Morgan Hill City Council
February 15, 2023

Benchmark: Elevations shown on this map are based upon Santa Clara Valley Water Benchmark BM1067 located at the railroad tracks for Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR); 300 southeast from Cochrane Road along Old Monterey Road; opposite to address 18515 Old Monterey Road; disk is on top of 1.7 feet wide by 8.5 feet long concrete headwall on northewesterly side of tracks and over 2 feet diameter steel pipe culvert; 9.5 feet southwesterly from the most southwesterly rail fro railroad tracks; 37.5 feet northeasterly from telephone pole No. GT109368. City of Morgan Hill
Elevation= 353.25' (NAVD '88)
Flood Zone:Project lies within Flood Zone AH: Flood depths of 1-3 feet (usually areas of ponding); Base flood elevations determined.

Base Flood Elevation = 354.00'
Underground Utility Note: Observed surface evidence of utility lines including facilities, appurtenances and markings were used in depicting the location of underground utilities shown on these plans. However, lacking excavation, the exact location and depth of underground features cannot be accurately, completely and reliably depicted. Where additional or more detailed information is required, the client is advised that excavation may be necessary.

Construction Staking Note: Owner's Engineer shall provide construction staking for all improvements shown. It shall be the contractor's responsibility to verify the accuracy of all staking prior to the installation of all improvements shown on these plans. It is recommended that the contractor check line and grade from at least three (3) stakes provided. Any descrepancies shall be reported immediately to MH engineering Co. or the Owner's representative.

The contractor shall also field verify all existing tulities' location and elevation prior to the installation of any proposed utilities. Any discrepancies shall be reported to MH engineering Co. or the Owner's representative.

Underground Service Alert Note
Observedsurface evidenceof utility lines includingfacilities,appurtenances,and markingswereused in depictingthe locationsof the undergroundfeaturesshownon these plans. Underground features depicted are approximate and it is the responsibilityof the contractor to determine the actual location and depth of underground utilities prior to starting excavation.

Call USA North: 1.800.227.2600 OR 811
existing SDE

L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\Stormwater Control Plan\Attachment B1 - Cover Sheet.docx 6/16/2022
H
MH engineering Co.
16075 Vineyard Blvd. Morgan Hill, CA 95037 - (408) 779-7381 M

Attachment B:

Central Coast Performance
Requirement Checklist

The Gates 764-10-013 & 015
18545 & 18565 Monterey Rd. - 764-10-013 & 015
Monterey Rd & Jarvis Dr.

City Ventures Homebuilders, LLC
Kristian Wallace, PE
X
Mixed use development with 49 Residential Units and 5 Commercial Units.

Fisher Creek
174,172
0 174,172
0 112,024
112,024
62,148
0 112,024
County File No: GPA2021-0005
1 1

X
X
X
X
X
X

X See Improvement Plan Sheets C.9
X
City Ventures Homebuilders, LLC
City Ventures Homebuilders, LLC
444 Spear St., St. 200, San Francisco, CA 94105
646.522.4260 / [email protected]
X
X

No
yes
yes
yes
No jurisdictional creeks were disturbed in the proposed development. An existing drainage ditch is being backfilled and culverts extended across the project to maintain existing drainage patterns yes
no
yes
yes, runoff is routed through vegetated areas and vegetated swales to underground storage system wherever possible yes, sidewalk, driveway, walkway and patio runoff is directed over adjacent vegetation and collected in an underground storage system wherever possible.
yes
no
no
GPA2021-0005
Kristian Wallace, PE City Ventures Homebuilders, LLC
18545 & 18565 Monterey Rd.

STATE OF CAL I FORN I A
EXP.

No. 93207

REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGIN
E
ER
03-31-2024

C I V I L
KRISTIAN A. WALLACE

yes
yes
n/a
n/a
yes
yes
yes
n/a
n/a
yes
yes
all proposed runoff routed through vegetated areas yes
GPA2021-0005

Yes
No
Yes
yes
GPA2021-0005
yes
yes
yes
yes
No underdrain
provided
yes

GPA2021-0005
Yes
Yes
No
Kristian Wallace, PE City Ventures Homebuilders, LLC
18545 & 18565 Monterey Rd.

STATE OF CAL I FORN I A
EXP.

No. 93207

REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGIN
E
ER
03-31-2024

C I V I L
KRISTIAN A. WALLACE

x

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
No
N/A
No
N/A
N/A
GPA2021-0005

Incorporated
Incorporated
Incorporated
Incorporated
N/A
Optimized
Optimized
GPA2021-0005
Kristian Wallace, PE City Ventures Homebuilders, LLC
18545 & 18565 Monterey Rd.

STATE OF CAL I FORN I A
EXP.

No. 93207

REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINE
ER
03-31-2024

C I V I L
KRISTIAN A. WAL
ACE

N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
GPA2021-0005

ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
GPA2021-0005

ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
ü
GPA2021-0005

L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\Stormwater Control Plan\Attachment C1 - Cover Sheet.docx 6/16/2022
H
MH engineering Co.
16075 Vineyard Blvd. Morgan Hill, CA 95037 - (408) 779-7381 M

Attachment C:

Geotechnical Investigation Report

PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL UPDATE
On

PROPOSED TOWNHOME AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT
At
18605 Monterey Road
Morgan Hill, California
For
City Ventures

By
Quantum Geotechnical, Inc.

Project No. H052.G
June 1, 2022

6288 San Ignacio Avenue, Suite A, San Jose, CA 95119 Phone (408)-629-3822 Facsimile (408) 629-3825 1110 Burnett Avenue, Suite B, Concord, CA 94520 Phone: (925) 788-2751 QUANTUM GEOTECHNICAL INC.

Project No. H052.G
June 1, 2022
Ms. Samantha Hauser
Senior Vice President of Development
City Ventures
444 Spear Street
Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94105
Subject: Proposed Townhome and Commercial Development
18605 Monterey Road
Morgan Hill 8
Morgan Hill, California

PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL UPDATE
Reference: Geotechnical Investigation Report
Project No. 10218.G
Gateway Center Business Park
By Terrasearch, Inc
Dated 7 May 2004
Dear Ms. Hauser:

In accordance with your authorization, Quantum Geotechnical, Inc., has reviewed the previous referenced geotechnical investigation report for the purpose of providing an updated geotechnical report for the subject project located in Morgan Hill, California The accompanying report presents a summary of the findings and an update the geotechnical recommendations from the previous referenced report. Our update indicates that development of the site for the proposed new residential and commercial development is feasible provided the recommendations of this report are carefully followed and are incorporated into the project plans and specifications.

Should you have any questions relating to the contents of this report or should additional information be required, please contact our office at your convenience.

Sincerely,
Quantum Geotechnical, Inc.

Simon Makdessi, P.E., G.E.

President

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. Page 3 of 35

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
Purpose and Scope .......................................................................................................... ................ 4 Proposed Construction .................................................................................................... ................ 4 Site Location and Description ......................................................................................... ................ 5 General Geologic Conditions .......................................................................................... ................ 5 Investigation ................................................................................................................... ................ 6 Subsurface Conditions ................................................................................................... ................ 7 2019 CBC Seismic Design Criteria ............................................................................... ................ 7 Liquefaction Potential Evaluation .................................................................................. ................ 8

DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
General ........................................................................................................................... ................ 9 Grading ........................................................................................................................... ................ 9 Surface and Subsurface Drainage ................................................................................... .............. 10 Bio-Filtration Facilities ................................................................................................................. 11 Foundations ..................................................................................................................... .............. 12 Post-Tensioned Slab-On-Grade ................................................................................ .............. 12 General Construction Requirements for Post-Tensioned Slabs ............................... .............. 13 Spread Footings for Commercial Building ............................................................... .............. 15 Miscellaneous Concrete Flatwork ................................................................................... .............. 16 Retaining Walls………………………………………………………………… ………. ........... 16 Retaining Wall Foundations - Spread Footings .............................................................. .............. 18 Retaining Wall Foundations- Pier Footings .................................................................... .............. 18 Pavement Areas ............................................................................................................................ 19 Utility Trenches .............................................................................................................. .............. 20 Project Review and Construction Monitoring ................................................................ .............. 20 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................... .............. 22 LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS ......................................................... .............. 23

APPENDIX A
Figure 1, Site Plan ........................................................................................................... .............. 25 Logs of Test Borings Terrasearch B-1 to B-3 ................................................................. .............. 26

APPENDIX B
The Grading Specifications ............................................................................................. .............. 30 Guide Specifications for Rock Under Floor Slabs .......................................................... .............. 35

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. Page 4 of 35

GEOTECHNICAL IVESTIGATION

PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purpose of this update report was to review the referenced previous geotechnical investigation report performed in 2007, summarize the surface and subsurface soil conditions at the subject site, and prepare update geotechnical design criteria and recommendations for the grading of the site, the design of foundations for the proposed development and the construction of other related facilities on the property.

Our geotechnical update involved the following tasks:
a) An initial reconnaissance of the site by the Soil Engineer to observe local and regional site conditions and document the current condition of the site. b) Review the referenced geotechnical report and any other available published and unpublished geotechnical data for the site and surrounding area.
c) Perform four (4) percolation tests to a depth of 5 to 6 feet at locations designated by the project civil engineer
d) Preparation of a stand alone design level geotechnical update report summarizing the previous geotechnical work, and provide geotechnical recommendations pertinent to the project, including 2019 CBC seismic design criteria, grading, foundations, slab-on-grade construction, percolation tests results, pavement section design, retaining walls, and drainage.

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
It is our understanding that the proposed project consists of developing the site for the construction of seven residential townhome buildings, one commercial building and associated improvements including a large detention pond. Preliminary development plans indicate that the site will receive approximately 2 feet of import soil to raise the site. The buildings will be of wood frame construction and the townhomes will be founded on a post-tensioned slab foundation, while the commercial building will be supported on a conventional spread footing in conjunction with a slab-on-grade floor.

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. Page 5 of 35

SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The site is located in the northern part of Morgan Hill within level terrain. The site is triangular in shape, approximately 3.0 acres in size and has a culvert that runs through the middle of the site. The site is bounded by Monterey Road to the east, railroad tracks to the west and a commercial development to the north. Currently, the site is vacant and covered with short to tall grasses, some shrubs and trees. The surface grade of the site is uneven and it appears that some grading has been performed in the by excavating some areas 3 to 4 feet in depth and creating stockpiles up to 4 feet high. Based on a review of historic aerial photos from Google Earth®, it is not clear as to when such grading may have occurred, but it likely appears that the grading was performed in 2004, the same year the referenced geotechnical investigation was performed.

GENERAL GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS
The site is located within the Coast Ranges Geomorphic Province of California. Throughout the Cenozoic Era, the western part of California has been affected by tectonic forces associated with lateral or transform plate motion between the North American and Pacific crustal plates, which has produced a complex system of northwest-trending faults - the San Andreas, Hayward, and Calaveras Fault systems being the most prominent. Uplift, erosion and subsequent re-deposition of sedimentary rocks within this province have been driven primarily by the northwest-southeast directed strike-slip movement of the tectonic plates and the associated northeast oriented compressional stress. The northwest-trending coastal mountain ranges are the result of an orogeny believed to have been occurring since the Pleistocene epoch (approximately 2-3 million years before present).

Based on a review of geologic maps, the site is underlain by Pleistocene age alluvial fan deposits.

These deposits will generally consist of well consolidated coarser grained material nearer to the crown of the fan and around the area of paleochannels, and finer grained silt and clay deposits nearer to the toe.

The USGS Quaternary Fault database provides a record of quaternary fault surface traces based on historic mapping and observations. Table I, below, lists the USGS Quaternary active fault traces located within 10 miles of the site location.

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. Page 6 of 35
The California Geological Survey seismic hazard zone report for the Morgan Hill quadrangle (2) excludes the site from areas mapped for liquefaction, landslide, and fault surface rupture hazards.

According to the California Department of Water Resources, Water Data Library (1), groundwater may be encountered around 20 feet below ground surface within the site vicinity.

Table I
List of Quaternary Faults

INVESTIGATION
A total of four percolation tests were performed between April 16 and April 20, 2022, at the locations shown on the attached Figure 1, Site Plan, attached to Appendix A.

The percolation tests were performed by drilling an 8 inch diameter hole to depths ranging from 5’7” to 8’3” to the base of the pond design elevation of 344.35. The percolation hole comprised placing a 4 inch perforated pipe centered in the hole on a bed of 6 inches of gravel, with the pipe extending a few inches above the ground surface, and filling the annulus with pea gravel to the ground surface. The material encountered in the test holes ranged from a silty sand to silty clay. Each percolation hole was filled with water to saturate the hole overnight.

The percolation test was performed the next day by filling water to the top and the drop in water level within the pipe was measured at 60 minute intervals. The depth was measured relative to the top of pipe. The test was terminated when the water level drop was similar for 3 consecutive readings. The average water level drop during the last 3 readings is recorded as the percolation rate. The measured percolation rates are as follows;
Fault ID Distance from
Site (mi) USGS Activity Level (yrs)
Calaveras 1.0 < 150 ya
Tres Pinos 2.0 <15 kya
Quien Sabe 3.3 < 15 kya
Sargent 3.7 < 15 kya
San Andreas 5.6 < 150 ya
Vergeles 6.1 1.6 mya – 15 kya
Note: mya and kya are abbreviations for million years (mya) and thousand years (kya) ago.

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. Page 7 of 35
Percolation Test # Depth (ft) Percolation Rate (in/hr)
220 5’7” 3
221 8’3” 3
222 8’0” 2
223 6’9” 5

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Terrasearch advanced a total of three borings to a maximum depth of 30 feet. The locations of the the borings are unknown as the site plan was not included in the copy of the report provided. The subsurface conditions as encountered in the three previous borings somewhat varied in the upper 6 to 9 feet, but generally consisted of layers of clay, silty sand, sand and clayey sand in the upper 6 to 9 feet and then underlain by medium dense sand and gravel to 16 feet where very stiff to hard silty clay or clayey silt was encountered and extended to the maximum depth explored of 30 feet.

No groundwater was encountered in the borings. Fluctuations in the groundwater table may occur due to tidal influences, seasonal rainfall and urbanization or nearby development activities.

The near surface soil registered a Plasticity Index (PI) value of 12, indicating the material to be of low expansion potential.

A more thorough description and stratification of the soil conditions are presented on the respective “Logs of Test Borings” attached in Appendix A.
2019 CBC SEISMIC DESIGN CRITERIA
The seismic design should be in accordance with Chapter 16 of the 2019 California Building Code (CBC). The 2019 CBC utilizes the design procedures outlined in the ASCE 7-16 Standard.

Using the criteria in Chapter 20 of ASCE 7-16, the site is classified as Site Class D. The seismic design parameters have been developed using the online “Seismic Design Maps” tool by the Structural Engineering Association (SEA) and Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD) and a site location based on longitude and latitude. The parameters generated for the center of the site for a latitude 37.143025° N, and longitude 121.663553° W, are presented in the following Table II.

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. Page 8 of 35
According to Section 11.4.8 of ASCE 7-16, a ground motion hazard analysis shall be performed when the coefficient S1 has a value greater than or equal to 0.2 for Site Class D and E sites. A ground motion hazard analysis is excepted if the Cs value is determined by equation 12.8-2 of ASCE 7-16. This is to be determined by the structural engineer. In the event that the calculated Cs values do not trigger a ground motion hazard analysis, the following parameters may be used.

Table II
2019 CBC Seismic Design Criteria
Seismic Parameter Coefficient Value
Site Class D
Peak Ground Acceleration (Site Modified) PGAM 0.742
Mapped MCE Spectral Acceleration at Short-Period 0.2 secs Ss 1.617 Mapped MCE Spectral Acceleration at a Period of 1.0s S1 0.600 Adjusted MCE, 5% Damped Spectral Response
Acceleration at Short Period of 0.2s SMS 1.617
Adjusted MCE, 5% Damped Spectral Response
Acceleration at Period of 1.0s SM1 1.020
Design 5% Damped Spectral Response Acceleration at
Short Period of 0.2s for Occupancy Category I/II/III SDS 1.078 Design 5% Damped Spectral Response Acceleration at
Period of 1.0s for Occupancy Category I/II/III SD1 0.680

LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL EVALUATION
Liquefaction occurs primarily in relatively loose, saturated, cohesionless soils. Under earthquake stresses, these soils become “quick”, lose their strength and become incapable of supporting the weight of the overlying soils or structures. The data used for evaluating liquefaction potential of the subsurface soils consisted of the penetration resistance, the soil gradation, the relative density of the materials, and the groundwater level.

Loose to medium dense cohesionless soil such as sands and some soft to firm silts and low plasticity clays are potentially liquefiable, while very stiff to hard silts and clays and dense and very dense cohesionless sands and gravels are considered to have a very low potential for liquefaction. Based on the data from the borings, no potentially liquefiable layers were encountered and the potential of liquefaction at this site is considered nil.

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. Page 9 of 35

DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS AND UPDATED RECOMMENDATIONS

GENERAL

1. From a geotechnical point of view, the site is suitable for the construction of the proposed residential and commercial development provided the recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into the project plans and specifications.

2. The most prominent geotechnical feature of this site is the presence of low expansive clay or sand materials within the upper 6 to 9 feet, and the presence of large stockpiles from previous grading activities.

3. Due to the previous grading activities, some areas of site disturbance may have occurred and some areas of loose fill may be present in areas. Any areas of loose fill must be removed to native ground, and can be reused as engineered fill. Hand digging into the stockpiles revealed a mixture of silt, clay and some sand and gravel material, which is suitable to re-use as engineered fill.

4. The proposed structures may be satisfactorily supported on structural post tensioned slabs or a spread footing foundation. Specific foundation design recommendations are provided under the heading Foundations.

GRADING

5. The grading requirements presented herein are an integral part of the grading specifications presented in Appendix B of this report and should be considered as such.

6. Currently, the site contains significant vegetation and stripping of vegetation will be required.

Vegetation conditions may be different at the time of grading, and the extent of any stripping, mowing or discing as part of site preparation, will be revaluated at the time of grading. Any strippings will be stockpiled in an approved area that is unaffected by grading operations until their future use.

Organically contaminated soil material may be utilized in landscape areas located outside the building footprint.

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. Page 10 of 35

7. After site preparation, and removal of any areas of old fill, the top 8 inches of exposed ground should be scarified and compacted to a degree of relative compaction of at least 90% at 2 percent above optimum moisture content as determined by ASTM D1557-12 Laboratory Test Procedure.

8. The site may be brought to the desired finished grades by placing engineered fill in lifts of 8 inches in uncompacted thickness and compacting to a minimum relative compaction of 90% at 2 percent above optimum moisture content for lean clay soil as determined by ASTM D1557-12 Laboratory Test Procedure.

9. All soils encountered during our investigation except those within the top few inches of predominantly organic material, are suitable for use as engineered fill when placed and compacted at the recommended moisture content and provided it does not contain any debris.

SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE

10. All finish grades should be provided with a positive gradient to an adequate discharge point in order to provide rapid removal of surface water runoff away from all foundations. No ponding of water should be allowed on the pad or adjacent to the foundations. Surface drainage must be designed by the project Civil Engineer and maintained by the property owners at all times. The pad should be graded in a manner that surface flow is to a controlled discharge system.

11. Lot slopes and drainage must be provided by the project Civil Engineer to remove all storm water from the pad and to minimize storm and/or irrigation water from seeping beneath the structures.

Should surface water be allowed to seep under the structure, foundation movement resulting in structural cracking and damage will occur. Where possible, finished grades around the perimeter of the structures should be compacted and should be sloped at a minimum 2% gradient away from the exterior foundation. Surface drainage requirements constructed by the builder should be maintained during landscaping. In particular, the creation of planter areas confined on all sides by concrete walkways or decks and the residence foundation is not desirable since any surface water due to rain or irrigation becomes trapped in the planter area with no outlet. If such a landscape feature is necessary, surface area drains in the planter area or a subdrain along the foundation perimeter must be installed.

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. Page 11 of 35

12. Continuous roof gutters are recommended. According to local government requirements, roof downspout and drain flows should be directed to at grade bio-filtration areas, or raised planter boxes next to the building perimeter, where possible. From a geotechnical and maintenance point of view it is undesirable to discharge water into at grade bio-filtration areas near foundations, because of the possibility of water ponding for sustained periods of time.

BIO-FILTRATION FACILITIES

13. As mentioned earlier, it is undesirable to discharge water into at grade bio-filtration areas near foundations, because of the possibility of water ponding for sustained periods of time, potentially creating excessive moisture related issues. However, certain design features could be made to minimize such potential effects. In addition, the property owners must always maintain the biofiltration area to ensure that they are performing as designed and that water does not pond in the area for longer than 48 hours.

14. Typically, the bio-filtration areas consist of an 18 inch layer of sandy loam over 18 inches of permeable gravel material. The top of the bio-filtration area is typically approximately 1 foot below pad grade, therefore, the base of the bio-filtration area will be approximately 4 feet below pad grade.

