0.0 1.8 1.3 5.2 0.0 0.4 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 24.4
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
EXHIBIT D
1965
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 Baseline
19: Isabel Ave & A Street Timing Plan: PM Peak
Synchro 12 Report
05/01/2024
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 27 41 197 19 27 19 159 358 30 18 790 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 27 41 197 19 27 19 159 358 30 18 790 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 29 45 214 21 29 21 173 389 33 20 859 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 119 71 338 35 209 151 222 1443 122 34 1174 524 Arrive On Green 0.07 0.26 0.26 0.02 0.21 0.21 0.12 0.44 0.44 0.02 0.33 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 276 1314 1781 994 720 1781 3306 279 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 29 0 259 21 0 50 173 208 214 20 859 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1590 1781 0 1714 1781 1777 1808 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.9 0.0 8.6 0.7 0.0 1.4 5.6 4.5 4.5 0.7 12.8 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.9 0.0 8.6 0.7 0.0 1.4 5.6 4.5 4.5 0.7 12.8 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.83 1.00 0.42 1.00 0.15 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 119 0 409 35 0 361 222 775 789 34 1174 524 V/C Ratio(X) 0.24 0.00 0.63 0.60 0.00 0.14 0.78 0.27 0.27 0.59 0.73 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 119 0 851 119 0 918 507 1279 1301 149 1844 822 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 26.5 0.0 19.7 29.1 0.0 19.2 25.3 10.7 10.8 29.1 17.7 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.1 0.0 1.6 15.2 0.0 0.2 5.8 0.2 0.2 15.6 0.9 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 0.0 3.2 0.4 0.0 0.5 2.5 1.4 1.4 0.4 4.4 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 27.5 0.0 21.3 44.3 0.0 19.4 31.1 10.9 10.9 44.6 18.6 0.0 LnGrp LOS C C D B C B B D B
Approach Vol, veh/h 288 71 595 879
Approach Delay, s/veh 21.9 26.7 16.8 19.2
Approach LOS C C B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.1 30.1 5.2 19.4 11.5 23.7 8.0 16.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 43.0 4.0 32.0 17.0 31.0 4.0 32.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.7 6.5 2.7 10.6 7.6 14.8 2.9 3.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.3 0.0 1.7 0.3 5.0 0.0 0.2 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 19.1
HCM 6th LOS B
EXHIBIT D
1966
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 Baseline
22: Main Street/Montage Dr & Portola Timing Plan: PM Peak Synchro 12 Report
05/01/2024
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 125 1189 82 101 510 129 22 38 204 37 69 31 Future Volume (veh/h) 125 1189 82 101 510 129 22 38 204 37 69 31 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 136 1292 89 110 554 140 24 41 222 40 75 34 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 310 1225 84 142 756 190 40 55 298 60 279 126 Arrive On Green 0.17 0.36 0.36 0.08 0.27 0.27 0.02 0.22 0.22 0.03 0.23 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3374 232 1781 2812 708 1781 253 1371 1781 1219 552 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 136 679 702 110 349 345 24 0 263 40 0 109 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1829 1781 1777 1743 1781 0 1624 1781 0 1771 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.6 19.0 19.0 3.2 9.4 9.4 0.7 0.0 7.9 1.2 0.0 2.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.6 19.0 19.0 3.2 9.4 9.4 0.7 0.0 7.9 1.2 0.0 2.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.13 1.00 0.41 1.00 0.84 1.00 0.31
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 310 645 664 142 478 469 40 0 354 60 0 405 V/C Ratio(X) 0.44 1.05 1.06 0.77 0.73 0.74 0.60 0.00 0.74 0.67 0.00 0.27 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 310 645 664 272 679 666 170 0 993 170 0 1083 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.3 16.7 16.7 23.6 17.4 17.4 25.3 0.0 19.1 25.0 0.0 16.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.0 50.1 50.9 8.7 2.4 2.5 13.5 0.0 3.1 12.0 0.0 0.4 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.4 15.0 15.6 1.5 3.5 3.5 0.4 0.0 3.0 0.7 0.0 1.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 20.3 66.8 67.6 32.3 19.8 20.0 38.8 0.0 22.2 37.0 0.0 16.9 LnGrp LOS C F F C B B D C D B
Approach Vol, veh/h 1517 804 287 149
Approach Delay, s/veh 63.0 21.6 23.6 22.3
Approach LOS E C C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.2 23.0 5.2 16.0 13.1 18.1 5.8 15.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 8.0 19.0 5.0 32.0 7.0 20.0 5.0 32.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.2 21.0 2.7 4.6 5.6 11.4 3.2 9.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 2.6 0.0 1.7 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 44.6
HCM 6th LOS D
EXHIBIT D
1967
HCM 6th AWSC 2040 plus Project - Gateway 1 Lane
1: Gateway Avenue & Main Street Timing Plan: AM Peak
Isabel TOD Synchro 12 Report
TJKM Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 34.7
Intersection LOS D
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 13 440 644 8 17 9
Future Vol, veh/h 13 440 644 8 17 9
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 14 478 700 9 18 10
Number of Lanes 011110
Approach EB WB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB
Opposing Lanes 2 1 0
Conflicting Approach Left SB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 0 2
Conflicting Approach Right SB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 0 1 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 17.5 47.6 10
HCM LOS C E A
Lane EBLn1 WBLn1 WBLn2 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 3% 0% 0% 65%
Vol Thru, % 97% 100% 0% 0%
Vol Right, % 0% 0% 100% 35%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 453 644 8 26
LT Vol 13 0 0 17
Through Vol 440 644 0 0
RT Vol 0089
Lane Flow Rate 492 700 9 28
Geometry Grp 4a 5 5 2
Degree of Util (X) 0.673 0.969 0.01 0.052
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.918 4.983 4.279 6.611
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 734 728 833 545
Service Time 2.96 2.725 2.02 4.611
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.67 0.962 0.011 0.051
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 17.5 48.1 7.1 10
HCM Lane LOS C E A A
HCM 95th-tile Q 5.2 14.8 0 0.2
EXHIBIT D
1968
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 plus Project - Gateway 1 Lane 11: Isabel & Portola Timing Plan: AM Peak
Isabel TOD Synchro 12 Report