The base of the bio-filtration area will typically contain a perforated pipe to drain any water that may collect within 24 hours. In some situations, the bio-filtration areas may be located immediately adjacent the building structure.

15. Where bio-filtration areas are located closer than 5 feet of the building, the section of loose loam and gravel will provide reduced lateral support, and we recommend a deepened footing be constructed along the perimeter the building adjacent to the bio-filtration area and extending 3 feet beyond in plan length. The depth of the deepened footing will depend on how close the bio-filtration area is located to the building perimeter. As a guide, the footing is to be deepened such that when an imaginary line inclined at 45 degrees from the outside edge base of the footings, it extends below the base of the bio-filtration area excavation. Where bio-filtration areas are located further than 5 feet, no special design is required. Provided the bio-filtration facility is lined with an impermeable liner, no waterproofing of the deepened footing is required.

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. Page 12 of 35

16. Where bio-filtration areas are located closer than 3 feet of street pavements, a deepened curb footing is required. Where bio-filtration areas are located closer than 1 foot of street pavements, because pavements do not have a positive connection to a deepened curb/footing, the deepened curb/footing may need to be designed as a retaining wall rigid enough to create minimal lateral deflections.

17. Where bio-filtration areas are located closer than 2 feet of hardscape areas, a deepened edge footing is required. The deepened edge should extend at least 1 foot below the subgrade. Where the bio-filtration area is immediately adjacent the hardscape, the deepened edge is to extend at least 3 inches below the base of the bio-filtration system.

FOUNDATIONS

13. Provided the site is prepared as recommended in the “Grading” section, a post-tensioned slab foundation may be satisfactorily used for the residential townhome buildings and a spread footing in conjunction with a slab-on-grade floor for the commercial building.

Post Tensioned Slab on Grade

14. Post-tensioned slabs should be designed using the following criteria which is based on the design method presented in the Post-Tensioning Institute, Standard Requirements for Design and Analysis of Shallow Post-Tensioned Concrete Foundations on Expansive Soils (PTI DC10.5-12), 2012. Using the relevant site soil and climatic parameters, the recommended geotechnical criteria for use in the design of the post-tensioned slabs is as follows; Swelling Mode
Center Lift Edge Lift
Edge Moisture Variation Distance (em) 9.0 feet 5.1 feet Differential Soil Movement (ym) 0.59 inches 1.09 inches The maximum allowable bearing pressure at the base of the slab and for localized thickened footings should not exceed 2,000 p.s.f. for dead plus sustained live loads.

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. Page 13 of 35

15. As indicated earlier, bio-filtration areas may be designed close to the foundation. Where biofiltration areas are located closer than 5 feet of the building, the section of loose loam and gravel, will provide reduced lateral support, and we recommend a deepened footing be constructed along the perimeter the building adjacent to the bio-filtration area and extending 3 feet beyond in plan length.

The depth of the deepened footing will depend on how close the bio-filtration area to the building perimeter. As a guide, the footing is to be deepened such that when an imaginary line inclined at 45 degrees from the outside edge base of the footings, it extends below the base of the bio-filtration area excavation.

General Construction Requirements for Post-Tensioned Slab

16. Prior to construction of the slab, the slab subgrade should be observed by the Soil Engineer to verify that all under-slab utility trenches greater than 18 inches in width have been properly backfilled and compacted, and that no loose or soft soils are present on the slab subgrade.

17. The on site near surface soil is non-expansive and if the on-site soil is used to form the building pads, slab subgrade saturation and moisture conditioning is not required. If clayey import material is used to grade the site the slab subgrade should be soaked to saturation (minimum 5% above optimum) to a depth of 12 inches prior to placement of the capillary break or vapor retarder/barrier. This should be verified and approved by the Soil Engineer. The penetration of a thin metal probe to a depth of 10-12 inches generally indicates sufficient saturation.

18. The four (4) inch (minimum thickness) layer of gravel typically placed to provide a capillary break beneath concrete slab-on-grade floors may be omitted beneath the monolithically poured mat slab foundations provided that the slabs are at least 10 inches thick. If it is desired to use a 4 inch layer or thinner of gravel section, the gravel should consist of broken stone, crushed or uncrushed gravel, quarry waste, or a combination thereof. The aggregate shall be free from deleterious substances. It shall be of such quality that the absorption of water in a saturated dry condition does not exceed 3% of the oven dry weight of the sample. The material shall be ¾” minus material with no more than 3% passing the #200 sieve, as specified in Appendix C.

19. A moisture vapor retarder/barrier is recommended beneath all slabs-on-grade that will be covered by moisture-sensitive flooring materials such as vinyl, linoleum, wood, carpet, rubber,

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. Page 14 of 35
rubber-backed carpet, tile, impermeable floor coatings, adhesives, or where moisture-sensitive equipment, products, or environments will exist. We recommend that design and construction of the moisture vapor retarder/barrier conform to Section 1805 of the 2013 CBC and relevant sections of American Concrete Institute (ACI) guidance documents 302.1R-04, 302.2R-06 and 360R-10.

20. The moisture vapor retarder/barrier can be placed above the 4 inches of gravel or directly on the soil subgrade and should consist of a minimum 10 mils thick polyethylene with a maximum perm rating of 0.1 in accordance with ASTM E 1745. Seams in the moisture vapor retarder/barrier should be overlapped no less than 6 inches or in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations.

Joints and penetrations should be sealed with the manufacturer’s recommended adhesives, pressuresensitive tape, or both. The contractor must avoid damaging or puncturing the moisture vapor retarder/barrier and repair any punctures with additional polyethylene properly lapped and sealed.

The installation of the vapor retarder membrane must be in conformance with ASTM E1643.

21. A minimum of two inches of wetted sand should be placed over the vapor retarder membrane to facilitate curing of the concrete and to act as a cushion to protect the membrane. The perimeter of the mat should be thickened to bear on the prepared building pad and to confine the sand. During winter construction, sand may become saturated due to rainy weather prior to pouring. Saturated sand is not desirable because the sand cushion may become over saturated, and boil into the concrete causing undesirable structural monopolies of sand pockets within the slab. As an alternate, a sandfine gravel mixture that is stable under saturated conditions may be used. However, the material must be approved by the Soil Engineer prior to use.

22. Alternatively, the sand layer may be eliminated provided the concrete has a maximum water/cement ratio of 0.45 and a 10 mil Class A vapor retarder membrane, such as Stego® Wrap. In any case, the vapor retarder/barrier should have a maximum perm rating of 0.3 in accordance with ASTM E 1745. Seams in the moisture vapor retarder/barrier should be overlapped no less than 6 inches or in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations. Joints and penetrations should be sealed with the manufacturer’s recommended adhesives, pressure-sensitive tape, or both. The contractor must avoid damaging or puncturing the vapor retarder/barrier and repair any punctures with additional polyethylene properly lapped and sealed.

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. Page 15 of 35

23. Any exterior concrete flatwork such as steps, patios, or sidewalks should be designed independently of the slab, and expansion joints should be provided between the flatwork and the structural unit.

Spread Footing Foundations in Conjunction with Interior Concrete Slab-on Grade Floor for Commercial Building

24. Continuous and spread footing foundations should extend to a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent pad grade (trenching depth below slab subgrade elevation). At this depth, continuous footings may be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 p.s.f. due to dead plus sustained live loads, and 3,300 p.s.f. due to all loads which include wind or seismic. Isolated spread footings for columns may be designed for an allowable bearing pressure of 2,800 p.s.f. due to dead plus sustained live loads, and 3,700 p.s.f. due to all loads which include wind or seismic. The specification of structural reinforcement for all foundations is to be performed by a structural engineer. The settlements of footings designed and constructed in accordance with the aforementioned criteria are estimated to be less than one-half inch. The differential settlement between individual column or wall footings can be estimated as the difference between the settlements at any two points and should not exceed one-quarter inch.

25. Lateral loads resulting from wind or earthquake may be resisted in the form of passive pressure on the site of footings and friction between the bottom of the footings and soils on which these are supported. The passive soil resistance against footings may be taken equal to a fluid having an equivalent fluid pressure of 250 p.c.f, below a depth of 1 foot. This assumes that the footings are placed neat against the soil face or that properly compacted backfill is placed in the space between the footings and the soil faces. A coefficient of friction of 0.30 may be used at the base of the footing.

26. It is expected that the interior concrete slab-on-grade floor may experience some cracking due to normal concrete shrinkage. To reduce the potential cracking of the concrete slab floor, the following are recommended:
a. Prior to construction of the slab, the slab subgrade should be observed by the Soil Engineer to verify that all under-slab utility trenches greater than 18 inches in width have been properly backfilled and compacted, and that no loose or soft soils are present on the slab subgrade.

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. Page 16 of 35
c. Slabs should be underlain by a minimum of 4 inches of angular gravel or clean crushed rock material placed between the finished subgrade and the slabs to serve as a capillary break between the subsoil and the slab. The gravel or crushed rock material should consist of broken stone, crushed or uncrushed gravel, quarry waste, or a combination thereof. The aggregate shall be free from deleterious substances. It shall be of such quality that the absorption of water in a saturated dry condition does not exceed 3% of the oven dry weight of the sample. The material shall be ¾” minus material with no more than 3% passing the #200 sieve.
d. The thickness of the slab and reinforcement is to be determined by the project Structural Engineer. We recommend that the slabs be reinforced with reinforcing bars or welded wire fabric sheets. Wire mesh must not be used for reinforcement. e. It is expected that moisture sensitive floor coverings will be used on the slab, and we recommend that a 15-mil or thicker vapor retarder membrane should be placed between the rock cushion and the slab to provide an effective vapor barrier and to minimize moisture condensation under floor coverings. It is further recommended that a two inch thick sand layer be placed on top of the membrane to assist in the curing of the concrete and to prevent puncture of the membrane. During winter construction, the sand may become saturated due to rainy weather prior to pouring. Saturated sand is not desirable because the sand cushion may become over saturated, and boil into the concrete causing undesirable structural monopolies of sand pockets within the slab. As an alternate, a sand-fine gravel mixture that is stable under saturated conditions may be used. However, the material must be approved by the Soil Engineer prior to use.

MISCELLANEOUS CONCRETE FLATWORK

27. Miscellaneous flatwork, driveways, and walkways may be designed with a minimum thickness of 4.0 inches. Control joints should be constructed to create squares or rectangles with a maximum spacing of 15 feet on large slab areas. Walkways should be separated from foundations with a thick expansion joint filler. Control joints should be constructed into walkways at a maximum of 5 feet spacing.

RETAINING WALLS

28. Retaining walls should be designed to resist lateral pressures exerted from a media having an equivalent fluid weight as follows:

Active Condition = 45 p.c.f. for horizontal backslope
At-rest Condition = 65 p.c.f.

Passive Condition = 300 p.c.f.

Coefficient of Friction = 0.35

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. Page 17 of 35

29. For a non-horizontal backslope, the active condition equivalent fluid weight can be increased by 1.5 p.c.f. for each 2 degree rise in slope from the horizontal.

30. Active conditions occur when the top of the wall is free to move outward. At-rest conditions apply when the top of wall is restrained from any movement.

31. It should be noted that the effects of any surcharge, traffic or compaction loads behind the walls must be accounted for in the design of the walls.

32. The above criteria are based on fully drained conditions. If drained conditions are not possible, then the hydrostatic pressure must be included in the design of the wall. An additional linear distribution of hydrostatic pressure of 63 p.c.f. should be adopted, in this case.

33. In order to achieve fully-drained conditions, a drainage filter blanket should be placed behind the wall. The blanket should be a minimum of 12 inches thick and should extend the full height of the wall to within 12 inches of the surface. If the excavated area behind the wall exceeds 12 inches, the entire excavated space behind the 12-inch blanket should consist of compacted engineered fill or blanket material. The drainage blanket material may consist of either granular crushed rock and drain pipe fully encapsulated in geotextile filter fabric or Class II permeable material that meets CalTrans Specification, Section 68, with drainage pipe but without fabric. A 4-inch perforated drain pipe should be installed in the bottom of the drainage blanket and should be underlain by at least 4 inches of filter type material. A 12-inch cap of clayey soil material should be placed over the drainage blanket. All back drains should be outlet to suitable drainage devices. Retaining wall less than 3 feet in height should be provided with backdrains or weep holes.

34. As an alternate to the 12-inch drainage blanket, a pre-fabricated strip drain (such as Miradrain) may be used between the wall and retained soil. In this case, the wall must be designed to resist an additional lateral hydrostatic pressure of 30 p.c.f.

35. Piping with adequate gradient shall be provided to discharge water that collects behind the walls to an adequately controlled discharge system away from the structure foundation.

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. Page 18 of 35

36. The retaining walls or soundwalls may be founded on a friction pier foundation or on spread footing foundations. Spread footing and pier design criteria are given below.

RETAINING WALL/SOUNDWALL FOUNDATION - SPREAD FOOTINGS

37. Spread footings should have a minimum depth of eighteen (18) inches below lowest adjacent pad grade (i.e., trenching depth) for soil subgrade. At this depth, the recommended design bearing pressure for continuous footings should not exceed 2,500 p.s.f. due to dead plus sustained live loads and 3,300 p.s.f. due to all loads which include wind and seismic.

38. To accommodate lateral loads, the passive resistance of the foundation soil can be utilized.

The passive soil pressures can be assumed to act against the front face of the footing below a depth of one foot below the ground surface. It is recommended that a passive pressure equivalent to that of a fluid weighing 300 p.c.f. be used. The weight of the soil above the footing can be used in the frictional calculations. For design purposes, an allowable friction coefficient of 0.35 can be assumed at the base of the spread footing.

RETAINING WALL/SOUNDWALL FOUNDATION - PIER FOOTINGS

39. The piers should be designed on the basis of skin friction acting between the soil and the pier.

For the soils at the site, an allowable skin friction value of 500 p.s.f. can be used for combined dead and live loads, below a depth of 1 foot. This value can be increased by one-third for total loads which include wind or seismic forces. The size, depth and spacing of the piers is to be determined by the structural engineer.

40. To resist lateral loads, the passive resistance of the soil can be used. The soil passive pressures can be assumed to act against the lateral projected area twice the pier diameter. It is recommended that a passive pressure equivalent to that of a fluid weighing 300 p.c.f be used below 1 foot of final pad grade.

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. Page 19 of 35

PAVEMENT AREAS

41. R-value tests were not performed as part of this investigation, as the soil expected at subgrade level is not known and depends on the planned grading. Assuming the subgrade material will consist of on site silty or imported low expansive clay material, we will assume an R-value of 10 for preliminary design.

42. Based on an R-Value of 10, the following flexible pavement sections are recommended. It is noted that the City of Morgan Hill’s minimum pavement section is 4 inches asphaltic concrete (AC) over 8 inches Class II aggregate base (AB).

Traffic Index
AC
(inches)
Class II¹ AB
(inches)

4.5 4.0 8.0

5.0 4.0 8.0

6.0 4.0 11.0

7.0 4.0 14.5

8.0 6.0 16.0
Notes: ¹Minimum R-Value = 78
R-Value = Resistance Value
All Layers in compacted thickness to Cal-Trans Standard Specifications

43. After underground facilities have been placed in the areas to receive pavement and removal of excess material has been completed, the upper 6 inches of the sub-grade soil shall be scarified, moisture conditioned, and compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 95% in accordance with the grading recommendations specified in this report.

44. All aggregate base material placed subsequently should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 95% based on the ASTM Test Procedure of D1557-12 (latest edition). The construction of the pavement areas should conform to the requirements set forth by the latest Standard Specifications of the Department of Transportations of the State of California and/or City of Morgan Hill, Department of Public Works.

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. Page 20 of 35

45. If planter areas are provided within or immediately adjacent to the pavement areas, or if permeable pavers are used for some areas of pavement, provisions should be made to control irrigation and surface water from entering the pavement subgrade. Water entering the pavement section at subgrade level, which does not have a means for discharge, could cause softening of this zone and lead to pavement failure. We recommend that for areas of permeable pavers, the subgrade be graded to a low point where a subdrain is constructed to discharge any accumulated water.

UTILITY TRENCHES

46. Applicable safety standards require that trenches in excess of 5 feet must be properly shored or that the walls of the trench slope back to provide safety for installation of lines. If trench wall sloping is performed, the inclination should vary with the soil type. The underground contractor should request an opinion from the Soil Engineer as to the type of soil and the resulting inclination.

47. With respect to state-of-the-art construction or local requirements, utility lines are generally bedded with granular materials. These materials can convey surface or subsurface water beneath the structures. It is, therefore, recommended that all utility trenches which possess the potential to transport water be sealed with a compacted impervious cohesive soil material or lean concrete where the trench enters/exits the building perimeter.

48. Utility trenches extending underneath all traffic areas must be backfilled with native or approved import material and compacted to a relative compaction of 90% to within 6 inches of the subgrade. The upper 6 inches should be compacted to 95% relative compaction in accordance with Laboratory Test Procedure ASTM D1557 (latest edition). Backfilling and compaction of these trenches must meet the requirements set forth by the City of Morgan Hill, Department of Public Works. Utility trenches within landscape areas may be compacted to a relative compaction of 85%.

PROJECT REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION MONITORING

49. All grading and foundation plans for the development must be reviewed by the Soil Engineer prior to contract bidding or submitted to governmental agencies so that plans are reconciled with soil

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. Page 21 of 35
conditions and sufficient time is allowed for suitable mitigative measures to be incorporated into the final grading specifications.

50. Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. should be notified at least two working days prior to site clearing, grading, and/or foundation operations on the property. This will give the Soil Engineer ample time to discuss the problems that may be encountered in the field and coordinate the work with the contractor.

51. Field observation and testing during the demolition and/or foundation operations must be provided by representatives of Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. to enable them to form an opinion regarding the adequacy of the site preparation, the acceptability of fill materials, and the extent to which the earthwork construction and the degree of compaction comply with the specification requirements. Any work related to the grading and/or foundation operations performed without the full knowledge and under the direct observation of the Soil Engineer will render the recommendations of this report invalid.

This does not imply full-time observation. The degree of observation and frequency of testing services would depend on the construction methods and schedule, and the item of work.

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. Page 22 of 35

REFERENCES

1. California Department of Water Resources. Water Resources Library. Accessed on May 31, 2022 via website: http://wdl.water.ca.gov/waterdatalibrary/.

2. California Geological Survey. 2004. “Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Morgan Hill 7.5- Minute Quadrangle, Santa Clara County, California”. Seismic Hazard Zone Report 096.

3. Graymer, R.W., Moring, B.C., Saucedo, G.J., Wentworth, C.M., Brabb, E.E., and Knudsen, K.L. 2006. “Geologic Map of the San Francisco Bay Region”. U.S. Geological Survey.

Scientific Investigations Map 2918.

4. Structural Engineers Association and Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development. 2018. “Seismic Design Maps”. Accessed May 31, 2022 from web site:
https://seismicmaps.org/.

5. U.S. Geological Survey. 2019. "Quaternary fault and fold database for the United States".

Accessed May 31, 2019 from USGS web site: http//earthquakes.usgs.gov/regional/qfaults/.

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. Page 23 of 35

LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS

1. It should be noted that it is the responsibility of the owner or his representative to notify Quantum Geotechnical, Inc., in writing, a minimum of two working days before any clearing, grading, or foundation excavations can commence at the site.

2. The recommendations of this report are based upon the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate from those disclosed in the borings and from a reconnaissance of the site. Should any variations or undesirable conditions be encountered during the development of the site, Quantum Geotechnical, will provide supplemental recommendations as dictated by the field conditions.

3. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the Architect and Engineer for the project and incorporated into the plans and the necessary steps are taken to see that the Contractor and Subcontractors carry out such recommendations in the field.

4. At the present date, the findings of this report are valid for the property investigated. With the passage of time, significant changes in the conditions of a property can occur due to natural processes or works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, legislation or the broadening of knowledge may result in changes in applicable standards. Changes outside of our control may render this report invalid, wholly or partially. Therefore, this report should not be considered valid after a period of two (2) years without our review, nor should it be used, or is it applicable, for any properties other than those investigated.

5. Not withstanding all the foregoing, applicable codes must be adhered to at all times.

APPENDIX A
Figure 1, Site Plan
Logs of Terrasearch Test Borings

PUBLIC
PLAZA
10' PSE

15.83' 12'

5.72'

9.99'
BLDG. 4
5 UNITS BLDG. 5 3 UNITS BLDG. 8 4 UNITS
8 11 BLDG. 1 6 UNITS

R A I L R O A D T R A C K S

M O N T E R E Y R O A D

E X I S T I N G

C O M M E R C I A L
BLDG. 3
3 UNITS
BLDG. 6
5 UNITS
BLDG. 7
7 UNITS BLDG. 2 4 UNITS
2 TRASH MECH. RM.

12'
3 BLDG. 10
6 UNITS
BLDG. 9
6 UNITS
26'
2 CLEAN AIR

VEHICLE
2 ELECTRIC

VEHICLE
1 CLEAN AIR

VEHICLE

2.62'
26'
3'

47.5' 6'

20.71' 26' 5.5' 47.5'
9' 26' 3' 54.59' 26' 3' 89.53' 97.08' 13.46' METER STACK TESTBLOCK & METER HOUSE PANEL SPACE FOR LV PULL MAIN METER STACK SPACE FOR LV METER STACK TESTBLOCK & METER PULL/MAIN HOUSE PANEL SPACE FOR LV METER STACK TESTBLOCK & METER PULL/MAIN HOUSE PANEL

STACK METER

TESTBLOCK
& METER

PANEL HOUSE
FOR LV
SPACE
PULL
MAIN

STACK METER

STACK METER

TESTBLOCK
& METER

PANEL HOUSE
FOR LV
SPACE
PULL
MAIN

STACK METER
METER
STACK

TESTBLOCK
&
HOUSE
METER
SPACE
FOR LV
PANEL
METER
MAIN
PULL

STACK SPACE FOR LV METER STACK TESTBLOCK & METER PULL/MAIN HOUSE PANEL

STACK METER
FOR LV
SPACE

PULL/MAIN
& METER

TESTBLOCK

PANEL HOUSE

STACK METER

TESTBLOCK
& METER

PANEL HOUSE
SPACE
FOR LV
PULL
MAIN

STACK METER METER
STACK

TESTBLOCK
& METER
HOUSE
PANEL
FOR LV
SPACE
PULL
MAIN
METER
STACK
North
1" = 40'
10'
10'
PVT SS
PVT SS
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD

SD SSFM SSFM
SSFM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
(w)
(sd)(w) (w)
(ssfm)
(ss)
(ss)
(ss)
(sd)
(w)
(w)
(w)
(w)
(sd) (sd)
(sd) (sd)
(ss)
(sd)
(sd) (sd) (sd) (sd) (sd) (sd) (sd) (sd) (sd) (sd)
(ss) (ss) (ss) (ss) (ss) (ss)
(w)
(w)
(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
(ssfm) (ssfm)
(ssfm) (ssfm) (ssfm) (ssfm)
(ssfm)
(ssfm)
(ssfm)
(ssfm)
> > > >
(e)
(oh)
(e) (oh) (e) (oh) (e) (oh) (e) (oh) (e) (oh) (e) (oh) (e) (oh) (ss)
(ss)
(ss)
(co)
(co)
(co) (t) (t) (t) (t) (t) (t) (t) (t) (t) (t) (t) (t)
(t)
(fh)
(w)
(w)
(w) (w) (w) (w) (w)
(w)
(w)
(w)
(fh)
(w)
W
W
W

W W W W W W
W
PVT SS
W
W
W
W
W W
W
(co)(co)(co)(co)(co)(co)(co)(co)(co)(co)(co)(co)
(co)
(co)
(co)
(co)
(co)
(co)
(co)
(co)
(co)
(co)
(co)
(co)
W
W
W
W
W
W
(co)
(co)
(co)
(co)
(co)
(co)
(co)
(co)
(co)
(co)
(co)(co)(co)
(co)
(co)
(co)
(co)
(co)
(co)
(co)
(co)
W
W
W
(co)(co)(co)
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
(E) City Forced
Sewer Main
W
W

W PVT SS

PVT SS PVT SS PVT SS PVT SS PVT SS PVT SS PVT SS
PVT SS
SD
SD
SD
CLEAN AIR CLEAN AIR >
> >
> >
>
> PVT SD PVT SD
PVT SD
>
PVT SD
PVT SD
PVT SD
PVT SD
> > > > >
W

CLEAN AIR
SD
SD
SD
W W
W
W
W
W

EV CHARGINGEV CHARGING SD
SD SD
SD
PVT SD
X

X X X X X X X X X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SD
SD
W W
W
W W
W
W W
W W
W
W

W W W W

W W W W W W W W W

W W W W W

W W W W
W W W

W W W W W
W W W

W W W W
W JT

JT JT JT JT JT JT JT
JT
SD
SD
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 0 0 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23 Kristian Wallace by 12/5/2021 10:32 AM - Plotted 12/5/2021 10:32 AM - L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\DWG\221005 LO New.dwg JOB NO.

OF
Morgan Hill, CA 95037 16075 Vineyard Boulevard DATE: SCALE: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: Xrefs: 221005 LO Existing-Map; Arch Background 9-21-21; 221005 Points - St Plane Topo 9-09-21; 221005 Points - St Plane; 221005 LO Existing-Imps; 221005 3D New; 221005 LO-Easements of Record; 221102_PROPOSED JT; BL-CTV154 221005.1
SHEETSite Layout
1 1 The Gates 12/5/21 1" = 40' KWHS

Appendix B
The Grading Specification
Guide Specifications for Rock Under Floor Slabs

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. 30 of 35

THE GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
on
Proposed Residential & Commercial Development
18605 Monterey Road
Morgan Hill, California

1. General Description

1.1 These specifications have been prepared for the grading and site development of the subject residential development. Quantum Geotechnical Inc., hereinafter described as the Soil Engineer, should be consulted prior to any site work connected with site development to ensure compliance with these specifications.

1.2 The Soil Engineer should be notified at least two working days prior to any site clearing or grading operations on the property in order to observe the stripping of organically contaminated material and to coordinate the work with the grading contractor in the field.

1.3 This item shall consist of all clearing or grubbing, preparation of land to be filled, filling of the land, spreading, compaction and control of fill, and all subsidiary work necessary to complete the grading of the filled areas to conform with the lines, grades, and slopes as shown on the accepted plans. The Soil Engineer is not responsible for determining line, grade elevations, or slope gradients. The property owner, or his representative, shall designate the person or organizations who will be responsible for these items of work.

1.4 The contents of these specifications shall be integrated with the soil report of which they are a part, therefore, they shall not be used as a self-contained document.

2. Tests
The standard test used to define maximum densities of all compaction work shall be the ASTM D1557-12 Laboratory Test Procedure. All densities shall be expressed as a relative compaction in terms of the maximum dry density obtained in the laboratory by the foregoing standard procedure.

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. 31 of 35

3. Clearing, Grubbing, and Preparing Areas To Be Filled

3.1 If encountered, all vegetable matter, trees, root systems, shrubs, debris, and organic topsoil shall be removed from all structural areas and areas to receive fill.

3.2 If encountered, any soil deemed soft or unsuitable by the Soil Engineer shall be removed.

Any existing debris or excessively wet soils shall be excavated and removed as required by the Soil Engineer during grading.

3.3 All underground structures shall be removed from the site such as old foundations, abandoned pipe lines, septic tanks, and leach fields.

3.4 The final stripped excavation shall be approved by the Soil Engineer during construction and before further grading is started.

3.5 After the site has been cleared, stripped, excavated to the surface designated to receive fill, and scarified, it shall be disked or bladed until it is uniform and free from large clods. The native subgrade soils shall be moisture conditioned and compacted to the requirements as specified in the grading section of this report. Fill can then be placed to provide the desired finished grades. The contractor shall obtain the Soil Engineer's approval of subgrade compaction before any fill is placed.

4. Materials

4.1 All fill material shall be approved by the Soil Engineer. The material shall be a soil or soilrock mixture which is free from organic matter or other deleterious substances. The fill material shall not contain rocks or lumps over 6 inches in greatest dimension and not more than 15% larger than 2-1/2 inches. Materials from the site below the stripping depth are suitable for use in fills provided the above requirements are met.

4.2 Materials existing on the site are suitable for use as compacted engineered fill after the removal of all debris and organic material. All fill soils shall be approved by the Soil Engineer in the field.

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. 32 of 35

4.3 Should import material be required, it should be approved by the soil Engineer before it is brought to the site.

5. Placing, Spreading, and Compacting Fill Material

5.1 The fill materials shall be placed in uniform lifts of not more than 8 inches in uncompacted thickness. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly blade mixed during the spreading to obtain uniformity of material in each layer. Before compaction begins, the fill shall be brought to a water content that will permit proper compaction by either (a) aerating the material if it is too wet, or (b) spraying the material with water if it is too dry.

5.2 After each layer has been placed, mixed, and spread evenly, either import material or native material shall be compacted to a relative compaction designated for engineered fill.

5.3 Compaction shall be by footed rollers or other types of acceptable compacting rollers.

Rollers shall be of such design that they will be able to compact the fill to the specified density.

Rolling shall be accomplished while the fill material is within the specified moisture content range.

Rolling of each layer shall be continuous over its entire area and the roller shall make sufficient trips to ensure that the required density has been obtained. No ponding or jetting shall be permitted.

5.4 Field density tests shall be made in each compacted layer by the Soil Engineer in accordance with Laboratory Test Procedure ASTM D1556-15 or D6938-10. When footed rollers are used for compaction, the density tests shall be taken in the compacted material below the surface disturbed by the roller. When these tests indicate that the compaction requirements on any layer of fill, or portion thereof, has not been met, the particular layer, or portion thereof, shall be reworked until the compaction requirements have been met.

5.5 No soil shall be placed or compacted during periods of rain nor on ground which contains free water. Soil which has been soaked and wetted by rain or any other cause shall not be compacted until completely drained and until the moisture content is within the limits hereinbefore described or approved by the Soil Engineer. Approval by the Soil Engineer shall be obtained prior to continuing the grading operations.

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. 33 of 35

6. Pavement

6.1 The proposed subgrade under pavement sections, native soil, and/or fill shall be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 95% at 2% above optimum moisture content for a depth of 12 inches.

6.2 All aggregate base material placed subsequently should also be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 95% based on the ASTM Test Procedure D1557-12. The construction of the pavement in the parking and traffic areas should conform to the requirements set forth by the latest Standard Specifications of the Department of Transportation of the State of California and/or City of Morgan Hill, Department of Public Works.

6.3 It is recommended that soils at the proposed subgrade level be tested for a pavement design after the preliminary grading is completed and the soils at the site design subgrade levels are known.

7. Utility Trench Backfill

7.1 The utility trenches extending under concrete slabs-on-grade shall be backfilled with native on-site soils or approved import materials and compacted to the requirements pertaining to the adjacent soil. No ponding or jetting will be permitted.

7.2 Utility trenches extending under all pavement areas shall be backfilled with native or approved import material and properly compacted to meet the requirements set forth by the City of Morgan Hill, Department of Public Works.*

7.3 Where any opening is made under or through the perimeter foundations for such items as utility lines and trenches, the openings must be resealed so that they are watertight to prevent the possible entrance of outside irrigation or rain water into the underneath portion of the structures.

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. 34 of 35

8. Subsurface Line Removal

8.1 The methods of removal will be designated by the Soil Engineer in the field depending on the depth and location of the line. One of the following methods will be used.

8.2 Remove the pipe and fill and compact the soil in the trench according to the applicable portions of sections pertaining to compaction and utility backfill.

8.3 The pipe shall be crushed in the trench. The trench shall then be filled and compacted according to the applicable portions of Section 5.

8.4 Cap the ends of the line with concrete to prevent entrance of water. The length of the cap shall not be less than 5 feet. The concrete mix shall have a minimum shrinkage.

9. Unusual Conditions

9.1 In the event that any unusual conditions not covered by the special provisions are encountered during the grading operations, the Soil Engineer shall be immediately notified for additional recommendations.

10. General Requirements
Dust Control

10.1 The contractor shall conduct all grading operations in such a manner as to preclude windblown dirt and dust and related damage to neighboring properties. The means of dust control shall be left to the discretion of the contractor and he shall assume liability for claims related to windblown material.

Project No. H052.G Preliminary Geotechnical Update/18605 Monterey Rd, Morgan Hill June 1, 2022 Quantum Geotechnical, Inc. 35 of 35

GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROCK UNDER FLOOR SLABS
Definition
Graded gravel or crushed rock for use under slabs-on-grade shall consist of a minimum thickness of mineral aggregate placed in accordance with these specifications and in conformance with the dimensions shown on the plans. The minimum thickness is specified in the accompanying report.

Material
The mineral aggregate shall consist of broken stone, crushed or uncrushed gravel, quarry waste, or a combination thereof. The aggregate shall be free from deleterious substances. It shall be of such quality that the absorption of water in a saturated dry condition does not exceed 3% of the oven dry weight of the sample.

Gradation
The mineral aggregate shall be of such size that the percentage composition by dry weight, as determined by laboratory sieves (U.S. Sieves) will conform to the following gradation:

Sieve Size Percentage Passing
¾’’ 90-100
No. 4 25-60
No. 8 18-45
No. 200 0-3
Placing
Subgrade, upon which gravel or crushed rock is to be placed, shall be prepared as outlined in the accompanying soil report.

Attachment D:

Retention Volume Calculations
Project: The Gates
Project No.: 221005.1
Date: 6/28/2022
___________________________________________________________________________________________ L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\Stormwater Control Plan\221005.1 Stormwater Calculations.xlsx
6/28/2022 Attachment D Page 1 of 4

a.)
Roof PCC AC Roof PCC AC Roof PCC AC
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 39,429 25,836 46,760
Replaced New Total
1 174,172 174,172 0 62,148 0 112,024 112,024 0.64 0.44
Total 174,172 174,172 0 62,148 0 112,024 112,024 0.64 0.44 DMA DMA Area APA Aother Areplaced Aretention
1 174,172 0 0 0 174,172
Total 174,172 0 0 0 174,172
Aroofs = roof areas (sf)
Atotal = drainage area (sf)
b.)adjustments for redevelopment project
Carea# = Area runoff coefficient=C = 0.858i3 - 0.78i2 + 0.774i + 0.04 i = fraction of the tributary area that is impervious = Aimpervious / Aarea APA = Undisturbed or Self-Retaining Planted or Open Areas Aother = Impervious Areas that discharge to independent infiltrating Areas Areplaced = Replaced Impervious Areas
Aretention = Retention Tributary Area = DMA Area - APA - Aother - (0.5 x Areplaced) Aimpervious = total impervious roof areas, PCC areas & AC areas (sf) Apervious = Planted & Open Areas (sf)
AAC-streets = Street pavement areas (sf)
Apcc -streets = area of pcc walks and curbs (sf)
Apcc-walks/parking = area of pcc walks & parking lot
Pre-Development Replaced New
Post-Development
Pre-Development Post-Development
Total Area
Impervious
Pervious Impervious Pervious
DMA
DMA
Impervious Areas
Pervious vs Impervious Areas
Project:

Project No.:

Date:

Retention Volume Calculations
The Gates
221005.1
6/28/2022

1.) Determination of the Retention Tributary Area
Per Resolution No. R3-2013-0032
Post Construction Storm Water Management Calculations
i C
___________________________________________________________________________________________ L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\Stormwater Control Plan\221005.1 Stormwater Calculations.xlsx
6/28/2022 Retention Volume Calculations Page 2 of 4

1 DMA DMA Area i C
1 174,172 0.64 0.44
Total 174,172 0.64 0.44
DMA Aretention i C D95 Vretention
1 174,172 0.64 0.44 1.85 11,907
Total 174,172 0.64 0.44 1.85 11,907
Elevation
347.85
348
348.85
Material Depth % Voids
Biomedia 24 in. 25%
Drainrock 24 in. 40%

3.) Retention Volume Provided
Incremental Volume

0.00 CF
c.) compute the runoff coefficient
= WMZ = watershed management zone per WMZ map
a.) retention requirement

2.) Determination of Retention Volume
b.) WMZ 1 Runoff Retention Requirement = Retain 95th percentile 24-hour rainfall event C = 0.858i3 - 0.78i2 + 0.774i + 0.04
Impervious Area
112,024
i = fraction of the tributary area that is impervious = Aimpervious / Aproject d.) Project Type
C = 0.858i3 - 0.78i2 + 0.774i + 0.04
Mixed Use
e.) Compute Retention Volume required
i = fraction of the tributary area that is impervious = Aimpervious / Aproject Vretention = Required Retention Volume = Aretention x C x (D95/12) 112,024

1.85 = D95 = 95th Percentile Rainfall Depth
5,096.78 SF 748.89 CF 748.89 CF
Surface Volume Calculations
Surface Area Cumulative Volume
4,888.43 SF 0.00 CF
6,330.85 SF 4,856.74 CF 5,605.63 CF
Bioretention Volume
Area Volume
4,888.43 SF 2,444.22 CF
4,888.43 SF 3,910.75 CF
___________________________________________________________________________________________ L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\Stormwater Control Plan\221005.1 Stormwater Calculations.xlsx
6/28/2022 Retention Volume Calculations Page 3 of 4

4.) Summary of HydroCAD Output

1.625 in/hr = Exfiltration Rate (See Appendix A for details) Pre
Dev.

Post
Dev.

Out from
Storage Infiltration
Water
Elev Storage
Return (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (ft) (cf)
95th 0.58 1.24 0.00 0.57 348.16 8,146
2 year 1.16 1.94 0.33 0.62 349.15 14,612
5 year 1.79 2.64 1.43 0.65 349.56 17,665
10 year 2.34 3.23 1.86 0.66 349.77 19,259
25 year 3.13 4.06 2.33 0.68 350.06 21,612
100 year 4.44 5.40 3.02 0.71 350.59 26,333
see detailed HydroCAD Output on following sheets
3d.) Total Volume Provided
Total Volume: Vtotal = Vsurface + Vbioretention = 11,961 CF 11,961CF ≥ 11,907; therefore ok

5.) Drawdown Time Calculations
Retention Volume = 11,961 CF
18 hours
Infiltration Flow Rate = Infiltration Area x Design Infiltration Rate x (1 ft./12 in) =

1.625 in/hr
Drawdown Time = (Storage Volume/Infiltration Flow Rate) = Infiltration Area = 4,888.43 ft.

Design Infiltration Rate =
661.98 CF/Hour
___________________________________________________________________________________________ L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\Stormwater Control Plan\221005.1 Stormwater Calculations.xlsx
6/28/2022 Retention Volume Calculations Page 4 of 4

Attachment E:

NOAA Rainfall Data
Project: The Gates
Project No.: 221005.1
Date: 6/28/2022
___________________________________________________________________________________________ L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\Stormwater Control Plan\221005.1 Stormwater Calculations.xlsx
6/28/2022 Attachment E Page 1 of 2

Rainfall Data
Project: The Gates
Project No.: 221005.1
Date: 6/28/2022
___________________________________________________________________________________________ L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\Stormwater Control Plan\221005.1 Stormwater Calculations.xlsx
6/28/2022 Rainfall Data Page 2 of 2

Attachment F:

HydroCAD Modeling Output
Project: The Gates
Project No.: 221005.1
Date: 6/28/2022
___________________________________________________________________________________________ L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\Stormwater Control Plan\221005.1 Stormwater Calculations.xlsx
6/28/2022 Attachment F Page 1 of 12

Event Summary
Project:

Project No.:

The Gates
221005.1
Date: 6/28/2022
SCS Routing
Event = rainfall event
Inflow = total inflow into storm water control
1S
Pre-development 2S
Post-Dev Existing
Commercial
6S
Post-Development
Proposed
5P
Proposed
Retention/Detention
Pond
Events for Subcatchment 1S: Pre-development
Event Rainfall
(inches)
Runoff
(cfs)
Volume
(acre-feet)
Depth
(inches)
95th 1.85 0.58 0.226 0.44
1 year 2.05 0.72 0.286 0.55
2 year 2.66 1.16 0.490 0.95
5 year 3.48 1.79 0.802 1.55
10 year 4.18 2.34 1.092 2.11
25 year 5.16 3.13 1.521 2.94
50 year 5.94 3.77 1.876 3.63
100 year 6.77 4.44 2.263 4.37
Events for Subcatchment 2S: Post-Dev Existing Commercial Event Rainfall
(inches)
Runoff
(cfs)
Volume
(acre-feet)
Depth
(inches)
95th 1.85 0.53 0.275 1.26
1 year 2.05 0.60 0.316 1.44
2 year 2.66 0.80 0.442 2.02
5 year 3.48 1.08 0.616 2.82
10 year 4.18 1.31 0.766 3.50
25 year 5.16 1.63 0.977 4.47
50 year 5.94 1.89 1.145 5.24
100 year 6.77 2.16 1.325 6.06
Events for Subcatchment 6S: Post-Development Proposed
Event Rainfall
(inches)
Runoff
(cfs)
Volume
(acre-feet)
Depth
(inches)
95th 1.85 0.71 0.344 1.03
1 year 2.05 0.82 0.402 1.21
2 year 2.66 1.14 0.585 1.76
5 year 3.48 1.56 0.840 2.52
10 year 4.18 1.92 1.063 3.19
25 year 5.16 2.42 1.379 4.14
50 year 5.94 2.82 1.632 4.90
100 year 6.77 3.24 1.903 5.71
Events for Pond 5P: Proposed Retention/Detention Pond
Event Inflow
(cfs)
Outflow
(cfs)
Discarded
(cfs)
Primary
(cfs)
Tertiary
(cfs)
Elevation
(feet)
Storage
(cubic-feet)
95th 1.24 0.57 0.57 0.00 0.00 348.16 8,146
1 year 1.41 0.58 0.58 0.00 0.00 348.43 9,772
2 year 1.94 0.96 0.62 0.33 0.00 349.15 14,612
5 year 2.64 2.07 0.65 1.43 0.00 349.56 17,665
10 year 3.23 2.52 0.66 1.86 0.00 349.77 19,258
25 year 4.06 3.01 0.68 2.33 0.00 350.06 21,612
50 year 4.71 3.37 0.69 2.68 0.00 350.31 23,766
100 year 5.40 3.73 0.71 3.02 0.00 350.59 26,333
___________________________________________________________________________________________ L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\Stormwater Control Plan\221005.1 Stormwater Calculations.xlsx
6/28/2022 SCS Routing Page 2 of 12

Pre-Development
Post-Development - Existing Commercial Development
Note: Pre-Development Node is taken to be bare dirt for this calcuations due to the relocation of the existing detention pond proposed by the development.