TJKM Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 2 302 191 329 643 75 425 291 57 11 75 2 Future Volume (veh/h) 2 302 191 329 643 75 425 291 57 11 75 2 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 2 328 208 358 699 82 462 316 62 12 82 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 9 685 538 725 1064 125 593 1198 534 48 685 306 Arrive On Green 0.00 0.19 0.19 0.14 0.33 0.33 0.17 0.34 0.34 0.03 0.19 0.19 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 2790 5023 3204 376 3456 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 2 328 208 358 387 394 462 316 62 12 82 2 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1395 1674 1777 1803 1728 1777 1585 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.1 5.1 4.0 4.1 11.6 11.6 8.0 4.0 1.7 0.4 1.2 0.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.1 5.1 4.0 4.1 11.6 11.6 8.0 4.0 1.7 0.4 1.2 0.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.21 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 9 685 538 725 590 599 593 1198 534 48 685 306 V/C Ratio(X) 0.23 0.48 0.39 0.49 0.66 0.66 0.78 0.26 0.12 0.25 0.12 0.01 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 257 2397 1882 1452 1456 1477 1110 2820 1258 343 2386 1064 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 30.9 22.3 21.9 24.5 17.8 17.8 24.7 15.0 14.2 29.7 20.8 20.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.8 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.5 0.9 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 2.0 1.3 1.5 4.4 4.4 3.1 1.5 0.6 0.2 0.5 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 35.7 22.5 22.1 24.7 18.2 18.2 25.5 15.1 14.3 30.7 20.8 20.3 LnGrp LOS D C C C B B C B B C C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 538 1139 840 96
Approach Delay, s/veh 22.4 20.3 20.8 22.0
Approach LOS CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.7 26.3 13.0 17.3 14.7 17.3 4.3 26.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.3 4.0 5.3 4.0 * 5.3 4.0 5.3 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 12.0 49.4 18.0 42.0 20.0 * 42 9.0 51.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.4 6.0 6.1 7.1 10.0 3.2 2.1 13.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.5 0.6 2.0 0.7 0.3 0.0 3.5 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 20.9
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
EXHIBIT D
1969
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 plus Project - Gateway 1 Lane 14: Isabel & Gateway Avenue Timing Plan: AM Peak
Isabel TOD Synchro 12 Report
TJKM Page 3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 22 6 429 83 18 18 580 781 35 20 674 54 Future Volume (veh/h) 22 6 429 83 18 18 580 781 35 20 674 54 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 24 0 471 90 20 20 630 849 38 22 733 59 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 36 0 628 100 203 203 685 1872 84 34 633 51
Arrive On Green 0.02 0.00 0.20 0.06 0.24 0.24 0.37 0.54 0.54 0.02 0.19 0.19 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 0 3070 1781 844 844 1853 3458 155 1781 3321 267 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 24 0 471 90 0 40 630 436 451 22 392 400 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1535 1781 0 1689 926 1777 1836 1781 1777 1811 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.2 0.0 12.9 4.5 0.0 1.6 29.0 13.3 13.3 1.1 17.0 17.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.2 0.0 12.9 4.5 0.0 1.6 29.0 13.3 13.3 1.1 17.0 17.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.08 1.00 0.15
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 36 0 628 100 0 406 685 962 994 34 338 345 V/C Ratio(X) 0.67 0.00 0.75 0.90 0.00 0.10 0.92 0.45 0.45 0.66 1.16 1.16 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 80 0 1032 100 0 568 934 1135 1173 100 338 345 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 43.4 0.0 33.3 41.9 0.0 26.4 26.9 12.4 12.5 43.5 36.1 36.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 19.5 0.0 1.8 59.7 0.0 0.1 11.3 0.3 0.3 19.6 99.1 99.2 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.7 0.0 4.8 3.6 0.0 0.7 6.8 4.6 4.7 0.6 16.2 16.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 63.0 0.0 35.2 101.5 0.0 26.5 38.2 12.8 12.8 63.1 135.2 135.3 LnGrp LOS E D F C D B B E F F
Approach Vol, veh/h 495 130 1517 814
Approach Delay, s/veh 36.5 78.4 23.3 133.3
Approach LOS D E C F
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.7 52.3 9.0 22.3 37.0 21.0 5.8 25.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 57.0 5.0 30.0 45.0 17.0 4.0 30.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.1 15.3 6.5 14.9 31.0 19.0 3.2 3.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 5.8 0.0 1.8 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 58.2
HCM 6th LOS E
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
EXHIBIT D
1970
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 plus Project - Gateway 1 Lane 19: Isabel Ave & A Street Timing Plan: AM Peak
Isabel TOD Synchro 12 Report
TJKM Page 4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 17 13 158 28 14 6 294 501 12 7 562 26 Future Volume (veh/h) 17 13 158 28 14 6 294 501 12 7 562 26 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 18 14 172 30 15 7 320 545 13 8 611 28 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 31 22 272 48 237 111 399 1649 39 15 888 377
Arrive On Green 0.02 0.19 0.19 0.03 0.20 0.20 0.22 0.47 0.47 0.01 0.25 0.25 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 117 1437 1781 1192 556 1781 3544 84 1781 3554 1511 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 18 0 186 30 0 22 320 273 285 8 611 28 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1554 1781 0 1748 1781 1777 1852 1781 1777 1511 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.5 0.0 5.7 0.9 0.0 0.5 8.8 5.0 5.0 0.2 8.1 0.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.5 0.0 5.7 0.9 0.0 0.5 8.8 5.0 5.0 0.2 8.1 0.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.32 1.00 0.05 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 31 0 295 48 0 348 399 827 862 15 888 377 V/C Ratio(X) 0.57 0.00 0.63 0.62 0.00 0.06 0.80 0.33 0.33 0.53 0.69 0.07 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 138 0 902 138 0 1015 1344 1856 1934 138 1306 555 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 25.2 0.0 19.3 24.9 0.0 16.8 19.0 8.7 8.7 25.5 17.6 8.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 15.4 0.0 2.2 12.4 0.0 0.1 3.8 0.2 0.2 26.5 1.0 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.3 0.0 2.1 0.5 0.0 0.2 3.4 1.4 1.4 0.2 2.8 0.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 40.6 0.0 21.5 37.2 0.0 16.9 22.8 9.0 9.0 52.1 18.5 8.9 LnGrp LOS D C D B C A A D B A