Note: Existing Commercial Development Node is considered for PEAK MITIGATION ONLY. This area relied on the detention pond located on the proposed development that The Gates will be relocating. As mentioned above, Pre-Development Node is considered to be bare dirt (before the existing commercial development) to ensure that peak flow mitigation is maintained with new pond design.

Primary = Flow released from the retention/detention pond through the 10" orifice at 348.85' and (if needed) the stand pipe top at 352.50'
Tertiary = Flow over the top of bank in emergency situations (occurs at elevation 353.50') Outflow = total outflow from storm water control (discarded+primary+tertiary) Discarded = flow via infiltration
Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Pre-development
Runoff = 4.44 cfs @ 18.14 hrs, Volume= 2.263 af, Depth= 4.37" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs SCVWD 1956 Storm 100 year Rainfall=6.77"
Area (sf) CN Description
270,379 79 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG C
270,379 100.00% Pervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)

10.0 Direct Entry,
Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Post-Dev Existing Commercial Runoff = 2.16 cfs @ 18.12 hrs, Volume= 1.325 af, Depth= 6.06" Routed to Pond 5P : Proposed Retention/Detention Pond
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs SCVWD 1956 Storm 100 year Rainfall=6.77"
Area (sf) CN Description
114,303 94 Urban commercial, 85% imp, HSG C
17,145 15.00% Pervious Area
97,158 85.00% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)

10.0 Direct Entry,
___________________________________________________________________________________________ L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\Stormwater Control Plan\221005.1 Stormwater Calculations.xlsx
6/28/2022 SCS Routing Page 3 of 12

Post-Development - Proposed Development
Note: This Proposed Development area is what is being proposed in The Gates development. This area is used for retention calculations and peak-flow mitigation.

Proposed Retention/Detention Pond Summary - 95th Percentile Event Summary for Subcatchment 6S: Post-Development Proposed
Runoff = 3.24 cfs @ 18.14 hrs, Volume= 1.903 af, Depth= 5.71" Routed to Pond 5P : Proposed Retention/Detention Pond
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs SCVWD 1956 Storm 100 year Rainfall=6.77"
Area (sf) CN Description
* 39,429 98 roof
* 25,836 98 concrete
* 46,760 98 asphalt
62,148 79 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG C
174,173 91 Weighted Average
62,148 35.68% Pervious Area
112,025 64.32% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)

10.0 Direct Entry,
Summary for Pond 5P: Proposed Retention/Detention Pond
Inflow Area = 6.622 ac, 72.51% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.12" for 95th event Inflow = 1.24 cfs @ 18.14 hrs, Volume= 0.619 af
Outflow = 0.57 cfs @ 19.07 hrs, Volume= 0.619 af, Atten= 54%, Lag= 55.9 min Discarded = 0.57 cfs @ 19.07 hrs, Volume= 0.619 af
Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af
Tertiary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 348.16' @ 19.07 hrs Surf.Area= 15,105 sf Storage= 8,146 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 189.3 min calculated for 0.619 af (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 189.4 min ( 1,183.1 - 993.8 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description
#1 347.85' 60,359 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) #2 349.35' 178 cf 18.0" Round RCP_Round 18" -Impervious L= 101.0' S= 0.0022 '/'
#3 347.08' 30 cf 18.0" Round RCP_Round 18" -Impervious
L= 17.0' S= 0.1440 '/'
#4 347.08' 792 cf 18.0" Round RCP_Round 18" -Impervious L= 448.0' S= 0.0032 '/'
#5 345.85' 2,444 cf BSM (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) 9,776 cf Overall x 25.0% Voids
#6 343.85' 3,910 cf Drain Rock (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) 9,776 cf Overall x 40.0% Voids
67,713 cf Total Available Storage
Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store
(feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet)
347.85 4,888 0 0
348.00 5,097 749 749
348.85 6,331 4,857 5,606
349.00 6,556 967 6,572
350.00 8,116 7,336 13,908
___________________________________________________________________________________________ L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\Stormwater Control Plan\221005.1 Stormwater Calculations.xlsx
6/28/2022 SCS Routing Page 4 of 12

L= 448.0' S= 0.0032 '/'
#5 345.85' 2,444 cf BSM (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) 9,776 cf Overall x 25.0% Voids
#6 343.85' 3,910 cf Drain Rock (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) 9,776 cf Overall x 40.0% Voids
67,713 cf Total Available Storage
Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store
(feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet)
347.85 4,888 0 0
348.00 5,097 749 749
348.85 6,331 4,857 5,606
349.00 6,556 967 6,572
350.00 8,116 7,336 13,908
351.00 9,776 8,946 22,854
352.00 11,537 10,657 33,511
353.00 13,399 12,468 45,979
354.00 15,361 14,380 60,359
Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store
(feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet)
345.85 4,888 0 0
347.85 4,888 9,776 9,776
Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store
(feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet)
343.85 4,888 0 0
345.85 4,888 9,776 9,776
Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices
#1 Tertiary 353.50' 10.0' long + 23.0 '/' SideZ x 7.0' breadth Emergency Overflow Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00

2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50
Coef. (English) 2.40 2.52 2.70 2.68 2.68 2.67 2.66 2.65 2.65

2.65 2.66 2.65 2.66 2.68 2.70 2.73 2.78
#2 Discarded 343.85' 1.625 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area #3 Primary 352.50' 21.0" Horiz. Top of Stand Pipe C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads
#4 Primary 348.85' 10.0" Vert. 10" Orifice C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Discarded OutFlow Max=0.57 cfs @ 19.07 hrs HW=348.16' (Free Discharge) 2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.57 cfs)
Primary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=343.85' (Free Discharge) 3=Top of Stand Pipe ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
4=10" Orifice ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
Tertiary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=343.85' (Free Discharge) 1=Emergency Overflow Weir ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
___________________________________________________________________________________________ L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\Stormwater Control Plan\221005.1 Stormwater Calculations.xlsx
6/28/2022 SCS Routing Page 5 of 12

Proposed Retention/Detention Pond Summary - 100-Year Event Summary for Pond 5P: Proposed Retention/Detention Pond
Inflow Area = 6.622 ac, 72.51% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 5.85" for 100 year event Inflow = 5.40 cfs @ 18.14 hrs, Volume= 3.229 af
Outflow = 3.73 cfs @ 18.69 hrs, Volume= 3.229 af, Atten= 31%, Lag= 32.8 min Discarded = 0.71 cfs @ 18.69 hrs, Volume= 1.384 af
Primary = 3.02 cfs @ 18.69 hrs, Volume= 1.845 af
Tertiary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 350.59' @ 18.69 hrs Surf.Area= 18,876 sf Storage= 26,333 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 163.6 min calculated for 3.229 af (100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 163.6 min ( 1,066.0 - 902.4 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description
#1 347.85' 60,359 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) #2 349.35' 178 cf 18.0" Round RCP_Round 18" -Impervious L= 101.0' S= 0.0022 '/'
#3 347.08' 30 cf 18.0" Round RCP_Round 18" -Impervious
L= 17.0' S= 0.1440 '/'
#4 347.08' 792 cf 18.0" Round RCP_Round 18" -Impervious L= 448.0' S= 0.0032 '/'
#5 345.85' 2,444 cf BSM (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) 9,776 cf Overall x 25.0% Voids
#6 343.85' 3,910 cf Drain Rock (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) 9,776 cf Overall x 40.0% Voids
67,713 cf Total Available Storage
Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store
(feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet)
347.85 4,888 0 0
348.00 5,097 749 749
348.85 6,331 4,857 5,606
349.00 6,556 967 6,572
350.00 8,116 7,336 13,908
351.00 9,776 8,946 22,854
352.00 11,537 10,657 33,511
353.00 13,399 12,468 45,979
354.00 15,361 14,380 60,359
Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store
(feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet)
345.85 4,888 0 0
347.85 4,888 9,776 9,776
Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store
(feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet)
343.85 4,888 0 0
345.85 4,888 9,776 9,776
Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices
#1 Tertiary 353.50' 10.0' long + 23.0 '/' SideZ x 7.0' breadth Emergency Overflow Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00

2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50
Coef. (English) 2.40 2.52 2.70 2.68 2.68 2.67 2.66 2.65 2.65

2.65 2.66 2.65 2.66 2.68 2.70 2.73 2.78
#2 Discarded 343.85' 1.625 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area #3 Primary 352.50' 21.0" Horiz. Top of Stand Pipe C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads
#4 Primary 348.85' 10.0" Vert. 10" Orifice C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Discarded OutFlow Max=0.71 cfs @ 18.69 hrs HW=350.59' (Free Discharge) 2=E
filtration (E
filtration Controls 0
71 cfs)
___________________________________________________________________________________________ L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\Stormwater Control Plan\221005.1 Stormwater Calculations.xlsx
6/28/2022 SCS Routing Page 6 of 12

95th% Event - Post Development
95th% Event - Pre-Development
Tertiary = flow out via over the emergency overflow weir (occurs when water surface elevation exceeds 353.50) Note: full dewatering of subsurface retention occurs at hour 32.65, 8.65 hours after storm ends.

Note: 0cfs discharge for 95th% event
Elevation = water surface elevation
Inflow = all inflow into the storm water control
Outflow = sum of all outflow (discarded+primary+tertiary) Discarded = flow out via infiltration
Primary = flow out of the 10" orifice and/or the top of the stand pipe (Orifice elevation=348.85, Stand Pipe Top Elevation=352.50)
Runoff
Hydrograph
Time (hours)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Flow (cfs)

0.6 0.5

0.4 0.3

0.2 0.1
0 SCVWD 1956 Storm
95th Rainfall=1.85"
Runoff Area=270,379 sf
Runoff Volume=0.226 af
Runoff Depth=0.44"
Tc=10.0 min
CN=79

0.58 cfs
345.85 4,888 9,776 9,776
Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices
#1 Tertiary 353.50' 10.0' long + 23.0 '/' SideZ x 7.0' breadth Emergency Overflow Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00

2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50
Coef. (English) 2.40 2.52 2.70 2.68 2.68 2.67 2.66 2.65 2.65

2.65 2.66 2.65 2.66 2.68 2.70 2.73 2.78
#2 Discarded 343.85' 1.625 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area #3 Primary 352.50' 21.0" Horiz. Top of Stand Pipe C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads
#4 Primary 348.85' 10.0" Vert. 10" Orifice C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads Discarded OutFlow Max=0.71 cfs @ 18.69 hrs HW=350.59' (Free Discharge) 2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.71 cfs)
Primary OutFlow Max=3.02 cfs @ 18.69 hrs HW=350.59' (Free Discharge) 3=Top of Stand Pipe ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
4=10" Orifice (Orifice Controls 3.02 cfs @ 5.55 fps)
Tertiary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=343.85' (Free Discharge) 1=Emergency Overflow Weir ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
Elevation
Inflow
Outflow
Discarded
Primary
Tertiary
Hydrograph
Time (hours)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Flow (cfs)
1 0 Elevation (feet)
348
347
346
345
344
Inflow Area=6.622 ac
Peak Elev =348.16'
Storage=8,146 cf
348.16'

1.24 cfs

0.57 cfs

0.57 cfs

0.00 cfs

0.00 cfs
___________________________________________________________________________________________ L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\Stormwater Control Plan\221005.1 Stormwater Calculations.xlsx
6/28/2022 SCS Routing Page 7 of 12

2-year Event - Pre-Development
2-year Event - Post Development
5-year Event - Pre-Development
Discarded = flow out via infiltration
Primary = flow out of the 10" orifice and/or the top of the stand pipe (Orifice elevation=348.85, Stand Pipe Top Elevation=352.50)
Elevation = water surface elevation
Inflow = all inflow into the storm water control
Outflow = sum of all outflow (discarded+primary+tertiary) Tertiary = flow out via over the emergency overflow weir (occurs when water surface elevation exceeds 353.50) Note: full dewatering of subsurface retention occurs at hour 32.65, 8.65 hours after storm ends.

Runoff
Hydrograph
Time (hours)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Flow (cfs)
2 1
0 SCVWD 1956 Storm
5 year Rainfall=3.48"
Runoff Area=270,379 sf
Runoff Volume=0.802 af
Runoff Depth=1.55"
Tc=10.0 min
CN=79

1.79 cfs
Runoff
Hydrograph
Time (hours)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Flow (cfs)
1 0
SCVWD 1956 Storm
2 year Rainfall=2.66"
Runoff Area=270,379 sf
Runoff Volume=0.490 af
Runoff Depth=0.95"
Tc=10.0 min
CN=79

1.16 cfs
Elevation
Inflow
Outflow
Discarded
Primary
Tertiary
Hydrograph
Time (hours)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Flow (cfs)
2 1
0 Elevation (feet)
349
348
347
346
345
344
Inflow Area=6.622 ac
Peak Elev =349.15'
Storage=14,612 cf
349.15'

1.94 cfs

0.96 cfs

0.62 cfs

0.33 cfs

0.00 cfs
___________________________________________________________________________________________ L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\Stormwater Control Plan\221005.1 Stormwater Calculations.xlsx
6/28/2022 SCS Routing Page 8 of 12

5-year Event - Post Development
10-year Event - Pre-Development
10-year Event - Post Development
Elevation = water surface elevation
Inflow = all inflow into the storm water control
Outflow = sum of all outflow (discarded+primary+tertiary) Discarded = flow out via infiltration
Primary = flow out of the 10" orifice and/or the top of the stand pipe (Orifice elevation=348.85, Stand Pipe Top Elevation=352.50)
Tertiary = flow out via over the emergency overflow weir (occurs when water surface elevation exceeds 353.50) Note: full dewatering of subsurface retention occurs at hour 32.65, 8.65 hours after storm ends.

Runoff
Hydrograph
Time (hours)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Flow (cfs)
2 1
0 SCVWD 1956 Storm
10 year Rainfall=4.18"
Runoff Area=270,379 sf
Runoff Volume=1.092 af
Runoff Depth=2.11"
Tc=10.0 min
CN=79

2.34 cfs
Elevation
Inflow
Outflow
Discarded
Primary
Tertiary
Hydrograph
Time (hours)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Flow (cfs)
3 2
1 0 Elevation (feet)
349
348
347
346
345
344
Inflow Area=6.622 ac
Peak Elev =349.77'
Storage=19,258 cf
349.77'

3.23 cfs

2.52 cfs

0.66 cfs

1.86 cfs

0.00 cfs
Elevation
Inflow
Outflow
Discarded
Primary
Tertiary
Hydrograph
Time (hours)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Flow (cfs)
2 1
0 Elevation (feet)
349
348
347
346
345
344
Inflow Area=6.622 ac
Peak Elev =349.56'
Storage=17,665 cf
349.56'

2.64 cfs

2.07 cfs

0.65 cfs

1.43 cfs

0.00 cfs
___________________________________________________________________________________________ L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\Stormwater Control Plan\221005.1 Stormwater Calculations.xlsx
6/28/2022 SCS Routing Page 9 of 12

25-year Event - Post Development
25-year Event - Post Development
Elevation = water surface elevation
Inflow = all inflow into the storm water control
Outflow = sum of all outflow (discarded+primary+tertiary) Discarded = flow out via infiltration
Primary = flow out of the 10" orifice and/or the top of the stand pipe (Orifice elevation=348.85, Stand Pipe Top Elevation=352.50)
Tertiary = flow out via over the emergency overflow weir (occurs when water surface elevation exceeds 353.50) Note: full dewatering of subsurface retention occurs at hour 32.65, 8.65 hours after storm ends.

Elevation = water surface elevation
Inflow = all inflow into the storm water control
Outflow = sum of all outflow (discarded+primary+tertiary) Discarded = flow out via infiltration
Primary = flow out of the 10" orifice and/or the top of the stand pipe (Orifice elevation=348.85, Stand Pipe Top Elevation=352.50)
Tertiary = flow out via over the emergency overflow weir (occurs when water surface elevation exceeds 353.50) Note: full dewatering of subsurface retention occurs at hour 32.65, 8.65 hours after storm ends.

Runoff
Hydrograph
Time (hours)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Flow (cfs)
3 2
1 0
SCVWD 1956 Storm
25 year Rainfall=5.16"
Runoff Area=270,379 sf
Runoff Volume=1.521 af
Runoff Depth=2.94"
Tc=10.0 min
CN=79

3.13 cfs
Elevation
Inflow
Outflow
Discarded
Primary
Tertiary
Hydrograph
Time (hours)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Flow (cfs)
4 3
2 1
0 Elevation (feet)
350
349
348
347
346
345
344
Inflow Area=6.622 ac
Peak Elev =350.06'
Storage=21,612 cf
350.06'

4.06 cfs

3.01 cfs

0.68 cfs

2.33 cfs

0.00 cfs
Time (hours)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Flow (cfs)
3 2
1 0
344

0.66 cfs

1.86 cfs

0.00 cfs
___________________________________________________________________________________________ L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\Stormwater Control Plan\221005.1 Stormwater Calculations.xlsx
6/28/2022 SCS Routing Page 10 of 12

50-year Event - Pre-Development
50-year Event - Post Development
100-year Event - Pre-Development
Elevation = water surface elevation
Inflow = all inflow into the storm water control
Outflow = sum of all outflow (discarded+primary+tertiary) Discarded = flow out via infiltration
Primary = flow out of the 10" orifice and/or the top of the stand pipe (Orifice elevation=348.85, Stand Pipe Top Elevation=352.50)
Tertiary = flow out via over the emergency overflow weir (occurs when water surface elevation exceeds 353.50) Note: full dewatering of subsurface retention occurs at hour 32.65, 8.65 hours after storm ends.

Runoff
Hydrograph
Time (hours)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Flow (cfs)
4 3
2 1
0 SCVWD 1956 Storm
100 year Rainfall=6.77"
Runoff Area=270,379 sf
Runoff Volume=2.263 af
Runoff Depth=4.37"
Tc=10.0 min
CN=79

4.44 cfs
Runoff
Hydrograph
Time (hours)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Flow (cfs)
4 3
2 1
0 SCVWD 1956 Storm
50 year Rainfall=5.94"
Runoff Area=270,379 sf
Runoff Volume=1.876 af
Runoff Depth=3.63"
Tc=10.0 min
CN=79

3.77 cfs
Elevation
Inflow
Outflow
Discarded
Primary
Tertiary
Hydrograph
Time (hours)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Flow (cfs)
5 4
3 2
1 0 Elevation (feet)
350
349
348
347
346
345
344
Inflow Area=6.622 ac
Peak Elev =350.31'
Storage=23,766 cf
350.31'

4.71 cfs

3.37 cfs

0.69 cfs

2.68 cfs

0.00 cfs
___________________________________________________________________________________________ L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\Stormwater Control Plan\221005.1 Stormwater Calculations.xlsx
6/28/2022 SCS Routing Page 11 of 12

100-year Event - Post Development
Elevation = water surface elevation
Note: full dewatering of subsurface retention occurs at hour 32.65, 8.65 hours after storm ends.

Inflow = all inflow into the storm water control
Outflow = sum of all outflow (discarded+primary+tertiary) Discarded = flow out via infiltration
Primary = flow out of the 10" orifice and/or the top of the stand pipe (Orifice elevation=348.85, Stand Pipe Top Elevation=352.50)
Tertiary = flow out via over the emergency overflow weir (occurs when water surface elevation exceeds 353.50) Elevation
Inflow
Outflow
Discarded
Primary
Tertiary
Hydrograph
Time (hours)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 Flow (cfs)
6 5
4 3
2 1
0 Elevation (feet)
350
348
346
344
Inflow Area=6.622 ac
Peak Elev =350.59'
Storage=26,333 cf
350.59'

5.40 cfs

3.73 cfs

0.71 cfs

3.02 cfs

0.00 cfs
___________________________________________________________________________________________ L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\Stormwater Control Plan\221005.1 Stormwater Calculations.xlsx
6/28/2022 SCS Routing Page 12 of 12

L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\Stormwater Control Plan\Attachment G1 - Cover Sheet.docx 4/5/2022
H
MH engineering Co.
16075 Vineyard Blvd. Morgan Hill, CA 95037 - (408) 779-7381 M

Attachment G:

Stormwater Management Plan &
Details

(sd) (sd)
(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
(sd) (sd) (sd) (sd) (sd)
(sd)
(sd) (sd)
(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
CLEAN AIR > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > PVT SD PVT SD PVT SD PVT SD PVT SD PVT SD
PVT SD
>
>
PVT SD
PVT SD
PVT SD
PVT SD
PVT SD
PVT SD
PVT SD
PVT SD
PVT SD

PVT SD PVT SD PVT SD
> > > > > >
> >
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD SD

PVT SD PVT SD PVT SD PVT SD PVT SD PVT SD PVT SD SD SD
PVT SD
SD
PVT SD
SD
SD
SD
SD

CLEAN AIR CLEAN AIR CLEAN AIR CLEAN AIR CLEAN AIR CLEAN AIR CLEAN AIR CLEAN AIR

EV CHARGINGEV CHARGING
PVT SD
>
>
>
>
> >
SD
>
>
>
>
>
SD SD
X
X
X
X
X
X

X X X X X X
X
X
X
X

X X X X X
A
C.8
AC.8
CC.8DC.8
EC.8
FC.8
D
C.8
C
C.8
B
C.8
B
C.8
DI #3 - 24" Sq. Inlet
Rim 354.44
Inv 345.08', 12" Ø (In)
Inv 349.55', 8" Ø (In)
Inv 345.08', 12" Ø (Out)
SDMH #6
Rim 355.64
Inv 345.47', 12" Ø (In)
Inv 345.47', 12" Ø (Out)
sdmh
rim 355.54'
inv 350.14', 18" Ø (Out)
inv 350.32', 12" Ø (Out)
DI #10 - 24" Sq. Inlet
Rim 355.02
Inv 347.64', 12" Ø (Thru)
SDMH #8
Rim 354.75
Inv 346.09', 12" Ø (Thru)
DI #11 - 24" Sq. Inlet
Rim 353.80
Inv 348.80', 12" Ø (Out)
CI #2 - Curb Inlet
TC 355.22'
Inv 350.01', 12" Ø (In)
SDMH #2
Rim 354.35
Inv 343.96', 18" Ø (In)
Inv 344.46', 12" Ø (In)
Inv 348.75', 8" Ø (In)
Inv 343.96', 18" Ø (Out)
DI #2 - 24" Sq. Inlet
Rim 354.35
Inv 344.49', 12" Ø (Thru)
Connect to ex. 18" culvert
Inv 349.87'
SDMH #11
Rim 354.03
Sump 348.63'
Inv 349.63', 18" Ø (In)
Inv 350.62', 18" Ø (Out)
SDMH #12 - SDMH
Rim 354.00
Inv 349.85', 18" Ø (In)
Inv 349.85', 18" Ø (Out)
CI #1 - Curb Inlet
TC 353.87'
Inv 347.34', 12" Ø (Out)
SDMH #5
Rim 355.33
Inv 345.28', 12" Ø (In)
Inv 345.28', 12" Ø (In)
Inv 345.28', 12" Ø (Out)
24" sq. inlet
rim 352.75'
inv 349.79', 18" Ø (Out)
SDMH #4 - SDMH
Rim 355.28
Inv 346.10', 18" Ø (In)
Inv 347.26', 12" Ø (In)
Inv 346.10', 18" Ø (Out)
24" sq. inlet
rim 351.69'
inv 349.57', 18" Ø (thru)
36" sq. inlet
rim 351.33'
inv 347.08', 18" Ø (thru)
SDMH #3 - SDMH
Rim 354.40
Inv 345.85', 18" Ø (In)
Inv 348.86', 8" Ø (In)
Inv 345.85', 18" Ø (Out)
DI #1 - ex 36" sq. inlet
Rim 352.95
Inv 348.51', 21" Ø (Thru)
Outlet #2 - ex. conc. headwall
ToW 352.47
Inv 348.47', 21" Ø (In)
Outlet #3 - 21" with Atrium Top
Rim 352.50
Inv 348.85', 10" Ø Orifice
Inv 348.63', 21" Ø (Out)
SDMH #1 - SDMH with Drain Cap
Rim 347.85
Sump 341.29'
Inv 343.29', 18" Ø (In)
226' - 18"Ø rcp sd @ S=0.12%
19' - 18"Ø HDPE SD @ S=0.12%
43' - 18"Ø HDPE SD @ S=0.50%
(ex 101' - 18" Ø rcp sd @ s=0.22%)
(ex 17' - 18" Ø rcp sd @ s=14.40%)
326' - 18"Ø RCP SD @ S=0.30%
34' - 21"Ø PVC SD @ S=0.33%
5' - 21"Ø CMP SD @ S=0.83%
232' - 12"Ø PVC SD @ S=0.50%
19' - 12"Ø PVC SD @ S=2.00%
74' - 18"Ø PVC SD @ S=2.56%
196' - 12"Ø PVC SD @ S=0.30%
11' - 12"Ø PVC SD @ S=0.30%
37' - 18"Ø PVC SD @ S=1.82%
65' - 12"Ø PVC SD @ S=2.00%
16' - 12"Ø PVC SD @ S=2.00%
63' - 12"Ø PVC SD @ S=0.30%
83' - 18"Ø PVC SD @ S=0.30%
68' - 12"Ø PVC SD @ S=0.30%
292' - 24"Ø HDPE SD @ S=0.26%
295' - 24"Ø HDPE SD @ S=0.26%
299' - 24"Ø HDPE SD @ S=0.26%
267' - 18"Ø HDPE SD @ S=0.27%
Retaining Wall by Others
Monterey Road
Monterey Road
10' PSE
SDE
SDE
FEMA Flood Zone AH
Base Flood Elevation = 354.00
Project will obtain CLOMR-F & LOMR-F from FEMA
18' (typ.)9' (typ.)18' (typ.)
9' (typ.)
18' (typ.)9' (typ.)
18' (typ.) 9' (typ.) 26'
13'
13'
26'
Building 2
FF: 355.80 Pad: 354.97 Max. Outside FG: 355.13
Building 1
Commercial FF: 356.10 Pad: 355.27
Building 1
FF: 356.15' Pad: 355.32'
Building 3
FF: 355.30
Pad: 354.47
Max. Outside FG: 354.63
Building 4
FF: 355.65
Pad: 354.82
Max. Outside FG: 354.98
Building 5
FF: 356.00
Pad: 355.17
Max. Outside FG: 355.33
Building 6 FF: 355.80 Pad: 354.97 Max. Outside FG: 355.13 Building 7
FF: 356.00 Pad: 355.17 Max. Outside FG: 355.33
Building 8
FF: 356.00 Pad: 355.17 Max. Outside FG: 355.33
Gar FF 355.30
Gar FF 355.60
Gar FF 354.80 Gar FF 355.15 Gar FF 355.50 Gar FF 355.30 Gar FF 355.50
Gar FF 355.50
TC ER 355.24
TC ER 355.66
TC BVC 355.67 TC HP 355.78
TC EVC 355.59 TC GB 355.14
TC PCC/GB 353.23
TC BVC 351.40
TC EVC 348.83 TC PRC 349.05
TC GB 348.46 TC PRC/GB 347.53
TC GB 346.64
TC GB 354.16
TC Mid VC 350.28
FC 355.89 FC ER 355.45
FC 355.51
FC EVC 355.51
TC 355.21
TC EVC 355.22
TC 355.38
TC 355.22
TC 355.37 TC 355.37
TC 355.84 TC 355.84
TC 355.44
TC 355.99
FC 355.54 FC 355.78 FC 355.78
FC 354.39
FL GB 353.56
FC 354.68
TC HP 354.61
TC GB 354.44 TC LP 354.70
FC 354.85
TC GB 355.12
FL GB 354.22
FC 355.12 FC ER 355.42
FC 355.42
TC 355.93
FL GB 354.78
TC GB 355.68 TC 355.81
TC 355.38 TC 355.25 TC BVC 355.25 TC 355.22 TC ER 355.38TC BVC 356.02 TC EVC 355.81 TC ER 355.67 FC 355.08
TC 354.12
TC 353.72
TC 354.99 TC 354.89 TC ER 356.03
TC 354.50 TC 355.42 TC 355.80 TC 355.15 TC ER 355.59 TC 354.61 TC 355.26 TC 354.20 TC 354.85 TC 354.52 TC 354.94 TC HP 355.08
TC LP 354.80
TC ER 355.08
TC ER 355.15
TC LP 354.70
FL HP 354.82
FC 355.46
FC 355.41
FC 355.34
34' - 12"Ø PVC SD @ S=0.50%
CI #3 - Curb Inlet
TC 353.83'
Inv 347.08', 12" Ø (Out)
133' - 12"Ø PVC SD @ S=0.50%
158' - 12"Ø PVC SD @ S=0.30%
48' - 12"Ø PVC SD @ S=0.30%
10' - 8"Ø PVC SD @ S=22.38%
56' - 8"Ø PVC SD @ S=0.50%
16' - 12"Ø PVC SD @ S=2.00%
38' - 12"Ø PVC SD @ S=2.00%
SDMH #9
Rim 353.80
Inv 346.76', 12" Ø (In)
Inv 346.76', 12" Ø (In)
Inv 346.76', 12" Ø (Out)
SDMH #10
Rim 355.12
Inv 346.58', 12" Ø (Thru)
31' - 8"Ø PVC SD @ S=2.00% 0.30% 0.30% 1.48% 1.43%

1.85% 1.59%

0.20% 0.14%

3.04% 0.32% 2.80% 0.04%1.60%

2.00%

2.00%

1.60%1.68% 3.73%

0.50%

2.00%

1.75%

1.88%

0.68%

3.63%

1.50%

2.00%

0.57%

2.12% 0.50% 2.00%3.36% 3.93%

1.19% 1.28% 0.30% 4.50% 2.49% 4.55%

2.00%

2.42% 0.25%

2.00%

2.04%

0.08%

4.50%

1.44%

1.15%

0.35%

1.00%

0.08%

1.21%

2.00%

4.36%

1.29%

2.00%

4.38%
DI #5 - 24" Sq. Inlet
Rim 353.31
Inv 346.92', 12" Ø (Out)
SDMH #7 - SDMH
Rim 355.17
Inv 345.61', 12" Ø (In)
Inv 345.95', 8" Ø (In)
Inv 345.61', 12" Ø (Out)
DI #4 - 24" Sq. Inlet
Rim 354.90
Inv 349.57', 8" Ø (In)
Inv 353.89', 6" Ø (In)
Inv 353.89', 6" Ø (In)
Inv 348.17', 8" Ø (Out)
DI #43 - 24" Sq. Inlet
Rim 354.89
Inv 349.85', 8" Ø (In)
Inv 349.85', 8" Ø (In)
Inv 349.85', 8" Ø (Out)
DI #50 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.59
DI #49 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.59 DI #48 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.58
DI #47 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.73
DI #46 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.72
DI #45 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.72 DI #44 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.92
DI #51 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.80 DI #52 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.29
DI #53 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.21
DI #54 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.29
DI #55 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.21 DI #56 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.31
DI #57 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.21
133' Trench Drain
44' Trench Drain 0.74%
SW 354.81 SW 354.88 SW 354.82
SW 355.17 SW 355.49 SW 355.19 SW 355.03
SW 354.68 SW 355.06 SW 355.67 SW 355.56 SW 355.30
SW 355.12
SW 354.55
SW 355.48
SW 355.94
SW 355.99
SW 355.89 SW 355.09
SW 355.89
SW 354.75 SW 354.78 SW 354.82 SW 354.92
SW 354.63
SW 355.27
SW 354.90
SW 354.11
SW 354.37
SW 355.74

1.85% 0.73% 1.42% 2.84% 2.00% 3.93% 3.22% 2.15%

1.32%

2.00%

2.00%

2.97%

4.00%

2.00%

4.42%

1.10% 0.50% 0.50% 0.50% 0.50%

0.29% 0.29% 0.29%

0.45%

0.50%

0.55%

2.00% 2.00% 2.00%

2.00%

1.50%

2.00%

2.00%

2.00% 0.72% 0.72% 0.51% TC GB 354.82

0.65%

0.98%

1.90%

3.19%

2.73%

2.49% 4:1
4:1
4:1
4:1
2:1
2:1
2:1
3:1
3:1
5:1

2.00%
SW 355.20
SW 355.29
SW 355.43
Bioretention Pond
Bottom 347.85
ToW 352.25 BoW 351.04
ToW 351.50 BoW 348.86
ToW 352.11 BoW 350.20 4.50% 2.47%
ToB 354.00
ToB 354.00
ToB 354.00
ToB 354.00
DI #42 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.43
DI #41 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.46
DI #40 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.79 DI #39 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.43
DI #38 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.43
DI #37 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.78
DI #36 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.78
DI #35 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.83
DI #34 - 8" Ø
Rim 355.48 DI #33 - 8" Ø
Rim 355.48 DI #32 - 8" Ø
Rim 355.06
DI #31 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.78
DI #16 - 8" Ø
Rim 355.12
DI #17 - 8" Ø
Rim 355.13
DI #18 - 8" Ø
Rim 355.08
DI #19 - 8" Ø
Rim 355.03
DI #20 - 8" Ø
Rim 355.07
DI #21 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.96
DI #22 - 8" Ø
Rim 355.03
DI #23 - 8" Ø
Rim 355.02
DI #24 - 8" Ø
Rim 355.02
DI #25 - 8" Ø
Rim 355.03
DI #26 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.96
DI #27 - 8" Ø
Rim 355.08
DI #28 - 8" Ø
Rim 355.06
DI #29 - 8" Ø
Rim 355.06
DI #30 - 8" Ø
Rim 355.11
DI #15 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.57
DI #9 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.75
DI #6 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.61
DI #7 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.58
DI #8 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.66
SW 353.50
ToW 353.96
BoW 352.26
ToW 353.85
BoW 353.48
ToW 353.49
BoW 350.77
ToW 354.88
BoW 351.89
ToW 353.99
BoW 353.10
ToW 354.20
BoW 353.95
ToW 354.45
BoW 352.49
ToW 354.70
BoW 352.71
ToW 354.95
BoW 352.58
ToW 354.81
BoW 351.99
ToW 354.44
BoW 351.52
ToW 352.56
BoW 351.52
ToB 353.39
ToB 354.00
SW 355.94
SW 356.05
SW 355.98 SW 355.77
SW 354.16
CITY FILE NO.

PLAN SET:

DRAWING:

REVISIONS
NO. DESCRIPTION DATE BY
Public Works Department
City of Morgan Hill
CITY OF MORGAN HILL 17575 PEAK AVE. MORGAN HILL, CA 95037 L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\DWG\221005 C6-Preliminary Grading Plan.dwg (408) 776-6480 FAX (408) 779-7236 MORGAN HILL CALIFORNIA - 6/28/2022 4:17 PM - Plotted 6/28/2022 4:38 PM by Kristian Wallace WORK ACCEPTED: INSPECTOR: SUPERVISED BY:

SIGNATURE DATE
DRAWN: CHECKED:

APPROVED:

DESIGN: DATE:HOR.

VERT.

JOB NO.

EXP. DATE 06-30-2021 CITY ENGINEERRCE 58879
Scott C. Creer
DATE: BY: DATE: 16075 VINEYARD BOULEVARD MORGAN HILL, CA 95037 (408) 779-7381 FAX: (408) 226-5712

SUBDIVISIONS - LAND PLANNING - LAND SURVEYS
Xrefs: 221005 Hatch New; 221005 LO Existing-Imps; 221005 LO Existing-Map; 221005 LO New; Arch Background 9-21-21; 221005 3D New The Gates The Gates
Preliminary Grading Plan
Preliminary Grading Plan
C.6
of 13
6/28/22
KW HS 1"=20' SR2021-0020
221005.1
CH
Retaining Wall by Others

HAR I NDER S I NGLA

STATE OF CAL I FORN I A
C49717

REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINE
ER

FOR PLANCHECK ONLY

FOR PLANCHECK ONLY
signature shall be provided upon approval
06/28/2022 4:17pm
North
SCALE: 1"=20'
010203040

(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
PVT SD
PVT SD
>
PVT SD
PVT SD
SD SD
PVT SD
SD
>
>
>
>
>
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X X X X X X
X
X
X
X

X X X X X X X X X X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
AC.8
EC.8
FC.8
FC.8
EC.8
B
C.8
DI #10 - 24" Sq. Inlet
Rim 355.02
Inv 347.64', 12" Ø (Thru)
SDMH #2
Rim 354.35
Inv 343.96', 18" Ø (In)
Inv 344.46', 12" Ø (In)
Inv 348.75', 8" Ø (In)
Inv 343.96', 18" Ø (Out)
DI #2 - 24" Sq. Inlet
Rim 354.35
Inv 344.49', 12" Ø (Thru)
SDMH #4 - SDMH
Rim 355.28
Inv 346.10', 18" Ø (In)
Inv 347.26', 12" Ø (In)
Inv 346.10', 18" Ø (Out)
SDMH #3 - SDMH
Rim 354.40
Inv 345.85', 18" Ø (In)
Inv 348.86', 8" Ø (In)
Inv 345.85', 18" Ø (Out)
DI #1 - ex 36" sq. inlet
Rim 352.95
Inv 348.51', 21" Ø (Thru)
Outlet #2 - ex. conc. headwall
ToW 352.47
Inv 348.47', 21" Ø (In)
Outlet #3 - 21" with Atrium Top
Rim 352.50
Inv 348.85', 10" Ø Orifice
Inv 348.63', 21" Ø (Out)
SDMH #1 - SDMH with Drain Cap
Rim 347.85
Sump 341.29'
Inv 343.29', 18" Ø (In)
ex. 24" sq. inlet
rim 342.78'
inv 339.74', 8" Ø (in)
34' - 21"Ø PVC SD @ S=0.33%
5' - 21"Ø CMP SD @ S=0.83%
19' - 12"Ø PVC SD @ S=2.00%
74' - 18"Ø PVC SD @ S=2.56%
196' - 12"Ø PVC SD @ S=0.30%
11' - 12"Ø PVC SD @ S=0.30%
37' - 18"Ø PVC SD @ S=1.82%
83' - 18"Ø PVC SD @ S=0.30%
Monterey Road
10' PSE
SDE
SDE
13'
13'
26'
Building 6 FF: 355.80 Pad: 354.97 Max. Outside FG: 355.13 Building 7 FF: 356.00 Pad: 355.17 Max. Outside FG: 355.33 Gar FF 355.30 Gar FF 355.50
TC BVC 351.40
TC EVC 348.83 TC PRC 349.05
TC GB 348.46 TC PRC/GB 347.53
TC GB 346.64 TC EC 345.94
TC Mid VC 350.28
TC 355.38 TC 355.25 TC BVC 355.25 TC 355.22 TC ER 355.38 TC ER 355.15
TC LP 354.70
FL HP 354.82
FC 355.41
FC 355.34

2.00%

2.42% 0.25%

2.00%

1.15% 0.35%

1.00%

0.08%

1.21%

2.00%

2.00%

2.00%

2.00%

4.36%

1.29%

2.00%

4.38% SW 354.82 SW 354.92
SW 354.63
SW 355.27
SW 354.90
SW 354.14
SW 354.14
SW 354.11 SW 354.11
SW 354.37
SW 355.74

2.00%

2.00%

2.00%

4.42%

0.55%

3.19%

2.73%

2.49% 4:1 4:1
4:1
4:1
4:1
4:1
2:1
2:1
2:1
3:1
SW 355.20
SW 355.29
SW 355.43
Bioretention Pond
Bottom 347.85
ToW 352.25 BoW 351.04
ToW 351.50 BoW 348.86
ToW 352.11 BoW 350.20
ToB 354.00 ToB 354.00
ToB 354.00
ToB 354.00
ToB 354.00
ToB 354.00
DI #16 - 8" Ø
Rim 355.12
DI #17 - 8" Ø
Rim 355.13
DI #18 - 8" Ø
Rim 355.08
DI #19 - 8" Ø
Rim 355.03
DI #20 - 8" Ø
Rim 355.07
DI #21 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.96
DI #22 - 8" Ø
Rim 355.03
DI #23 - 8" Ø
Rim 355.02
DI #15 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.57
DI #9 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.75
DI #6 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.61
DI #7 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.58
DI #8 - 8" Ø
Rim 354.66
SW 353.50 SW 353.50
SW 354.11
Safety Fence per
Landscape Plans (typ)
Landscape Plans (typ) Safety Fence per 2.00%
ToW 354.81
BoW 351.99
ToW 354.44
BoW 351.52
ToW 352.56
BoW 351.52
ToW 352.56
BoW 351.93
ToW 352.56
BoW 352.24
ToW 352.56
BoW 352.32
ToB 354.00
ToB 353.39 ToB 353.39
ToB 354.00
Emergency Overflow
Weir per Detail Below
SW 354.14
SW 354.17
SW 354.17
SW 354.17
SW 354.16
SW 354.19
SW 354.19
SW 354.14

4.36%
SW 354.14
26'

2.00%
13' 13'
4" AC on
8" Class II AB
Modified Wedge Curb (Catch)
See Detail
Flush Curb
See Flush Curb Detail
℄
Typical Section - Private Drive
Fronting Buildings Not to Scale
Modified Wedge Curb Detail (Catch)
Private Street Not to Scale
10"
24"
1"