Approach Vol, veh/h 204 52 878 647
Approach Delay, s/veh 23.2 28.6 14.0 18.5
Approach LOS C C B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.4 28.1 5.4 13.8 15.6 16.9 4.9 14.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 54.0 4.0 30.0 39.0 19.0 4.0 30.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 7.0 2.9 7.7 10.8 10.1 2.5 2.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.2 0.0 1.2 0.9 2.5 0.0 0.1 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 17.1
HCM 6th LOS B
EXHIBIT D
1971
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 plus Project - Gateway 1 Lane 22: Main Street/Montage Dr & Portola Timing Plan: AM Peak Isabel TOD Synchro 12 Report
TJKM Page 5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 10 381 28 137 894 27 192 9 25 24 87 102 Future Volume (veh/h) 10 381 28 137 894 27 192 9 25 24 87 102 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 11 414 30 149 972 29 209 10 27 26 95 111 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 20 1062 77 156 1383 41 264 130 352 42 131 153 Arrive On Green 0.01 0.32 0.32 0.09 0.39 0.39 0.15 0.29 0.29 0.02 0.17 0.17 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3361 243 1781 3523 105 1781 447 1206 1781 786 919 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 11 218 226 149 490 511 209 0 37 26 0 206 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1827 1781 1777 1851 1781 0 1653 1781 0 1705 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.3 5.5 5.5 4.7 13.2 13.2 6.4 0.0 0.9 0.8 0.0 6.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.3 5.5 5.5 4.7 13.2 13.2 6.4 0.0 0.9 0.8 0.0 6.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.13 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.73 1.00 0.54
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 20 562 577 156 698 727 264 0 482 42 0 285 V/C Ratio(X) 0.55 0.39 0.39 0.95 0.70 0.70 0.79 0.00 0.08 0.62 0.00 0.72 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 125 562 577 156 698 727 469 0 1045 156 0 778 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 28.0 15.2 15.2 25.9 14.5 14.5 23.4 0.0 14.6 27.5 0.0 22.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 21.5 2.0 2.0 57.8 5.8 5.6 5.3 0.0 0.1 13.7 0.0 3.5 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.3 2.2 2.2 4.3 5.4 5.5 2.9 0.0 0.3 0.5 0.0 2.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 49.6 17.2 17.2 83.7 20.4 20.1 28.7 0.0 14.7 41.3 0.0 26.0 LnGrp LOS D B B F C C C B D C
Approach Vol, veh/h 455 1150 246 232
Approach Delay, s/veh 18.0 28.5 26.6 27.7
Approach LOS B C C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.0 22.0 12.4 13.5 4.6 26.4 5.3 20.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 18.0 15.0 26.0 4.0 19.0 5.0 36.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.7 7.5 8.4 8.5 2.3 15.2 2.8 2.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.8 0.3 1.1 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.2 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 25.9
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.
EXHIBIT D
1972
HCM 6th AWSC 2040 plus Project - Gateway 1 Lane
1: Gateway Avenue & Main Street Timing Plan: PM Peak
Isabel TOD Synchro 12 Report
TJKM Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 38.9
Intersection LOS E
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 15 628 581 18 12 17
Future Vol, veh/h 15 628 581 18 12 17
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 16 683 632 20 13 18
Number of Lanes 011110
Approach EB WB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB
Opposing Lanes 2 1 0
Conflicting Approach Left SB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 0 2
Conflicting Approach Right SB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 0 1 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 42.9 35.9 10.1
HCM LOS EEB
Lane EBLn1 WBLn1 WBLn2 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 2% 0% 0% 41%
Vol Thru, % 98% 100% 0% 0%
Vol Right, % 0% 0% 100% 59%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 643 581 18 29
LT Vol 15 0 0 12
Through Vol 628 581 0 0
RT Vol 0 0 18 17
Lane Flow Rate 699 632 20 32
Geometry Grp 4a 5 5 2
Degree of Util (X) 0.945 0.902 0.024 0.059
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.87 5.143 4.437 6.685
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 741 701 801 539
Service Time 2.921 2.9 2.194 4.685
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.943 0.902 0.025 0.059
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 42.9 36.8 7.3 10.1
HCM Lane LOS EEAB
HCM 95th-tile Q 13.8 11.6 0.1 0.2
EXHIBIT D
1973
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 plus Project - Gateway 1 Lane 11: Isabel & Portola Timing Plan: PM Peak
Isabel TOD Synchro 12 Report
TJKM Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 6 1122 361 319 552 9 262 221 44 23 164 6 Future Volume (veh/h) 6 1122 361 319 552 9 262 221 44 23 164 6 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 7 1220 392 347 600 10 285 240 48 25 178 7 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 29 1461 1147 548 1803 30 376 735 328 85 517 231 Arrive On Green 0.02 0.41 0.41 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.11 0.21 0.21 0.05 0.15 0.15 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 2790 5023 3577 60 3456 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 7 1220 392 347 298 312 285 240 48 25 178 7 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1395 1674 1777 1860 1728 1777 1585 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.3 25.4 7.9 5.5 8.2 8.3 6.6 4.7 2.0 1.1 3.7 0.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.3 25.4 7.9 5.5 8.2 8.3 6.6 4.7 2.0 1.1 3.7 0.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.03 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 29 1461 1147 548 896 937 376 735 328 85 517 231 V/C Ratio(X) 0.24 0.83 0.34 0.63 0.33 0.33 0.76 0.33 0.15 0.29 0.34 0.03 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 194 1809 1420 1644 1292 1352 461 1654 738 302 1800 803 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 40.1 21.8 16.6 35.2 12.2 12.2 35.7 27.8 26.8 38.0 31.7 30.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.6 2.4 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 4.3 0.1 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.2 10.3 2.4 2.2 3.1 3.2 2.9 2.0 0.8 0.5 1.6 0.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 41.7 24.2 16.7 35.6 12.3 12.3 40.0 27.9 26.8 38.7 31.9 30.3 LnGrp LOS D C B D B B D C C D C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1619 957 573 210
Approach Delay, s/veh 22.5 20.7 33.8 32.6
Approach LOS CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.9 22.4 13.0 39.2 13.0 17.3 5.3 46.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.3 4.0 5.3 4.0 * 5.3 4.0 5.3 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 14.0 38.4 27.0 42.0 11.0 * 42 9.0 60.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.1 6.7 7.5 27.4 8.6 5.7 2.3 10.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.1 0.7 6.5 0.1 0.8 0.0 2.5 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 24.5
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
EXHIBIT D
1974
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 plus Project - Gateway 1 Lane 14: Isabel & Gateway Avenue Timing Plan: PM Peak
Isabel TOD Synchro 12 Report
TJKM Page 3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 84 26 530 59 21 54 545 505 90 53 1028 33 Future Volume (veh/h) 84 26 530 59 21 54 545 505 90 53 1028 33 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 91 0 595 64 23 59 592 549 98 58 1117 36 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 63 0 693 63 102 262 561 1662 296 75 1031 33
Arrive On Green 0.04 0.00 0.23 0.04 0.23 0.23 0.30 0.55 0.55 0.04 0.29 0.29 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 0 3075 1781 454 1164 1853 2998 533 1781 3510 113 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 91 0 595 64 0 82 592 324 323 58 565 588 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1538 1781 0 1618 926 1777 1754 1781 1777 1846 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.0 0.0 20.9 4.0 0.0 4.6 34.0 11.2 11.3 3.6 33.0 33.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.0 0.0 20.9 4.0 0.0 4.6 34.0 11.2 11.3 3.6 33.0 33.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.72 1.00 0.30 1.00 0.06
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 63 0 693 63 0 365 561 985 973 75 522 543 V/C Ratio(X) 1.43 0.00 0.86 1.01 0.00 0.22 1.06 0.33 0.33 0.78 1.08 1.08 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 63 0 822 63 0 432 561 985 973 127 522 543 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 54.2 0.0 41.8 54.2 0.0 35.5 39.2 13.6 13.7 53.3 39.7 39.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 264.6 0.0 8.0 115.5 0.0 0.3 53.5 0.2 0.2 15.6 63.6 63.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 6.5 0.0 8.6 3.8 0.0 1.9 11.5 4.2 4.1 1.9 22.9 23.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 318.8 0.0 49.7 169.6 0.0 35.8 92.6 13.8 13.8 68.8 103.3 102.7 LnGrp LOS F D F D F B B E F F
Approach Vol, veh/h 686 146 1239 1211
Approach Delay, s/veh 85.4 94.5 51.5 101.4
Approach LOS F F D F
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.7 66.3 8.0 29.3 38.0 37.0 8.0 29.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 8.0 59.0 4.0 30.0 34.0 33.0 4.0 30.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.6 13.3 6.0 22.9 36.0 35.0 6.0 6.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 78.9
HCM 6th LOS E
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
EXHIBIT D
1975
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 plus Project - Gateway 1 Lane 19: Isabel Ave & A Street Timing Plan: PM Peak
Isabel TOD Synchro 12 Report
TJKM Page 4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 43 41 280 19 27 19 234 379 30 18 815 16 Future Volume (veh/h) 43 41 280 19 27 19 234 379 30 18 815 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.96 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 47 45 304 21 29 21 254 412 33 20 886 17 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 105 60 403 34 252 182 313 1439 115 33 981 418 Arrive On Green 0.06 0.29 0.29 0.02 0.25 0.25 0.18 0.43 0.43 0.02 0.28 0.28 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 204 1376 1781 995 721 1781 3323 265 1781 3554 1515 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 47 0 349 21 0 50 254 219 226 20 886 17 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1580 1781 0 1716 1781 1777 1811 1781 1777 1515 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.7 0.0 13.6 0.8 0.0 1.5 9.3 5.4 5.5 0.8 16.3 0.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.7 0.0 13.6 0.8 0.0 1.5 9.3 5.4 5.5 0.8 16.3 0.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.87 1.00 0.42 1.00 0.15 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 105 0 462 34 0 434 313 770 784 33 981 418 V/C Ratio(X) 0.45 0.00 0.75 0.61 0.00 0.12 0.81 0.29 0.29 0.61 0.90 0.04 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 105 0 700 105 0 761 1026 1391 1418 132 997 425 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 30.8 0.0 21.7 32.9 0.0 19.5 26.8 12.4 12.4 33.0 23.6 10.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.9 0.0 2.5 16.3 0.0 0.1 5.1 0.2 0.2 16.6 11.2 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.8 0.0 5.1 0.5 0.0 0.6 4.0 1.8 1.9 0.5 7.5 0.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 33.7 0.0 24.3 49.3 0.0 19.6 31.9 12.6 12.6 49.6 34.8 10.3 LnGrp LOS C C D B C B B D C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 396 71 699 923
Approach Delay, s/veh 25.4 28.4 19.6 34.7
Approach LOS C C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.3 33.3 5.3 23.8 15.9 22.7 8.0 21.1 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 53.0 4.0 30.0 39.0 19.0 4.0 30.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.8 7.5 2.8 15.6 11.3 18.3 3.7 3.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.5 0.0 2.1 0.7 0.4 0.0 0.2 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 27.7
HCM 6th LOS C
EXHIBIT D
1976
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 plus Project - Gateway 1 Lane 22: Main Street/Montage Dr & Portola Timing Plan: PM Peak Isabel TOD Synchro 12 Report
TJKM Page 5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 125 1189 142 125 510 129 73 38 223 37 69 31 Future Volume (veh/h) 125 1189 142 125 510 129 73 38 223 37 69 31 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 136 1292 154 136 554 140 79 41 242 40 75 34 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 367 1211 144 153 727 183 101 53 315 58 248 112 Arrive On Green 0.21 0.38 0.38 0.09 0.26 0.26 0.06 0.23 0.23 0.03 0.20 0.20 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3199 380 1781 2812 708 1781 235 1386 1781 1219 552 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 136 715 731 136 349 345 79 0 283 40 0 109 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1802 1781 1777 1743 1781 0 1621 1781 0 1771 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.8 22.0 22.0 4.4 10.5 10.6 2.5 0.0 9.5 1.3 0.0 3.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.8 22.0 22.0 4.4 10.5 10.6 2.5 0.0 9.5 1.3 0.0 3.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.21 1.00 0.41 1.00 0.86 1.00 0.31