0.31'
6" 12"
Modified Curb and Gutter Detail
Not to Scale
3 4
"
15"
6"
6"
12"
6"
Flush Curb Detail
Not to Scale
6"

2.0%
4" AC
8" AB

NATIVE SOIL
3 4
"
Vertical Curb Detail
Not to Scale
6"

2.0% 6"
3/4"
4" AC
8" AB

NATIVE SOIL
13' 13'
26'
Varies
2% - 4%
℄
Typical Section - Private Drive
Fronting Buildings 9 & 10 Not to Scale
Flush Curb
See Flush Curb Detail
4" AC on
8" Class II AB
Modified Curb and Gutter
See Detail

2.00%
4" AC on
8" Class II AB
Flush Curb
See Detail
Valley Gutter per
City Std. Detail A-3
Vertical Curb
See Detail
13' 12' 18' Parking
25'
Varies
2% - 4%
℄
Typical Section - Private Drive
Fronting Buildings 6 & 7 Not to Scale
Varies
2% - 4%
6" AC on 18" Class II AB
or Match Existing
Curb and Gutter per City Std. A-3
ex. pavement varies 20.44'-44.91' Varies 2'-15.84'
ex. R/W varies 50.62'-65.69'
℄
Typical Section - Monterey Road Widening
Looking South Not to Scale
TI = 9 R = 10
⅊
24" BSM Over
24" Class II Drain Rock
21" Ø Inlet with Atrium Top
Rim: 352.50'
Inv: 348.85', 10" Ø Orifice
Inv: 348.63', 21" Ø CMP (Out)
4:1 Max 4:1 Max
Retention/Detention Pond Detail
Not to Scale
3' Retention/Detention Pond 3'
Bottom: 347.85
1' Ponding Depth
X XX X
Top of Bank
354.00
Safety Fence per Landscape Plans Safety Fence per Landscape Plans Top of Bank
354.00
221005 Storm New - Pipe Table
Start
Inlet
SDMH #3
SDMH #2
DI #56
DI #55
DI #54
DI #53
DI #52
DI #51
DI #49
DI #48
DI #47
DI #46
DI #45
DI #44
DI #43
DI #43
End
Inlet
DI #6
DI #15
DI #57
DI #56
DI #55
DI #54
DI #53
DI #52
DI #50
DI #49
DI #48
DI #47
DI #46
DI #45
DI #51
DI #44
Size
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
Length
26'
55'
38'
21'
16'
16'
16'
16'
15'
16'
16'
16'
21'
39'
15'
16'
Slope

2.00%

2.00%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

2.89%
Start
Invert
348.86'
348.75'
350.35'
350.25'
350.17'
350.09'
350.01'
349.93'
350.85'
350.77'
350.68'
350.60'
350.50'
350.30'
349.85'
349.85'
End
Invert
349.37'
349.85'
350.54'
350.35'
350.25'
350.17'
350.09'
350.01'
350.92'
350.85'
350.77'
350.68'
350.60'
350.50'
349.93'
350.30'
Description
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
221005 Storm New - Pipe Table
Start
Inlet
DI #41
DI #40
DI #39
DI #38
DI #37
DI #36
DI #35
DI #35
DI #34
DI #33
DI #32
DI #29
DI #28
DI #27
DI #26
DI #25
End
Inlet
DI #42
DI #41
DI #40
DI #39
DI #38
DI #37
DI #34
DI #36
DI #33
DI #32
DI #31
DI #30
DI #29
DI #28
DI #27
DI #26
Size
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
Length
27'
21'
16'
12'
9'
12'
22'
21'
16'
16'
22'
12'
16'
16'
16'
16'
Slope

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%
Start
Invert
350.63'
350.52'
350.44'
350.38'
350.34'
350.28'
350.17'
350.17'
350.28'
350.36'
350.44'
351.38'
351.30'
351.22'
351.14'
351.06'
End
Invert
350.76'
350.63'
350.52'
350.44'
350.38'
350.34'
350.28'
350.28'
350.36'
350.44'
350.55'
351.44'
351.38'
351.30'
351.22'
351.14'
Description
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
221005 Storm New - Pipe Table
Start
Inlet
DI #24
DI #23
DI #22
DI #21
DI #20
DI #19
DI #18
DI #17
DI #16
DI #15
DI #7
DI #6
DI #6
DI #3
End
Inlet
DI #25
DI #24
DI #23
DI #22
DI #21
DI #20
DI #19
DI #18
DI #17
DI #16
DI #8
DI #9
DI #7
DI #35
Size
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
8"
Length
13'
8'
12'
16'
16'
17'
16'
12'
30'
26'
27'
23'
37'
31'
Slope

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

0.50%

2.00%

2.00%

2.00%

2.00%

2.00%
Start
Invert
351.00'
350.96'
350.90'
350.81'
350.74'
350.65'
350.57'
350.51'
350.36'
349.85'
350.10'
349.37'
349.37'
349.55'
End
Invert
351.06'
351.00'
350.96'
350.90'
350.81'
350.74'
350.65'
350.57'
350.51'
350.36'
350.65'
349.82'
350.10'
350.17'
Description
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD
PVC SD

4.36% 4.36%
7'
6"-12" Ø Rip Rap
Bioretention Pond Weir Detail
Scale: none
10'
SW 353.50
Inv: 353.50
Sidewalk
354.11
Sidewalk
354.11
Profile View
Section View
10'
1%

4.36%
4:1 Max
ToB 353.39 2% ±21%
14' 14'
24" Min.
6"
1"-2" Ø clean drainrock 12" Min
24" Sump for
heavy particulates Mirafi 140 Filter Fabric
or equivalent to prevent
clogging of drain rock
Bioretention Pond Bubble Up Detail
Scale: none
18" Ø RCP
Inv: 343.29'
Inflow
from Project
CITY FILE NO.

PLAN SET:

DRAWING:

REVISIONS
NO. DESCRIPTION DATE BY
Public Works Department
City of Morgan Hill
CITY OF MORGAN HILL 17575 PEAK AVE. MORGAN HILL, CA 95037 L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\DWG\221005 C6-Preliminary Grading Plan.dwg (408) 776-6480 FAX (408) 779-7236 MORGAN HILL CALIFORNIA - 6/28/2022 4:17 PM - Plotted 6/28/2022 4:40 PM by Kristian Wallace WORK ACCEPTED: INSPECTOR: SUPERVISED BY:

SIGNATURE DATE
DRAWN: CHECKED:

APPROVED:

DESIGN: DATE:HOR.

VERT.

JOB NO.

EXP. DATE 06-30-2021 CITY ENGINEERRCE 58879
Scott C. Creer
DATE: BY: DATE: 16075 VINEYARD BOULEVARD MORGAN HILL, CA 95037 (408) 779-7381 FAX: (408) 226-5712

SUBDIVISIONS - LAND PLANNING - LAND SURVEYS
Xrefs: 221005 Hatch New; 221005 LO Existing-Imps; 221005 LO Existing-Map; 221005 LO New; Arch Background 9-21-21; 221005 3D New The Gates The Gates
Preliminary Grading Plan
Preliminary Grading Plan
C.7
of 13
6/28/22
KW HS 1"=20' SR2021-0020
221005.1
CH

HAR I NDER S I NGLA

STATE OF CAL I FORN I A
C49717

REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINE
ER

FOR PLANCHECK ONLY

FOR PLANCHECK ONLY
signature shall be provided upon approval
06/28/2022 4:17pm
North
SCALE: 1"=20'
010203040
Preliminary Earthwork
Cut Fill Net
Rough Grade 8,577 CY 6,132 CY 2,445 CY (Cut)
Trench Spoils 1,481 CY 0 CY 1,481 CY (Cut)
Total 10,058 CY 6,132 CY 3,926 CY (Cut)

PROFILE: SD Culvert Extension
SCALE H: 1"=20' SCALE V: 1"=10'
342
344
346
348
350
352
354
356
358
342
344
346
348
350
352
354
356
358
1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+20
PROFILE: A-A
SCALE H: 1"=20' SCALE V: 1"=10'
344
346
348
350
352
354
356
358
360
362
344
346
348
350
352
354
356
358
360
362
1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 5+50 6+00 6+50 6+79 PROFILE: B-B
SCALE H: 1"=20' SCALE V: 1"=10'
344
346
348
350
352
354
356
358
360
362
344
346
348
350
352
354
356
358
360
362
1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 5+50 6+00 6+13
12" Ø PVC SD
Inv: 345.44'
E
D
C
B
A
PROFILE: C-C
SCALE H: 1"=20' SCALE V: 1"=10'
344
346
348
350
352
354
356
358
360
362
344
346
348
350
352
354
356
358
360
362
1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+13
PROFILE: D-D
SCALE H: 1"=20' SCALE V: 1"=10'
342
344
346
348
350
352
354
356
358
360
362
342
344
346
348
350
352
354
356
358
360
362
1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 3+71
PROFILE: E-E
SCALE H: 1"=20' SCALE V: 1"=10'
338
340
342
344
346
348
350
352
354
356
358
338
340
342
344
346
348
350
352
354
356
358
1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 3+51
PROFILE: F-F
SCALE H: 1"=20' SCALE V: 1"=10'
342
344
346
348
350
352
354
356
358
342
344
346
348
350
352
354
356
358
1+50 2+00 2+50 2+69
A
F
B
C
D
E
24" Ø HDPE SD
Inv: 350.60'
18" Ø HDPE SD
Inv: 350.59'
24" Ø HDPE SD
Inv: 350.60'
24" Ø HDPE SD
Inv: 350.60' 12" Ø PVC SD
Inv: 346.45'
24" Ø HDPE SD
Inv: 350.16'
12" Ø PVC SD
Inv: 346.63'
18" Ø HDPE SD
Inv: 350.16'
24" Ø HDPE SD
Inv: 350.16'
24" Ø HDPE SD
Inv: 350.16'
8" Ø PVC SD
Inv: 350.61'
8" Ø PVC SD
Inv: 350.15'
8" Ø PVC SD
Inv: 350.53' 12" Ø PVC SD
Inv: 345.79'
18" Ø rcp sd
inv 349.98' 18" Ø RCP SD
Inv: 347.77'
18" Ø RCP SD
Inv: 346.30'
12" Ø PVC SD
Inv: 347.97'
8" Ø PVC SD
Inv: 350.40'
12" Ø PVC SD
Inv: 344.99'
8" Ø PVC SD
Inv: 351.18'
306' - Triple 24"Ø HDPE Culvert Extension @ S=0.26%
Finish Grade
(existing ground)
TC 355.07
FG 355.73
Building 1
Commercial FF 356.15 SW 355.95
Building 8
FF 356.00
Building 7
FF 356.00
FG 356.15
FG 355.33
FG 355.33 FG 355.33 FG 355.33
TC 355.72
SW 355.25
SW 355.25
SW 355.17 SW 355.37 SW 355.30
SW 355.29 SW 355.29 SW 354.94
SW 354.86

2.00%

1.82% 1.69%

1.33%

4.82%
TC 354.01
TC 354.81
TC 355.54
TC 354.79
SW 353.97
SW 354.74
FG 354.63
Building 3
FF 355.30
FL 354.30
TC 354.65
TC 356.02
TC 355.25
SW 354.78
SW 354.70 SW 354.88
SW 354.96 SW 354.93 SW 355.01
SW 355.47
SW 354.85
SW 354.80
FG 354.63 FG 354.98 FG 354.98 FG 355.33 FG 355.33 FG 355.13 Building 4
FF 355.65
Building 5
FF 356.00
Building 3
FF 355.80

2.00%

2.00%

4.08%
ToW 354.07
BoW 351.14
FL 353.91
FC 354.57
Building 3
FF 355.30
SW 354.97 Conform 355.76
TC 355.22 Building 2 FC 355.51 TC 355.72
FF 355.80
Building 1
FF 356.15
Building 1
Commercial FF 356.15

2.00% 2.30% 2.00%

3.11%
SW 354.87
SW 354.97 FG 355.09 SW 356.02
SW 355.98
SW 355.88
ToW 354.80
BoW 352.90
FL 354.64
FC 355.34 SW 356.00
EP 352.56
Confrom 352.52

2.00% 2.51% 4.44% 3.40%

1.91%
3:1
SW 355.94 2.87%
SW 355.56
SW 355.48
SW 355.67
SW 355.33 SW 355.17
TC 354.94 SW 355.07
TC 352.48
FC 355.42
Building 5
FF 356.00
Building 8
FF 356.00
SW 354.72
ToB 354.00
SW 354.06
SW 354.14
ToB 354.00
Bioretention Pond
Bottom 347.85

6.18%
4:1

2.00%2:1
ToB 353.94
TOW 352.56
BoW 351.27
ToB 354.00 SW 354.05 ToB 356.00
SW 354.15
Bioretention Pond SW 354.07
Bottom 347.85

2.00% 4:1 4:1

2.00%
196' - 12"Ø PVC SD @ S=0.30%
DI #2 - 24" Sq. Inlet
Rim 354.35
Inv 344.49', 12" Ø (Thru)
11' - 12"Ø PVC SD @ S=0.30%
SDMH #2 - SDMH
Rim 354.35
Inv 343.96', 18" Ø (In)
Inv 344.46', 12" Ø (In)
Inv 348.75', 8" Ø (In)
Inv 343.96', 18" Ø (Out)
37' - 18"Ø PVC SD
@ S=1.82%
SDMH #1 - SDMH with Drain Cap
Rim 347.85
Sump 341.29
Inv 343.29', 18" Ø (In)
8" Ø DIP Water
Inv 351.11
8" Ø C900 SSFM
Inv 347.90
8" Ø DIP Water
Inv 350.12
8" Ø DIP Water
Inv 350.79 6" Ø PVC SS
Inv 348.66
8" Ø DIP Water
Inv 351.45 6" Ø PVC SS
Inv 350.13
8" Ø C900 SSFM
Inv 348.02
6" Ø PVC SS
Inv 349.04
8' Ø DIP Water
Inv 350.69
8' Ø DIP Water
Inv 350.90
6" Ø PVC SS
Inv 349.46
8" Ø DIP Water
Inv 351.20
6" Ø PVC SS
Inv 349.84
8" Ø DIP Water
Inv 350.99 6" Ø PVC SS
Inv 350.46
X
X
P/L
Safety fence per landscape plans
P/L
Finish Grade
(existing ground)
(tc 345.41)
Safety fence per
landscape plans
XX
Safety Fence per Landscape Plans
Finish Grade
(existing ground) 4:1
Safety Fence per Landscape Plans
P/L
Retaining wall by others
P/L
(existing ground)
Finish Grade
Finish Grade
P/L
Retaining Wall by others
P/L
(existing ground)
Finish Grade
(existing ground)
TC 364.50
Finish Grade
(existing ground)
F 4'-0" 8" 1'-6"
20'
3'-3" 18" Typ.
3/4" Chamfer 8" 4'-0"
12"
Headwall Detail
Scale: None
3'-3"
Section X
Scale: None
See Section X
3" typ.
3" min. (typ.)
1 1/2" min. (typ.)
(4) # 4 bars (2) #5 bars
(2) #5 bars
12" 12" 6"
Native Backfill
(3) 24" dia. Storm
Pvc culvert pipes
2 sacks/yard cement slurry backfill
Culvert Extension Detail 1'-6"
PL
Min. 6" slurry Backfill
(typ.) 6"
18"Ø
24"Ø
24"Ø
24"Ø
24"Ø
24"Ø24"Ø
18"Ø
Typ. PVC Bell End Placement
@ Headwall Outlet
G
G 2.0% 2.0%
12"-15" Ø Rip-Rap 12"-15" Ø Rip-Rap 5.5'

17.65'
1' 1'

22.15'
Energy Dissipation Box Detail
Scale: none
11'± 11'±
6" Ø weep holes (typ)
6" 9"

2.25'
Energy Dissipation Box Section G-G
Scale: none

4.5'
6" 15"
Headwall per Detail right
P/L
(3) 24" HDPE SD &
(1) 18" HDPE SD 12"
Mirafi 140 Filter Fabric
(or equivalent) 6" Ø weep holes

HAR I NDER S I NGLA

STATE OF CAL I FORN I A
C49717

REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINE
ER

FOR PLANCHECK ONLY

FOR PLANCHECK ONLY
signature shall be provided upon approval
06/28/2022 4:17pm
CITY FILE NO.

PLAN SET:

DRAWING:

REVISIONS
NO. DESCRIPTION DATE BY
Public Works Department
City of Morgan Hill
CITY OF MORGAN HILL 17575 PEAK AVE. MORGAN HILL, CA 95037 L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\DWG\221005 C6-Preliminary Grading Plan.dwg (408) 776-6480 FAX (408) 779-7236 MORGAN HILL CALIFORNIA - 6/28/2022 4:17 PM - Plotted 6/28/2022 4:41 PM by Kristian Wallace WORK ACCEPTED: INSPECTOR: SUPERVISED BY:

SIGNATURE DATE
DRAWN: CHECKED:

APPROVED:

DESIGN: DATE:HOR.

VERT.

JOB NO.

EXP. DATE 06-30-2021 CITY ENGINEERRCE 58879
Scott C. Creer
DATE: BY: DATE: 16075 VINEYARD BOULEVARD MORGAN HILL, CA 95037 (408) 779-7381 FAX: (408) 226-5712

SUBDIVISIONS - LAND PLANNING - LAND SURVEYS
Xrefs: 221005 Hatch New; 221005 LO Existing-Imps; 221005 LO Existing-Map; 221005 LO New; Arch Background 9-21-21; 221005 3D New The Gates The Gates
Preliminary Grading Plan - Sections
Preliminary Grading Plan - Sections
C.8
of 13
6/28/22
KW HS 1"=20' SR2021-0020
1"=10'
221005.1
CH

(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
(sd)
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
> CLEAN AIR > > > > > > > > PVT SD PVT SD PVT SD
PVT SD
PVT SD
>
PVT SD
PVT SD
PVT SD
PVT SD

PVT SD PVT SD
> > > > >
SD
SD
SD SD

PVT SD PVT SD PVT SD PVT SD SD SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD

CLEAN AIR CLEAN AIR CLEAN AIR CLEAN AIR CLEAN AIR CLEAN AIR CLEAN AIR CLEAN AIR

EV CHARGINGEV CHARGING
>
>
>
SD
>
>
>
SD SD
X
X
X
X

X X X X
X
X

X X X X X X X
X
X
X
X
Outlet #2 - ex. conc. headwall
ToW 352.47
Inv 348.47', 21" Ø (In)
Outlet #3 - 21" with Atrium Top
Rim 352.50
Inv 348.85', 10" Ø Orifice
Inv 348.63', 21" Ø (Out)
DMA 1
174,172 SF
Monterey Road
Monterey Road
Building 2
FF: 355.80 Pad: 354.97
Building 1
Commercial FF: 356.10 Pad: 355.27
Building 1
FF: 356.15' Pad: 355.32'
Building 3
FF: 355.30 Pad: 354.47
Building 4
FF: 355.65 Pad: 354.82
Building 5
FF: 356.00 Pad: 355.17
Building 6 FF: 355.80 Pad: 354.97
Building 7
FF: 356.00 Pad: 355.17
Building 8
FF: 356.00 Pad: 355.17
SCM-1 Bioretention/Detention Pond
Bottom 347.85
Bubble Up Structure per detail below

4.36%

4.36%
7'
6"-12" Ø Rip Rap
Bioretention Pond Weir Detail
Scale: none
10'
SW 353.50
Inv: 353.50
Sidewalk
354.11
Sidewalk
354.11
Profile View
Section View
10'
1%

4.36%
4:1 Max
ToB 353.39 2% ±21%
14' 14'
24" Min.
6"
1"-2" Ø clean drainrock 12" Min
24" Sump for
heavy particulates Mirafi 140 Filter Fabric
or equivalent to prevent
clogging of drain rock
Bioretention Pond Bubble Up Detail
Scale: none
18" Ø RCP
Inv: 343.29'
Inflow
from Project
24" BSM Over
24" Class II Drain Rock
21" Ø Inlet with Atrium Top
Rim: 352.50'
Inv: 348.85', 10" Ø Orifice
Inv: 348.63', 21" Ø CMP (Out)
4:1 Max
4:1 Max
Retention/Detention Pond Detail
Not to Scale
3' Retention/Detention Pond 3'
Bottom: 347.85
1' Ponding Depth
X XX X
Top of Bank
354.00
Safety Fence per Landscape Plans Safety Fence per Landscape Plans Top of Bank
354.00
CITY FILE NO.