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 367 673 682 153 459 450 101 0 368 58 0 361 V/C Ratio(X) 0.37 1.06 1.07 0.89 0.76 0.77 0.79 0.00 0.77 0.69 0.00 0.30 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 367 673 682 153 612 600 153 0 893 153 0 975 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.8 18.1 18.1 26.3 19.9 19.9 27.1 0.0 21.0 27.8 0.0 19.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.6 52.5 55.3 41.8 3.9 4.2 13.8 0.0 3.4 13.3 0.0 0.5 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.5 17.1 17.8 3.5 4.2 4.2 1.4 0.0 3.7 0.7 0.0 1.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 20.4 70.6 73.4 68.0 23.8 24.1 40.9 0.0 24.4 41.1 0.0 20.1 LnGrp LOS C F F E C C D C D C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1582 830 362 149
Approach Delay, s/veh 67.6 31.2 28.0 25.7
Approach LOS E C C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.0 26.0 7.3 15.8 16.0 19.0 5.9 17.2 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 22.0 5.0 32.0 7.0 20.0 5.0 32.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.4 24.0 4.5 5.0 5.8 12.6 3.3 11.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 2.4 0.0 1.8 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 50.2
HCM 6th LOS D
EXHIBIT D
1977
HCM 6th AWSC 2040 plus Project - Gateway 2 Lanes
1: Gateway Avenue & Main Street Timing Plan: AM Peak
Isabel TOD Synchro 12 Report
TJKM 05/09/2024
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 14.9
Intersection LOS B
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 13 440 644 8 17 9
Future Vol, veh/h 13 440 644 8 17 9
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 14 478 700 9 18 10
Number of Lanes 012010
Approach EB WB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB
Opposing Lanes 2 1 0
Conflicting Approach Left SB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 0 2
Conflicting Approach Right SB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 0 1 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 16.2 14.2 9.6
HCM LOS C B A
Lane EBLn1 WBLn1 WBLn2 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 3% 0% 0% 65%
Vol Thru, % 97% 100% 96% 0%
Vol Right, % 0% 0% 4% 35%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 453 429 223 26
LT Vol 13 0 0 17
Through Vol 440 429 215 0
RT Vol 0089
Lane Flow Rate 492 467 242 28
Geometry Grp 4a 5 5 2
Degree of Util (X) 0.65 0.645 0.333 0.049
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.754 4.975 4.95 6.201
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 758 728 726 575
Service Time 2.78 2.704 2.679 4.268
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.649 0.641 0.333 0.049
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 16.2 16.3 10.1 9.6
HCM Lane LOS C C B A
HCM 95th-tile Q 4.9 4.7 1.5 0.2
EXHIBIT D
1978
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 plus Project - Gateway 2 Lanes 11: Isabel & Portola Timing Plan: AM Peak
Isabel TOD Synchro 12 Report
TJKM 05/09/2024
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 2 302 191 329 643 75 425 291 57 11 75 2 Future Volume (veh/h) 2 302 191 329 643 75 425 291 57 11 75 2 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 2 328 208 358 699 82 462 316 62 12 82 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 9 685 538 725 1064 125 593 1198 534 48 685 306 Arrive On Green 0.00 0.19 0.19 0.14 0.33 0.33 0.17 0.34 0.34 0.03 0.19 0.19 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 2790 5023 3204 376 3456 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 2 328 208 358 387 394 462 316 62 12 82 2 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1395 1674 1777 1803 1728 1777 1585 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.1 5.1 4.0 4.1 11.6 11.6 8.0 4.0 1.7 0.4 1.2 0.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.1 5.1 4.0 4.1 11.6 11.6 8.0 4.0 1.7 0.4 1.2 0.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.21 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 9 685 538 725 590 599 593 1198 534 48 685 306 V/C Ratio(X) 0.23 0.48 0.39 0.49 0.66 0.66 0.78 0.26 0.12 0.25 0.12 0.01 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 257 2397 1882 1452 1456 1477 1110 2820 1258 343 2386 1064 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 30.9 22.3 21.9 24.5 17.8 17.8 24.7 15.0 14.2 29.7 20.8 20.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.8 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.5 0.9 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 2.0 1.3 1.5 4.4 4.4 3.1 1.5 0.6 0.2 0.5 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 35.7 22.5 22.1 24.7 18.2 18.2 25.5 15.1 14.3 30.7 20.8 20.3 LnGrp LOS D C C C B B C B B C C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 538 1139 840 96
Approach Delay, s/veh 22.4 20.3 20.8 22.0
Approach LOS CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.7 26.3 13.0 17.3 14.7 17.3 4.3 26.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.3 4.0 5.3 4.0 * 5.3 4.0 5.3 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 12.0 49.4 18.0 42.0 20.0 * 42 9.0 51.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.4 6.0 6.1 7.1 10.0 3.2 2.1 13.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.5 0.6 2.0 0.7 0.3 0.0 3.5 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 20.9
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
EXHIBIT D
1979
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 plus Project - Gateway 2 Lanes 14: Isabel & Gateway Avenue Timing Plan: AM Peak
Isabel TOD Synchro 12 Report
TJKM 05/09/2024
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 22 6 429 83 18 18 580 781 35 20 674 54 Future Volume (veh/h) 22 6 429 83 18 18 580 781 35 20 674 54 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 24 0 471 90 20 20 630 849 38 22 733 59 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 38 0 676 103 217 217 791 1629 73 36 812 65
Arrive On Green 0.02 0.00 0.22 0.06 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.47 0.47 0.02 0.24 0.24 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 0 3074 1781 845 845 3206 3458 155 1781 3323 267 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 24 0 471 90 0 40 630 436 451 22 392 400 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1537 1781 0 1690 1603 1777 1836 1781 1777 1813 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.9 0.0 9.8 3.5 0.0 1.2 12.7 11.9 11.9 0.8 14.8 14.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.9 0.0 9.8 3.5 0.0 1.2 12.7 11.9 11.9 0.8 14.8 14.8 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.08 1.00 0.15