PLAN SET:

DRAWING:

REVISIONS
NO. DESCRIPTION DATE BY
Public Works Department
City of Morgan Hill
CITY OF MORGAN HILL 17575 PEAK AVE. MORGAN HILL, CA 95037 L:\Projects\Harry\221005.1 MH Morgan Hill 8 City Ventures @ Gateway Center\DWG\221005 C9-Preliminary SWCP.dwg (408) 776-6480 FAX (408) 779-7236 MORGAN HILL CALIFORNIA - 6/28/2022 3:28 PM - Plotted 6/28/2022 4:41 PM by Kristian Wallace WORK ACCEPTED: INSPECTOR: SUPERVISED BY:

SIGNATURE DATE
DRAWN: CHECKED:

APPROVED:

DESIGN: DATE:HOR.

VERT.

JOB NO.

EXP. DATE 06-30-2021 CITY ENGINEERRCE 58879
Scott C. Creer
DATE: BY: DATE: 16075 VINEYARD BOULEVARD MORGAN HILL, CA 95037 (408) 779-7381 FAX: (408) 226-5712

SUBDIVISIONS - LAND PLANNING - LAND SURVEYS
Xrefs: 221005 Hatch New; 221005 LO Existing-Imps; 221005 LO Existing-Map; 221005 LO New; Arch Background 9-21-21 The Gates The Gates
Preliminary Stormwater Control Plan
Preliminary Stormwater Control Plan
C.9
of 13
6/28/22
KW HS 1"=40' SR2021-0020
221005.1
CH

HAR I NDER S I NGLA

STATE OF CAL I FORN I A
C49717

REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINE
ER

FOR PLANCHECK ONLY

FOR PLANCHECK ONLY
signature shall be provided upon approval
06/28/2022 3:28pm
North 100102030406080
0 SCALE: 1"=40'
Retention Volume Calculations
Post Construction Storm Water Management Calculations
Per Resolution No. R3-2013-0032

1.) Determination of the Retention Tributary Area
a.)
Impervious Areas
DMA
Pre-Development Post-Development
Replaced New
Roof PCC AC Roof PCC AC Roof PCC AC
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 39,429 25,836 46,760
Pervious vs Impervious Areas
DMA Total Area
Pre-Development Post-Development
Pervious Impervious Pervious
Impervious
i C Replaced New Total
1 174,172 174,172 0 62,148 0 112,024 112,024 0.64 0.44
Total 174,172 174,172 0 62,148 0 112,024 112,024 0.64 0.44 Atotal = drainage area (sf)
Aroofs = roof areas (sf)
Apcc-walks/parking = area of pcc walks & parking lot
Apcc -streets = area of pcc walks and curbs (sf)
AAC-streets = Street pavement areas (sf)
Apervious = Planted & Open Areas (sf)
Aimpervious = total impervious roof areas, PCC areas & AC areas (sf) i = fraction of the tributary area that is impervious = Aimpervious / Aarea Carea# = Area runoff coefficient=C = 0.858i3 - 0.78i2 + 0.774i + 0.04 b.)adjustments for redevelopment project
DMA DMA Area APA Aother Areplaced Aretention
1 174,172 0 0 0 174,172
Total 174,172 0 0 0 174,172
APA = Undisturbed or Self-Retaining Planted or Open Areas Aother = Impervious Areas that discharge to independent infiltrating Areas Areplaced = Replaced Impervious Areas
Aretention = Retention Tributary Area = DMA Area - APA - Aother - (0.5 x Areplaced)

2.) Determination of Retention Volume
a.) retention requirement
1 = WMZ = watershed management zone per WMZ map
b.) WMZ 1 Runoff Retention Requirement = Retain 95th percentile 24-hour rainfall event

1.85= D95 = 95th Percentile Rainfall Depth
c.) compute the runoff coefficient
DMA DMA Area Impervious Area i C
1 174,172 112,024 0.64 0.44
Total 174,172 112,024 0.64 0.44
C = 0.858i3 - 0.78i2 + 0.774i + 0.04
i = fraction of the tributary area that is impervious = Aimpervious / Aproject d.) Project Type
Mixed Use
e.) Compute Retention Volume required
DMA Aretention i C D95 Vretention
1 174,172 0.64 0.44 1.85 11,907
Total 174,172 0.64 0.44 1.85 11,907
C = 0.858i3 - 0.78i2 + 0.774i + 0.04
i = fraction of the tributary area that is impervious = Aimpervious / Aproject Vretention = Required Retention Volume = Aretention x C x (D95/12)

3.) Retention Volume Provided
Surface Volume Calculations
Elevation Surface Area Incremental Volume Cumulative Volume 347.85 4,888.43 SF 0.00 CF 0.00 CF
348 5,096.78 SF 748.89 CF 748.89 CF
348.85 6,330.85 SF 4,856.74 CF 5,605.63 CF
Bioretention Volume
Material Area Depth % Voids Volume
Biomedia 4,888.43 SF 24 in. 25% 2,444.22 CF
Drainrock 4,888.43 SF 24 in. 40% 3,910.75 CF
3d.) Total Volume Provided
Total Volume: Vtotal = Vsurface + Vbioretention = 11,961 CF 11,961CF ≥ 11,907; therefore ok
LID Sizing Table
DMA BMP Total DMA Area DMA Impervious Area i C Required Treatment Area
Provided
Treatment Area
Requied Retention
Volume
Provided
Retention Volume
1 SCM 1 174,172 SF 112,024 SF 0.64 0.44 4,481 SF 4,888 SF 11,907 CF 11,961 CF

Appendix F
Floodplain Impact Memorandum

Appendix F
Floodplain Impact Memorandum

Santa Clara ● San Francisco ● Santa Rosa ● Salinas
June 2, 2022
Valley Water
Attn: Benjamin Hwang, PE
Community Projects Review Unit
Watershed Stewardship and Planning Division
Subject: Monterrey 8 Development Impact on Floodplain
Dear Valley Water:

We have completed our hydraulic impact analysis for the Monterrey Rd proposed development and based on the Llagas Creek modeling results and the information below, the proposed development does not present significant impact to the existing floodplain that is shown on the FEMA effective map. Current modeling efforts show that the spills from Llagas Creek don’t reach this site and that it is likely that this site could be removed entirely from the floodplain through a LOMR process. See Attachment 1 for Llagas modeling results. The property owner, City Venture, would like to proceed with a design that meets the current effective FIRM rather than waiting for a lengthy LOMR process.

Attachment 1 to this letter shows that the Project Site is not within the floodplain of the Llagas Creek watershed. So instead of using the spills from Llagas, our focus is the two sources of runon from neighboring properties that currently flow through the open ditch on the Project Site.

The first is the flow that is from the private detention basin which has pumps and a 48-inch gravity outfall. We have been instructed by the City that the pumps will not be operating and to calculated the flow from the 48-inch gravity outfall during a 100-year storm event. While this seams like it should be pretty straight forward, it is not. This area has been modeled in numerous scenarios and system configurations with plugs in some pipes and the Butterfield Channel capacity changing that it not a straight forward exercise without detailed as-builts of the detention basin and the surrounding infrastructure.

However, I believe this information and the exact flow from the gravity 48-inch pipe are irrelevant based on the way the 48-inch pipe is conveyed to existing triple 24-inch culverts (see attached as-built). What the proposed development proposes to construct is extending the existing 24-inch pipes under the site, vs into the open ditch. There is no runoff from the proposed site that enters into the proposed triple 24s that are conveying the run-on to the Project Site. The site runoff is conveyed to the detention basin. These existing 24-inch pipes are inlet controlled and will dictate the flow across the site. The proposed development includes extending these pipes which will allow equal conveyance to what is there today.

To analyze the existing triple 24s into the ditch and the proposed longer 24s to the ditch closer to the railroad, I modeled the existing and post project in HY-8 using a range of flows. The upstream head is the same when the culverts are extended to the railroad ditch and I do not anticipate the development to have any impact on the existing system. In addition, I calculated the maximum flow through the triple 24s which results in 120cfs and modeled that in HY-8 and the upstream head is the same under both existing and proposed. This high flow is unlikely to occur as the majority of the flow from the private detention basin is directed to the Butterfield Channel. The HY-8 is set up using the County’s LiDAR and making some cross sections of the Schaaf & Wheeler

CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
870 Market Street, Suite 1278
San Francisco, CA 94102-2906
415-433-4848
FAX 415-433-1029

Valley Water June 2, 2022
Schaaf & Wheeler Page 2
existing ditch for the tailwater condition. It should be noted that the datum of the LiDAR is not the same as the as-builts.

There is also run-on from an 18-inch pipe that is also being extended without any runoff from the site entering that pipe. Finally, the slope of Monterrey Road is in the southern direction and any overland spills from the detention basin would not be directed onto the site.

Attachment 2 contains the design drawing and the existing and proposed schematics to get a better understanding of what is happening for those who don’t read design drawings frequently.

Please let me know if you have any questions or would like to set up a call to discuss further.

Sincerely,
Schaaf & Wheeler
Robin J. Lee, PE
Senior Project Manager
Attachments:
1 – Updated Llagas Creek Modeling
2 – Design Drawings and Existing and Proposed Schematics

Valley Water June 2, 2022
Schaaf & Wheeler Page 3
ATTACHMENT 1

LLAGAS CREEK MODELING RESULTS

382 381 378
377361 370 359 371 356 379
352

BUTTERFIELD BLVD

COCHRANE RD

LLAGAS RD

E DUNNE AVE

MONTEREY RD

RAILROAD

HALE RD
£¤101
£¤101
£¤101

E MAIN AVE

E CENTRAL AVE

DIANA AVE

E MAIN AVE

HALF RD

CONDUIT RD

DIANA AVE

COCHRANE RD

CONDUIT RD
W 3RD ST

W MAIN AVE

WRIGHT AVE

LLAGAS CREEK DR

LLAGAS RD
ZONE A

CONTAINED IN CHANNEL
ZONE A

CONTAINED IN CHANNEL
ZONE A

CONTAINED IN CHANNEL
ZONE X
ZONE X
ZONE X

ZONE A CONTAINED IN CHANNEL

UNDERGROUND BYPASS
Panel #3Panel #1 Panel #2
Panel #4Panel #6 Panel #7Panel #5
Panel #8Panel #9

SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS
CulvertPost Project Zone AEPost Project FloodwayPost Project Zone X (Shaded)Floodway Cross SectionBFECorporate Limits 0 500 1,000 1,500
Feet
¯

POST-PROJECT
Service Layer Credits: Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, USGS, Intermap,increment P Corp., NRCAN, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri(Thailand), TomTom, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and theGIS User Community Certification:This is to certify that the data on this workmap is accurate and thefloodplain analyses have been completed in accordance with sound engineering practices, per NFIP regulations Part 65.2 (B). Charles D. Anderson RCE NO. 43776 Upper Llagas Creek
Flood Protection Project
Special Flood
Hazard Areas
Panel 1 of 9
,%A

Valley Water June 2, 2022
Schaaf & Wheeler Page 4
ATTACHMENT 2

DESIGN DRAWING

EXISTING CONDITION SCHEMATIC

PROPOSED CONDITION SCHEMATIC

Detention Basin
Project Site

3 Detention Basin
Project Site

Appendix G
Exterior Noise and Façade Acoustical Analysis

Appendix G
Exterior Noise and Façade Acoustical Analysis

Veneklasen Associates
Consultants in Acoustics | Noise | Vibration | AV | IT
1711 Sixteenth Street • Santa Monica California 90404 • tel: 310.450.1733 • fax: 310.396.3424 • www.veneklasen.com October 12, 2022
City Ventures
444 Spear Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, California 94105
Attention: Samantha Hauser | Senior Vice President of Development Subject: The Gates
Morgan Hill, California
Exterior Noise and Façade Acoustical Analysis
VA Project No. 4616-025
Dear Samantha:

Veneklasen Associates (Veneklasen) has completed our review of the exterior noise and vibration levels at the proposed The Gates development in Morgan Hill, California. This updated report represents the results of our findings, utilizing the traffic reports from Hexagon Transportation Consultants dated November 27, 2019 and July 1, 2022.

Veneklasen has utilized measurements and computer modeling to assess noise levels and mitigation requirements for the exterior façade.

1.0 INTRODUCTION
This study was conducted to determine the impact of the exterior noise and vibration sources on the subject project in Morgan Hill, California, and to determine the method, if any, required to satisfy the noise and vibration standards of the State of California and the City of Morgan Hill.

The project consists of 3-story townhouse-style buildings. The project is bounded by Monterey Road to the east and north of the project boundary, Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) to the west and south, and existing commercial land uses to the northwest.

2.0 CRITERIA
LDN (Day-Night Noise Level) is the 24-hour equivalent (average) sound pressure level in which the nighttime (10 pm – 7 am) noise is weighted by adding 10 dB to the hourly level. Since this is a 24-hour metric, shortduration noise events (truck pass-by’s, buses, trains, etc.) are not as prominent in the analysis.

Leq (equivalent continuous sound level) is defined as the steady sound pressure level which, over a given period of time, has the same total energy as the actual fluctuating noise.

VdB is a measurement of ground velocity relative to 10-6inches per second.

Interior Noise Levels – Residential
The State of California Building Code (Section 1207, “Sound Transmission”) and the City of Morgan Hill Noise Element state that interior LDN values for residential land uses are not to exceed 45 LDN in any habitable room associated with exterior noise sources.

If the windows must be closed to meet an interior level of 45 LDN, then a mechanical ventilating system or other means of natural ventilation may be required.

Maximum Instantaneous Noise Levels – Residential
The City of Morgan Hill Noise Element (Goal 7, “Prevention of Noise from Interfering with Human Activities or Causing Health Problems”) states that noise levels in new residential development exposed to an exterior LDN 60 dBA or greater should be limited to a maximum instantaneous noise level in bedrooms of 50 dBA and

Veneklasen Associates
The Gates; Morgan Hill, California
Exterior Noise and Façade Acoustical Analysis
Veneklasen Project No. 4616-025
October 12, 2022–Page 2
www.veneklasen.com
55 dBA in all other habitable rooms. Veneklasen utilized the L1 metric “instantaneous noise level” for train pass-by’s.

Exterior Noise Levels – Residential
The City of Morgan Hill Noise Element sets an exterior noise level LDN goal of 60 dBA in residential areas where outdoor use is a major consideration. Where the City determines that providing an LDN of 60 dBA or lower cannot be achieved after the application of reasonable and feasible mitigation, an LDN of 65 dBA may be permitted. Also, the maximum outdoor noise level for new residences near the railroad shall be 70 dBA LDN.

It is understood that private exterior areas (balconies, patios) do not fall under this criterion.

Vibration Criteria – Residential
There are no regulatory requirements for vibration levels.

The “Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual” from the Federal Transit Administration, U.S.

Department of Transportation, dated September 2018 (“FTA Report No. 0123”) is used as a guideline. The criterion presented in Table 6-3 of that report for infrequent events (defined as fewer than 30 per day) in residences is that the vibration levels do not exceed 80 VdB.

Conditions of Approval
To date, Veneklasen has not received the conditions of approval (COAs) for the subject project.

Therefore, our comments herein are based on minimum Building Code requirements with references to the City of Morgan Hill General Plan.

3.0 EXTERIOR NOISE AND VIBRATION ENVIRONMENT
Noise and Vibration Measurements
Railroad operations from UPRR and traffic from Monterey Road are the primary sources of noise affecting the site.

Veneklasen visited the site on November 8, 2021, and placed meters at the project site to capture the hourly sound levels for a 42-hour period. Two (2) Bruel & Kjaer type 2270 sound level meters were installed to perform sound measurements. One meter was placed 40 feet from the Union Pacific Railroad, and the other meter was placed approximately 100 feet from the Monterey Road. We also carried out short measurements at four (4) locations to understand the noise distribution across the site. Lastly, Veneklasen measured the ground vibration levels at both long-term measurement locations to assess the vibration impact due to the train pass by’s on the proposed site.

Table 1 summary of Veneklasen’s noise and vibration measurements at locations shown in Figure 1.

Table 1 – Measured Sound Levels
Measurement Vibration Velocity
Level, VdB
Train Pass-by
/Road Events,
dBA
LDN
Noise, Train - 90-95 66
Noise, Road - 70-72 68
Vibration, Train 71 - -

Veneklasen Associates
The Gates; Morgan Hill, California
Exterior Noise and Façade Acoustical Analysis
Veneklasen Project No. 4616-025
October 12, 2022–Page 3
www.veneklasen.com
Veneklasen utilizes statistical methodologies1for establishing design levels for a project, as statistical methods provide a more reliable understanding of site environmental noise. This has been found useful for shorter environmental data sets, which are typical of this site.

Figure 1 – Project Site with Measurement Locations
Computer Modeling
Veneklasen has utilized the Traffic Noise Model computer software program developed by the FHWA (Federal Highway Administration TNM 2.5) in order to predict vehicular noise levels at various locations. The primary purpose of the computer model was to determine how the noise environment will change due to traffic and site changes.

Traffic counts for Monterey Road were obtained from the City of Morgan Hill Public Works Department and supplemented based on the Hexagon Transportation Consultants Traffic Impact Analysis and Trip Generation and Operation Analysis reports. The Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume on Monterey Road is approximately 14,000 (2015 count) per the City of Morgan Hill. The engineering report utilizes a 2.76% growth in traffic per year based on the City of Morgan Hill Traffic Impact Analysis report and traffic counts from 2009. Using the above information, Veneklasen predicted the traffic count level in year 2022, resulting in approximately 17,000 ADT. This is consistent with the 2022 report indicating a peak hour traffic volume of approximately 1500-2800. Since ADT is accepted as approximately 10x the peak hour volume, the ADT based on those peak hour volumes is on the same order of magnitude as obtained through the growth calculation.

Using the 17,000 ADT for 2022, the calculated sound level at a distance of 60 feet from the centerline of the road is 66-69 LDN. This corresponds with the levels that Veneklasen measured for Monterey Road. We also predicted the year 2032 noise level using a traffic level increase of 2.76% per year, and that results in an increase in sound level of 1 dB LDN.

Project-generated trips are included in this growth. Per the Hexagon report, the project is anticipated to generate 55 new vehicle trips during the AM peak hour and 84 new vehicle trips during the PM peak hour.

These represent an increase in peak-hour traffic volume of 1-3% for each intersection, resulting in an increase 1 LoVerde, John; Dong, Wayland; Rawlings, Samantha. “Noise Prediction of Traffic on Freeways and Arterials from Measured Data.” Noise-Con 2014. Fort Lauderdale, Florida.

Veneklasen Associates
The Gates; Morgan Hill, California
Exterior Noise and Façade Acoustical Analysis
Veneklasen Project No. 4616-025
October 12, 2022–Page 4
www.veneklasen.com
in overall sound level of 0.1 dB, which is indistinguishable to the human ear. The project-generated trips are included in the assessment but have no impact on the overall sound level.

Overall Exterior Exposure
Based on the computer model and measurements, Veneklasen calculated the noise level at different locations across the project site. To simplify the presentation of the exterior noise levels, we have separated the site into locations based on the sound exposure and required mitigation. The predicted sound levels at each zone, shown in Figure 2, are listed in Table 2 below.

Table 2 – Exterior Noise Levels
Location Floor Exterior Noise
Level, LDN
Train Pass-by/Road Traffic
Level, dBA
Zone A All 69-70 72-74
Zone B All 65-67 90-94
Zone C All 60-65 72
Remaining Units All < 60 < 70
Figure 2 – Noise Zones, Levels 1 to 3

4.0 INTERIOR NOISE
Exterior Facade Construction
Veneklasen anticipates the project will utilize a typical standard exterior construction which consists of a 3- coat stucco or HardiPlank lap siding finish over sheathing on wood studs with a single layer of gypsum board on the interior and batt insulation in the cavity.

Where applicable due to train pass-by events, an upgraded exterior wall assembly has been specified per the following construction:

Zone A
Zone A
Zone A
Zone B Zone B
Zone B
Zone C
Zone C

Veneklasen Associates
The Gates; Morgan Hill, California
Exterior Noise and Façade Acoustical Analysis
Veneklasen Project No. 4616-025
October 12, 2022–Page 5
www.veneklasen.com
OPTION #1
• 7/8” 3-coat exterior cement plaster at 10 psf
• 2x6 wood studs with batt insulation in the cavity
• 1-inch airspace
• 2x6 wood studs with batt insulation in the cavity
• 5/8” type ‘x’ gypsum board
• 5/8” type ‘x’ gypsum board
OPTION #2
• HardiePlank lap siding at 2.3 psf
• 5/8” DensGlass exterior gypsum sheathing at 2.5 psf
• 5/8” DensGlass exterior gypsum sheathing at 2.5 psf
• 2x6 wood studs with batt insulation in the cavity
• 1-inch airspace
• 2x6 wood studs with batt insulation in the cavity
• 5/8” type ‘x’ gypsum board
• 5/8” type ‘x’ gypsum board
Other mitigation strategies may be acceptable with approval by Veneklasen.

Veneklasen’s calculations included the roof path, but this was insignificant in the interior noise level calculated.

Veneklasen utilized the glazing ratings (glass, frame and seals) shown in Appendix I. Appendix I shall be the acoustical specification for the exterior windows and doors.