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 38 0 676 103 0 433 791 837 865 36 434 443 V/C Ratio(X) 0.63 0.00 0.70 0.87 0.00 0.09 0.80 0.52 0.52 0.62 0.90 0.90 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 103 0 1333 103 0 733 2131 1489 1539 129 436 445 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 33.6 0.0 24.9 32.4 0.0 19.6 24.4 12.8 12.8 33.7 25.3 25.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 15.9 0.0 1.3 51.2 0.0 0.1 1.9 0.5 0.5 16.3 21.5 21.4 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.6 0.0 3.5 2.9 0.0 0.5 4.5 3.9 4.1 0.5 8.1 8.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 49.5 0.0 26.2 83.5 0.0 19.7 26.3 13.3 13.3 49.9 46.9 46.7 LnGrp LOS D C F B C B B D D D
Approach Vol, veh/h 495 130 1517 814
Approach Delay, s/veh 27.3 63.9 18.7 46.9
Approach LOS C E B D
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.4 36.6 8.0 19.2 21.1 20.9 5.5 21.7 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 58.0 4.0 30.0 46.0 17.0 4.0 30.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.8 13.9 5.5 11.8 14.7 16.8 2.9 3.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 5.9 0.0 1.9 2.3 0.1 0.0 0.2 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 29.9
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
EXHIBIT D
1980
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 plus Project - Gateway 2 Lanes 19: Isabel Ave & A Street Timing Plan: AM Peak
Isabel TOD Synchro 12 Report
TJKM 05/09/2024
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 17 13 158 28 14 6 294 501 12 7 562 26 Future Volume (veh/h) 17 13 158 28 14 6 294 501 12 7 562 26 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 18 14 172 30 15 7 320 545 13 8 611 28 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 31 22 272 48 237 111 399 1649 39 15 888 377
Arrive On Green 0.02 0.19 0.19 0.03 0.20 0.20 0.22 0.47 0.47 0.01 0.25 0.25 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 117 1437 1781 1192 556 1781 3544 84 1781 3554 1511 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 18 0 186 30 0 22 320 273 285 8 611 28 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1554 1781 0 1748 1781 1777 1852 1781 1777 1511 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.5 0.0 5.7 0.9 0.0 0.5 8.8 5.0 5.0 0.2 8.1 0.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.5 0.0 5.7 0.9 0.0 0.5 8.8 5.0 5.0 0.2 8.1 0.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.32 1.00 0.05 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 31 0 295 48 0 348 399 827 862 15 888 377 V/C Ratio(X) 0.57 0.00 0.63 0.62 0.00 0.06 0.80 0.33 0.33 0.53 0.69 0.07 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 138 0 902 138 0 1015 1344 1856 1934 138 1306 555 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 25.2 0.0 19.3 24.9 0.0 16.8 19.0 8.7 8.7 25.5 17.6 8.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 15.4 0.0 2.2 12.4 0.0 0.1 3.8 0.2 0.2 26.5 1.0 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.3 0.0 2.1 0.5 0.0 0.2 3.4 1.4 1.4 0.2 2.8 0.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 40.6 0.0 21.5 37.2 0.0 16.9 22.8 9.0 9.0 52.1 18.5 8.9 LnGrp LOS D C D B C A A D B A
Approach Vol, veh/h 204 52 878 647
Approach Delay, s/veh 23.2 28.6 14.0 18.5
Approach LOS C C B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 4.4 28.1 5.4 13.8 15.6 16.9 4.9 14.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 54.0 4.0 30.0 39.0 19.0 4.0 30.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 7.0 2.9 7.7 10.8 10.1 2.5 2.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.2 0.0 1.2 0.9 2.5 0.0 0.1 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 17.1
HCM 6th LOS B
EXHIBIT D
1981
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 plus Project - Gateway 2 Lanes 22: Main Street/Montage Dr & Portola Timing Plan: AM Peak Isabel TOD Synchro 12 Report
TJKM 05/09/2024
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 10 381 28 137 894 27 192 9 25 24 87 102 Future Volume (veh/h) 10 381 28 137 894 27 192 9 25 24 87 102 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 11 414 30 149 972 29 209 10 27 26 95 111 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 20 1062 77 156 1383 41 264 130 352 42 131 153 Arrive On Green 0.01 0.32 0.32 0.09 0.39 0.39 0.15 0.29 0.29 0.02 0.17 0.17 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3361 243 1781 3523 105 1781 447 1206 1781 786 919 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 11 218 226 149 490 511 209 0 37 26 0 206 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1827 1781 1777 1851 1781 0 1653 1781 0 1705 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.3 5.5 5.5 4.7 13.2 13.2 6.4 0.0 0.9 0.8 0.0 6.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.3 5.5 5.5 4.7 13.2 13.2 6.4 0.0 0.9 0.8 0.0 6.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.13 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.73 1.00 0.54
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 20 562 577 156 698 727 264 0 482 42 0 285 V/C Ratio(X) 0.55 0.39 0.39 0.95 0.70 0.70 0.79 0.00 0.08 0.62 0.00 0.72 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 125 562 577 156 698 727 469 0 1045 156 0 778 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 28.0 15.2 15.2 25.9 14.5 14.5 23.4 0.0 14.6 27.5 0.0 22.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 21.5 2.0 2.0 57.8 5.8 5.6 5.3 0.0 0.1 13.7 0.0 3.5 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.3 2.2 2.2 4.3 5.4 5.5 2.9 0.0 0.3 0.5 0.0 2.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 49.6 17.2 17.2 83.7 20.4 20.1 28.7 0.0 14.7 41.3 0.0 26.0 LnGrp LOS D B B F C C C B D C
Approach Vol, veh/h 455 1150 246 232
Approach Delay, s/veh 18.0 28.5 26.6 27.7
Approach LOS B C C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.0 22.0 12.4 13.5 4.6 26.4 5.3 20.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 18.0 15.0 26.0 4.0 19.0 5.0 36.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.7 7.5 8.4 8.5 2.3 15.2 2.8 2.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.8 0.3 1.1 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.2 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 25.9
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.
EXHIBIT D
1982
HCM 6th AWSC 2040 plus Project - Gateway 2 Lanes
1: Gateway Avenue & Main Street Timing Plan: PM Peak
Isabel TOD Synchro 12 Report
TJKM 05/09/2024
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 30.7
Intersection LOS D
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 15 672 461 18 12 17
Future Vol, veh/h 15 672 461 18 12 17
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 16 730 501 20 13 18
Number of Lanes 012010
Approach EB WB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB
Opposing Lanes 2 1 0
Conflicting Approach Left SB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 0 2
Conflicting Approach Right SB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 0 1 1
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 44.9 11.6 9.7
HCM LOS EBA
Lane EBLn1 WBLn1 WBLn2 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 2% 0% 0% 41%
Vol Thru, % 98% 100% 90% 0%
Vol Right, % 0% 0% 10% 59%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 687 307 172 29
LT Vol 15 0 0 12
Through Vol 672 307 154 0
RT Vol 0 0 18 17
Lane Flow Rate 747 334 187 32
Geometry Grp 4a 5 5 2
Degree of Util (X) 0.962 0.479 0.264 0.055
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.638 5.16 5.086 6.239
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 784 698 705 569
Service Time 2.668 2.899 2.825 4.329
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.953 0.479 0.265 0.056
HCM Control Delay, s/veh 44.9 12.6 9.7 9.7
HCM Lane LOS EBAA
HCM 95th-tile Q 14.9 2.6 1.1 0.2
EXHIBIT D
1983
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 plus Project - Gateway 2 Lanes 11: Isabel & Portola Timing Plan: PM Peak
Isabel TOD Synchro 12 Report
TJKM 05/09/2024
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 6 1122 361 319 552 9 262 221 44 23 164 6 Future Volume (veh/h) 6 1122 361 319 552 9 262 221 44 23 164 6 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 7 1220 392 347 600 10 285 240 48 25 178 7 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 29 1461 1147 548 1803 30 376 735 328 85 517 231 Arrive On Green 0.02 0.41 0.41 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.11 0.21 0.21 0.05 0.15 0.15 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 2790 5023 3577 60 3456 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 7 1220 392 347 298 312 285 240 48 25 178 7 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1395 1674 1777 1860 1728 1777 1585 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.3 25.4 7.9 5.5 8.2 8.3 6.6 4.7 2.0 1.1 3.7 0.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.3 25.4 7.9 5.5 8.2 8.3 6.6 4.7 2.0 1.1 3.7 0.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.03 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 29 1461 1147 548 896 937 376 735 328 85 517 231 V/C Ratio(X) 0.24 0.83 0.34 0.63 0.33 0.33 0.76 0.33 0.15 0.29 0.34 0.03 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 194 1809 1420 1644 1292 1352 461 1654 738 302 1800 803 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 40.1 21.8 16.6 35.2 12.2 12.2 35.7 27.8 26.8 38.0 31.7 30.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.6 2.4 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 4.3 0.1 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.2 10.3 2.4 2.2 3.1 3.2 2.9 2.0 0.8 0.5 1.6 0.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 41.7 24.2 16.7 35.6 12.3 12.3 40.0 27.9 26.8 38.7 31.9 30.3 LnGrp LOS D C B D B B D C C D C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1619 957 573 210
Approach Delay, s/veh 22.5 20.7 33.8 32.6
Approach LOS CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.9 22.4 13.0 39.2 13.0 17.3 5.3 46.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 5.3 4.0 5.3 4.0 * 5.3 4.0 5.3 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 14.0 38.4 27.0 42.0 11.0 * 42 9.0 60.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.1 6.7 7.5 27.4 8.6 5.7 2.3 10.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.1 0.7 6.5 0.1 0.8 0.0 2.5 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 24.5
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
EXHIBIT D
1984
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 plus Project - Gateway 2 Lanes 14: Isabel & Gateway Avenue Timing Plan: PM Peak
Isabel TOD Synchro 12 Report
TJKM 05/09/2024
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 84 26 530 59 21 54 545 505 90 53 1028 33 Future Volume (veh/h) 84 26 530 59 21 54 545 505 90 53 1028 33 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 91 0 595 64 23 59 592 549 98 58 1117 36 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 94 0 690 82 99 253 1014 1639 291 75 956 31
Arrive On Green 0.05 0.00 0.22 0.05 0.22 0.22 0.32 0.55 0.55 0.04 0.27 0.27 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 0 3075 1781 454 1164 3206 2997 533 1781 3510 113 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 91 0 595 64 0 82 592 325 322 58 565 588 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1538 1781 0 1618 1603 1777 1753 1781 1777 1846 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.8 0.0 21.2 4.0 0.0 4.8 17.6 11.5 11.6 3.7 31.0 31.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.8 0.0 21.2 4.0 0.0 4.8 17.6 11.5 11.6 3.7 31.0 31.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.72 1.00 0.30 1.00 0.06
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 94 0 690 82 0 352 1014 972 959 75 484 503 V/C Ratio(X) 0.97 0.00 0.86 0.78 0.00 0.23 0.58 0.33 0.34 0.78 1.17 1.17 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 94 0 811 94 0 427 1014 972 959 110 484 503 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 53.8 0.0 42.4 53.7 0.0 36.7 32.6 14.3 14.3 54.0 41.4 41.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 82.4 0.0 8.4 29.8 0.0 0.3 2.5 0.2 0.2 18.5 95.9 95.4 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 4.8 0.0 8.8 2.5 0.0 1.9 6.9 4.3 4.3 2.0 25.8 26.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 136.2 0.0 50.8 83.5 0.0 37.0 35.1 14.5 14.5 72.5 137.3 136.8 LnGrp LOS F D F D D B B E F F
Approach Vol, veh/h 686 146 1239 1211
Approach Delay, s/veh 62.1 57.4 24.3 133.9
Approach LOS E E C F
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.8 66.2 9.2 29.5 40.0 35.0 10.0 28.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 7.0 60.0 6.0 30.0 36.0 31.0 6.0 30.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.7 13.6 6.0 23.2 19.6 33.0 7.8 6.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.0 0.0 1.6 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.4 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 74.1
HCM 6th LOS E
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
EXHIBIT D
1985
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 plus Project - Gateway 2 Lanes 19: Isabel Ave & A Street Timing Plan: PM Peak
Isabel TOD Synchro 12 Report
TJKM 05/09/2024
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 43 41 280 19 27 19 234 379 30 18 815 16 Future Volume (veh/h) 43 41 280 19 27 19 234 379 30 18 815 16 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.96 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 47 45 304 21 29 21 254 412 33 20 886 17 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 105 60 403 34 252 182 313 1439 115 33 981 418 Arrive On Green 0.06 0.29 0.29 0.02 0.25 0.25 0.18 0.43 0.43 0.02 0.28 0.28 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 204 1376 1781 995 721 1781 3323 265 1781 3554 1515 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 47 0 349 21 0 50 254 219 226 20 886 17 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1580 1781 0 1716 1781 1777 1811 1781 1777 1515 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.7 0.0 13.6 0.8 0.0 1.5 9.3 5.4 5.5 0.8 16.3 0.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.7 0.0 13.6 0.8 0.0 1.5 9.3 5.4 5.5 0.8 16.3 0.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.87 1.00 0.42 1.00 0.15 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 105 0 462 34 0 434 313 770 784 33 981 418 V/C Ratio(X) 0.45 0.00 0.75 0.61 0.00 0.12 0.81 0.29 0.29 0.61 0.90 0.04 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 105 0 700 105 0 761 1026 1391 1418 132 997 425 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 30.8 0.0 21.7 32.9 0.0 19.5 26.8 12.4 12.4 33.0 23.6 10.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.9 0.0 2.5 16.3 0.0 0.1 5.1 0.2 0.2 16.6 11.2 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.8 0.0 5.1 0.5 0.0 0.6 4.0 1.8 1.9 0.5 7.5 0.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 33.7 0.0 24.3 49.3 0.0 19.6 31.9 12.6 12.6 49.6 34.8 10.3 LnGrp LOS C C D B C B B D C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 396 71 699 923
Approach Delay, s/veh 25.4 28.4 19.6 34.7
Approach LOS C C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.3 33.3 5.3 23.8 15.9 22.7 8.0 21.1 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 53.0 4.0 30.0 39.0 19.0 4.0 30.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.8 7.5 2.8 15.6 11.3 18.3 3.7 3.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.5 0.0 2.1 0.7 0.4 0.0 0.2 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 27.7
HCM 6th LOS C
EXHIBIT D
1986
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2040 plus Project - Gateway 2 Lanes 22: Main Street/Montage Dr & Portola Timing Plan: PM Peak Isabel TOD Synchro 12 Report
TJKM 05/09/2024
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 125 1189 142 125 510 129 73 38 223 37 69 31 Future Volume (veh/h) 125 1189 142 125 510 129 73 38 223 37 69 31 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 136 1292 154 136 554 140 79 41 242 40 75 34 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 367 1211 144 153 727 183 101 53 315 58 248 112 Arrive On Green 0.21 0.38 0.38 0.09 0.26 0.26 0.06 0.23 0.23 0.03 0.20 0.20 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3199 380 1781 2812 708 1781 235 1386 1781 1219 552 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 136 715 731 136 349 345 79 0 283 40 0 109 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1802 1781 1777 1743 1781 0 1621 1781 0 1771 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.8 22.0 22.0 4.4 10.5 10.6 2.5 0.0 9.5 1.3 0.0 3.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.8 22.0 22.0 4.4 10.5 10.6 2.5 0.0 9.5 1.3 0.0 3.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.21 1.00 0.41 1.00 0.86 1.00 0.31
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 367 673 682 153 459 450 101 0 368 58 0 361 V/C Ratio(X) 0.37 1.06 1.07 0.89 0.76 0.77 0.79 0.00 0.77 0.69 0.00 0.30 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 367 673 682 153 612 600 153 0 893 153 0 975 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.8 18.1 18.1 26.3 19.9 19.9 27.1 0.0 21.0 27.8 0.0 19.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.6 52.5 55.3 41.8 3.9 4.2 13.8 0.0 3.4 13.3 0.0 0.5 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.5 17.1 17.8 3.5 4.2 4.2 1.4 0.0 3.7 0.7 0.0 1.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 20.4 70.6 73.4 68.0 23.8 24.1 40.9 0.0 24.4 41.1 0.0 20.1 LnGrp LOS C F F E C C D C D C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1582 830 362 149
Approach Delay, s/veh 67.6 31.2 28.0 25.7
Approach LOS E C C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.0 26.0 7.3 15.8 16.0 19.0 5.9 17.2 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 22.0 5.0 32.0 7.0 20.0 5.0 32.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.4 24.0 4.5 5.0 5.8 12.6 3.3 11.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 2.4 0.0 1.8 Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay, s/veh 50.2
HCM 6th LOS D
EXHIBIT D
1987
Appendix D
Simtraffic Queue Analysis Worksheets
EXHIBIT D
1988
Queuing and Blocking Report AM Peak
2040 Baseline 06/11/2024
2040 AM Isabel TOD SimTraffic Report
TJKM Page 1
Intersection: 1: Gateway Avenue & Main Street
Movement EB WB WB SB
Directions Served LT T TR LR
Maximum Queue (ft) 110 154 163 30
Average Queue (ft) 52 79 88 15
95th Queue (ft) 84 127 138 36
Link Distance (ft) 196 196
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 11: Isabel & Portola
Movement EB EB EB EB EB WB WB WB WB WB NB NB
Directions Served L T T R R L L L T TR L L
Maximum Queue (ft) 14 105 121 76 91 22 178 227 194 199 169 166 Average Queue (ft) 1 60 60 34 38 3 51 127 114 104 103 95 95th Queue (ft) 7 96 106 61 75 15 146 195 173 173 158 156 Link Distance (ft) 862 862 670 670
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 350 350 350 400 400 400 275 275
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 11: Isabel & Portola
Movement NB NB NB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served T T R L T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 111 99 31 40 50 91 19
Average Queue (ft) 48 48 5 9 6 39 1
95th Queue (ft) 94 93 21 32 31 78 10
Link Distance (ft) 328 328 568 568
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 275 170 170
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EXHIBIT D
1989
Queuing and Blocking Report AM Peak
2040 Baseline 06/11/2024
2040 AM Isabel TOD SimTraffic Report
TJKM Page 2
Intersection: 14: Isabel & Gateway Avenue
Movement EB EB WB WB NB NB NB NB SB SB SB
Directions Served TR R L TR L L T TR L T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 118 75 133 60 219 241 264 181 110 251 278 Average Queue (ft) 52 35 55 17 96 126 124 54 20 117 151 95th Queue (ft) 92 72 104 51 168 196 235 127 67 206 241 Link Distance (ft) 196 352 352 434 434 434 678 678
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 50 225 100
Storage Blk Time (%) 8 1 0 0 13
Queuing Penalty (veh) 10 1 0 0 3
Intersection: 19: Isabel Ave & A Street
Movement EB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB SB
Directions Served TR L TR L T TR L T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 80 62 40 203 169 114 33 164 198 86
Average Queue (ft) 37 21 11 95 48 23 5 69 92 12
95th Queue (ft) 66 53 36 169 122 72 24 138 173 56
Link Distance (ft) 475 678 678 170 170 170
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 1 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 2 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 200 200 150
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 2 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0 0 0
Intersection: 22: Main Street/Montage Dr & Portola
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served L T TR L T TR L TR L TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 35 102 130 150 204 206 129 22 54 139 Average Queue (ft) 8 42 60 63 93 102 59 3 17 66
95th Queue (ft) 26 81 113 120 167 170 103 16 44 120
Link Distance (ft) 616 616 862 862 215 215
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 290 295 100
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 17
EXHIBIT D
1990
Queuing and Blocking Report PM Peak
2040 Baseline 06/11/2024
2040 PM SimTraffic Report