Recommended Mitigation
Veneklasen investigated barrier option to minimize the noise impact due to the train locomotive noise level inside the residential spaces. However, it required a barrier height of 15 feet at the property line. We understand there are challenges with regards to footings at this location with a barrier of this height. Inform us if a barrier solution would like to be pursued further.

As an alternative solution, Veneklasen performed calculations with an upgraded wall assembly as mentioned in the section 4.1 and high STC-rated glazing. Table 3 below shows the interior noise levels with upgraded glazing and exterior wall construction.

Table 3 - Calculated Interior Maximum Noise Levels
Location Floor
Exterior Sound Level
Glazing Rating
LR/BR*
Upgraded
Exterior
Wall?
Interior Sound Level Meet the City Criteria
LDN Event Level,
dBA LDN
Event Level,
dBA
LR/BR*
LDN Event Level
LR/BR
Zone A All 69-70 72-74 STC 35/STC 35 No < 45 55/50 Yes Yes/Yes Zone B All 65-67 94 STC 42/STC 50 Yes < 45 55/50 Yes Yes/Yes Zone C All 60-65 70-72 STC 30/STC 30 No < 45 55/50 Yes Yes/Yes Remaining
Zones All 60-67 <70 STC 30/STC 30 No < 45 < 55/<50 Yes Yes/Yes * LR/BR means Living Room/Bedroom
Interior Train Pass-by Event Noise Level (dBA) – Residential In a similar manner, Veneklasen calculated the interior noise levels as a result of the train pass-by’s and traffic events. As described in Section 2.2, the event noise level criterion is 50 or 55 dBA for bedroom and living rooms, respectively.

Veneklasen Associates
The Gates; Morgan Hill, California
Exterior Noise and Façade Acoustical Analysis
Veneklasen Project No. 4616-025
October 12, 2022–Page 6
www.veneklasen.com
Per the analyses of 40 hours continuous measurement data at the L-1 location, it was observed that there were nine (9) train events during the daytime (7:00 am to 10:00 pm) and five (5) events during the nighttime (11:00 pm to 7:00 am).

Our analysis indicates that the maximum event level was 90-94 dBA due to the train pass by’s on Union Pacific Railroad. Per the analysis, significant upgrades to the exterior façade construction (i.e. double stud walls, double windows) are necessary required to meet 55 dBA interior event maximums. These recommendations are reflected above.

5.0 INTERIOR VIBRATION LEVELS (VDB)
Veneklasen evaluated the vibration levels due to the train passing by at location L1 approximately 60 feet from the Union Pacific Railroad on November 8, 2021. The vibration measurement was conducted for a period of 42-hours. The vibration levels were measured in the vertical direction.

Per Section 2.3, the railroad-induced vibration levels would be below the 80 VdB guideline for acceptability.

According to the VA analysis, the measured vibration levels, the infrequent events (defined as fewer than 30 per day) in residences do not exceed 80 VdB. Figure 3 below show the reported vibration level and FWA criteria for infrequent events.

Figure 3 – Ground Vibration VdB Levels on the Project Site It should be noted that compliance with the FTA guidelines does not indicate that vibration will not be perceptible. Events that occur at that vibration threshold would be noticeable and may cause secondary events such as the rattling of objects.

There are no regulatory requirements related to vibration from the train line; therefore, there are no mitigation requirements for this project. However, the levels are below the Infrequent Events criterion of 80 VdB as established by FTA guidelines.

Veneklasen Associates
The Gates; Morgan Hill, California
Exterior Noise and Façade Acoustical Analysis
Veneklasen Project No. 4616-025
October 12, 2022–Page 7
www.veneklasen.com

6.0 MECHANICAL VENTILATION – RESIDENTIAL
Because the windows and doors must be kept closed to meet the noise requirements, mechanical or other means of ventilation may be required for the units in Zone A, B and C. The ventilation system shall not compromise the sound insulation capability of the exterior facade assembly.

7.0 SUMMARY
Veneklasen has assessed the exterior noise environment based on the updated plans and current project drawings. Veneklasen’s conclusions are summarized below. • All buildings comply with the residential building criteria of and exterior 70 LDN level for railroad sources. • Provide window assemblies with minimum ratings as indicated in Table 3. Refer to Appendix I for the glazing acoustical ratings (glass, frame and seals). This is the specification of the windows and doors for the project and includes the required specified acoustical STC and Transmission Loss specified for all exterior windows and doors.
• Provide upgraded walls as indicated in Table 3 and described in section 4.1. Note that this construction is required to meet the maximum interior level due to events indicated. • The vibration levels inside of the residential buildings are predicted to be less than the 80 VdB threshold recommended by FTA based on the number of events. There are no regulatory requirements, and therefore no mitigation is required.
• Residential mechanical ventilation, or other means of natural ventilation, may be required for all units in Zones A, B, and C.
• A disclosure of the noise levels as caused by train pass-by events for all potential occupants should be adopted, most notably for those located in Zone B. Note that interior noise levels from train events will stop activity within the unit and will cause sleep disturbance.

If you have any questions or comments regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely,
Veneklasen Associates, Inc.

John LoVerde, FASA
Principal

Veneklasen Associates
The Gates; Morgan Hill, California
Exterior Noise and Façade Acoustical Analysis
Veneklasen Project No. 4616-025
October 12, 2022–Page 8
www.veneklasen.com
APPENDIX I – GLAZING REQUIREMENTS
In order to meet the predicted interior noise levels described in Section 4.0, the glazing shall meet the following requirements:

Table 4 – Acoustical Glazing Requirements: Minimum Octave Band Transmission Loss and STC Rating Nominal Thickness
Minimum Transmission Loss
Octave Band Center Frequency (Hz)
Min.

STC
125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 Rating
1” dual 21 19 28 34 37 33 30
1” dual 25 27 33 35 38 41 35
Storm 27 32 37 43 49 51 42
Storm 35 39 45 51 54 60 50
The transmission loss values in the table above can likely be met with the following glazing assemblies:

1. STC 30: 1/8” monolithic – 3/4” airspace – 1/8” monolithic

2. STC 35: 1/4" laminated – 1/2” airspace – 1/4” laminated

3. STC 42: 3/16” monolithic – 7/16” airspace – 1/8” monolithic – 2” airspace – 1/8” storm

4. STC 50: 7/32” laminated – 1/4” airspace – 7/32” laminated – 2” airspace – 3/16” storm An assembly’s frame and seals may limit the performance of the overall system. The window systems selected for the project shall not be selected on the basis of STC rating alone but must meet the system STC rating provided in Table 4 above. Additionally, the assemblies given above are provided as a basis of design, but regardless of construction, the octave band Transmission Loss (TL) of the particular system selected must meet the minimum values in Table 4 above. Therefore, systems selected must meet the minimum Transmission Loss values and STC ratings provided in Table 4.

Independent laboratory acoustical test reports should be provided for review by the design team to ensure compliance with glazing acoustical performance requirements. Lab shall be a current member of the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP) under the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) for accreditation and shall be pre-approved by Veneklasen Associates, Inc. Tests are required to be completed in North America. Lab reports shall be in compliance with ASTM standard E90 and be no more than 10 years old (from date of submission on specific project). VA requires invitation to witness acoustical testing completed to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of this report and reserves the right to exclude test reports from laboratories that are not pre-approved by Veneklasen Associates, Inc. for the specific test standard. The tests shall be performed on the entire assembly, including frame and seals and hardware, if applicable to be used for the project. If test reports are not available for the assembly, VA would require that the assembly be tested at a third-party independent lab accredited through NVLAP for the ASTM E90.

Veneklasen has adopted these standards as a result of variation between laboratory testing agencies.

Adoption of this process improves consistency and minimizes risk to a project developer, design/construction team, glazing manufacturers, the City, and future project residents.

Veneklasen Associates
The Gates; Morgan Hill, California
Exterior Noise and Façade Acoustical Analysis
Veneklasen Project No. 4616-025
October 12, 2022–Page 9
www.veneklasen.com
APPENDIX II – SAMPLE EXTERIOR TO INTERIOR CALCULATION
Morgan Hill 8
A
BR (c) 3FL
Room absorption 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000
Receiving Room Absorption Medium 0.18 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Length 12 Width 10 Room Absorption 114 121 121 127 127 127 127 127 Height 9
Exterior Noise Level
Volume 1080 Level Source type 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 dBA F/C area 120 CNEL, LDN, or average: 70 Monterey RD 76.9 74.6 63.8 63.7 66.9 62.8 53.2 44.3 70.0 Wall area 396 Total area 636 Level Source type 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 dBA Event: 80 Train passby max 82.9 80.9 75.2 78.8 73.5 73.0 66.7 58.3 80.0 Total Interior Level: 42.3
(excluding 63 Hz): 40.5
Event Level: 50.5
Exterior Assemblies Area Assembly Type 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 dBA wall 156 VA Typical Wall (stucco,ply,2x4ws,5/8gyp) wyle 62.8 51.3 33.1 24.7 20.1 11.2 -0.5 -9.8 39.2 glazing 42 STC 35, Milgard 1/4lam, 1/2, 1/4lam 56.5 51.0 38.2 31.9 33.1 26.0 13.4 4.5 39.3 door <N/A> 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
<N/A> 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
<N/A> 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total 63.7 54.2 39.4 32.7 33.3 26.1 13.6 4.7 42.3
A-weighted 37.7 38.2 30.4 29.7 33.3 27.1 14.6 3.7
Average Interior Levels
Project Name:

Zone
Plan, room

Appendix H
Trip Generation and Operations Analysis/VMT Assessment

Appendix H
Trip Generation and Operations Analysis/VMT Assessment

Memorandum
Date: July 1, 2022
To: Nick Pappani, Raney Planning & Management
From: Robert Del Rio, T.E., Luis Descanzo
Subject: Trip Generation and Operations Analysis for the Proposed The Gates Mixed-Use Development in Morgan Hill, California
Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. has completed a trip generation and operations analysis for the proposed The Gates Mixed-Use Development project located at 18545-18565 Monterey Road (APNs 764-10-013, -015) in Morgan Hill, California (see Figure 1). The project as proposed would consist of 49 townhome units and 4,016 square feet (s.f.) of ground-floor retail space on a vacant lot located along the westside of Monterey Road just north of Jarvis Drive. Approximately 15% of the units will be affordable residential units. Vehicular access would be provided via a proposed right-in/right-out access driveway on southbound Monterey Road. An internal drive aisle would connect to the adjacent commercial uses located north of the project site and would provide access to the signalized Monterey Road and Cochrane Road intersection.

The methodology, results, and recommendations of the analysis are discussed below.

Scope of Study
The current General Plan, Morgan Hill 2035 General Plan, adopted in July 2016 uses Level of Service (LOS) as its primary metric for the evaluation of the projected operation of the City’s roadway system.

Therefore, this traffic operations analysis which includes a peak hour intersection level of service analysis is included for consistency with the General Plan goals and policies. The traffic operations analysis supplements the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) required VMT analysis provided in a separate memorandum. However, the determination of project impacts per CEQA requirements is based solely on the VMT analysis.

The purposes of the trip generation and operations analysis is to evaluate the magnitude of traffic that would be added to the roadway system due to the proposed project and to determine whether a comprehensive traffic study is required for the proposed project. The analysis consists of an estimation of project trip generation and evaluation peak-hour intersection level of service analysis at intersections in the immediate vicinity of the project site. A review of the project’s site access per the proposed site plan also is included. Traffic conditions were evaluated for the scenarios listed below.

Existing Conditions. Existing conditions represent the existing peak-hour traffic volumes on the existing roadway network. It is not possible to collect new traffic counts due to the current COVID19 pandemic and its effects on normal traffic conditions. Therefore, existing traffic volumes were represented by traffic counts collected in May 2018.

The Gates Mixed-Use Development Trip Generation and Operations Analysis July 1, 2022 P a g e | 2
Figure 1
Site Location
Cochrane Rd Cochrane Rd
Madrone Pkwy Madrone Pkwy
Monterey Rd Monterey Rd Main Ave Main Ave But erfield Blvd But erfield Blvd Monterey Rd Monterey Rd Dunne Ave Dunne Ave 101
NORTH
Not to Scale Hale Ave
Hale Ave
Peebles Ave Peebles Ave Burnett Ave Burnett Ave = Project Site Location = City of Morgan Hill
LEGEND:

Old Monterey Rd

The Gates Mixed-Use Development Trip Generation and Operations Analysis July 1, 2022 P a g e | 3
Figure 2
Site Plan and Gross Project Trips at Site Access Points 24(22)
10(27)
11(17)
10(26)
= Inbound Path = AM(PM) Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes = Outbound Path LEGEND XX(XX)

The Gates Mixed-Use Development Trip Generation and Operations Analysis July 1, 2022 P a g e | 4
Existing Plus Project Conditions. Existing plus project peak-hour traffic volumes were estimated by adding to the existing traffic volumes the additional traffic that would be generated by the proposed project. Existing plus project conditions were evaluated relative to existing conditions in order to determine the effects of the proposed project on existing traffic conditions.

Year 2035 General Plan Conditions. Year 2035 General Plan conditions represent future traffic volumes on the future transportation network. Year 2035 General Plan conditions include traffic growth projected to occur in the Year 2035 without the proposed project.

Year 2035 General Plan with Project Conditions. Year 2035 General Plan with Project conditions consists of Year 2035 General Plan traffic conditions with the addition of project traffic.

Project Trip Generation Estimates and Assignment
In determining the project trip generation, the magnitude of traffic entering and existing the site is estimated for the AM and PM peak hours. Through empirical research, data have been collected that quantify the amount of traffic produced by many types of land uses. The research is compiled in the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (2021). The standard trip generation rates can be applied to help predict the future traffic increases that would result from a new development. As proposed, the residential component of the development would consist of 49 attached single-family residential units. The ITE trip generation manual does not provide trip rates specifically for attached single-family units. Therefore, the rates for “Single-Family Detached Housing” (ITE Land Use 210) were used to estimate the residential trips generated by the proposed project. It is expected that the trip-making characteristics of the proposed attached single-family units would be similar to those of detached single-family units since each of the proposed units will include a private two-car garage and the limited availability of transit services in the project area.

As proposed, the commercial component of the development would consist of 4,016 s.f. of ground-floor retail space. Rates for “Strip Retail Plaza (<40k)” (ITE Land Use 822) were used to estimate the trips generated by the proposed retail space. Trip generation for retail uses are typically adjusted to account for pass-by-trips. Pass-by-trips are trips that would already be on the adjacent roadways (and are therefore already counted in the existing traffic) but would turn into the site while passing by.

Justification for applying the pass-by-trip reduction is founded on the observation that a portion of retail traffic is not actually generated by the retail use but is already part of the ambient traffic levels. Pass-bytrips are therefore excluded from the traffic projections (although pass-by traffic is accounted for at the site entrances). A typical pass-by trip reduction of 20% was applied to the PM peak-hour trip estimates of the proposed retail/commercial component.

After applying the ITE trip rates and reductions for pass-by-trips, it is estimated that the project would generate 55 net new vehicle trips (20 inbound and 35 outbound) during the AM peak hour and 84 net new vehicle trips (49 inbound and 35 outbound) during the PM peak hour (see Table 1). At the proposed site access points, a total of 55 gross vehicle trips (20 inbound and 35 outbound) are expected during the AM peak hour and 92 gross vehicle trips (53 inbound and 39 outbound) are expected during the PM peak hour.

The directional distribution of site-generated traffic to and from the project site was estimated based on the existing travel patterns on the surrounding roadway network that reflect typical weekday AM and PM peak commute patterns, the location of the project driveways, freeway access points, and the locations of complimentary land uses. The peak-hour project trips associated with the proposed project were added to the transportation network in accordance with the distribution pattern. The project trip distribution pattern and assignment of project trips at the study intersections under existing plus project conditions are shown on Figure 3.

The Gates Mixed-Use Development Trip Generation and Operations Analysis July 1, 2022 P a g e | 5
Table 1
Trip Generation Summary
Year 2035 General Plan Conditions Project Trip Generation Estimates It should be noted that the Mixed-use Flex land use designation (7-24 du/ac) is currently assigned to the 3.82-acre project site per the City’s General Plan Land Use Map. Per the land use designation and maximum allowable development standards, the project site may support up to 91 dwelling units per the General Plan. However, analysis under cumulative conditions is based on the General Plan traffic model which assumes no new development on the project site.

Intersection Level of Service Analysis
Traffic conditions at the following study intersections were analyzed for the weekday AM and PM peak hours of traffic:

1. Monterey Road and Cochrane Road

2. Monterey Road and Old Monterey Road
Other intersections in the project area were not studied because the addition of project trips will be minimal, less than 10 peak hour trips per lane. The weekday AM peak hour of traffic generally falls within the 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM period and the weekday PM peak hour is typically in the 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM period. It is during these times that the most congested traffic conditions occur on a typical weekday.

Signalized Intersection Analysis
Signalized study intersections are subject to the City of Morgan Hill's level of service standards. The City of Morgan Hill's level of service methodology is TRAFFIX, which is based on the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) method for signalized intersections. TRAFFIX evaluates signalized intersections operations based on average delay time for all vehicles at the intersection. Since TRAFFIX is also the CMP-designated intersection level of service methodology, the City of Morgan Hill methodology employs the CMP defaults values for the analysis parameters, which include adjusted saturation flow rates to reflect conditions in Santa Clara County. All intersections within the City of Morgan Hill are required to meet the City’s LOS standard of LOS D, with the exception of the following:

Land Use Size Rate In Out Total Rate In Out Total
Proposed Land Uses
#210 - Single-Family Detached Housing 49 Dwelling Units 0.79 10 29 39 1.04 32 19 51 #822 - Strip Retail Plaza (<40k) 4,016 Square Feet 3.92 10 6 16 10.14 21 20 41 20% Passby Reduction1
0 0 0 -4 -4 -8
Net Project Trips 20 35 55 49 35 84
Gross Project Trips (Trips at Driveways) 20 35 55 53 39 92 Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition 2021. 1A 20% pass-by reduction is typically applied for retail development within the City of Morgan Hill.

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Trip Trip

The Gates Mixed-Use Development Trip Generation and Operations Analysis July 1, 2022 P a g e | 6
Figure 3
Project Trip Distribution and Project Trip Assignment
Cochrane Rd Cochrane Rd
Main Ave Main Ave
Butterfield Blvd Butterfield Blvd
101
Hale AveHale Ave
Madrone Pkwy Madrone Pkwy
Monterey Rd Monterey Rd Burnett Ave Burnett Ave
= Project Site Location
= Study Intersection
= City of Morgan Hill
LEGEND:
= Project Driveway X
X
XX(XX) = AM(PM) Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes
X%(X%) = Residential (Retail) Project Trip Distribution Wright Ave right Ave
Llagas Rd Llagas Rd
Old Monterey Rd
NORTH
Not to Scale
A
25%(5%)25%(5%)
25%(1
0 %) 25%(1
0 %) 2%(5%)
1 0%(5%) 10%(5%)
23%(50%) 23%(50%)
0%(10%)0%(10%)
0%(5%)
1 2
1 2 Rd Cochrane Monterey RdMonterey Rd Rd Old Monterey1 2

The Gates Mixed-Use Development Trip Generation and Operations Analysis July 1, 2022 P a g e | 7
 LOS F for Downtown intersections and segments including at Main/Monterey, along Monterey Road between Main and Fifth Street, and along Depot Street at First through Fifth Street;  LOS E for the following intersections and freeway zones:
 Main Avenue and Del Monte Avenue
 Main Avenue and Depot Street
 Dunne Avenue and Del Monte Avenue
 Dunne Avenue and Monterey Avenue
 Dunne Avenue and Church Street
 Dunne Avenue and Depot Street
 Cochrane Road and Monterey Road
 Tennant Avenue and Monterey Road
 Tennant Avenue and Butterfield Boulevard
 Cochrane Road Freeway Zone: from Madrone Parkway/Cochrane Plaza to Cochrane Road/DePaul Drive
 Dunne Avenue Freeway Zone: from Walnut Grove Drive/East Dunne Avenue to Condit Road/East Dunne Avenue
 Tennant Avenue Freeway Zone: from Butterfield Boulevard/Tennant Avenue to Condit Road/Tennant Avenue
According to the City of Morgan Hill level of service guidelines, a development is said to create a significant adverse effect on traffic conditions at a signalized intersection if for either peak hour:

1. The level of service at the intersection degrades from an acceptable level (LOS D or LOS E as identified above) under no project conditions to an unacceptable level (LOS E or F) under project conditions, or

2. The level of service at the intersection is an unacceptable level (LOS E or F as identified above) under no project conditions and the addition of project trips causes the average critical delay to increase by four (4) or more seconds and the volume-to-capacity ratio (V/C) to increase by 0.01.

An exception to this rule applies when the addition of project traffic reduces the amount of average delay for critical movements (i.e., the change in average delay for critical movements is negative). In this case, the threshold of significance is an increase in the critical V/C value by 0.01 or more.

Level of Service Results
The results of the intersection level of service analysis show that both signalized study intersections currently operate at an acceptable LOS D or better conditions under existing conditions, and the addition of project traffic would not result in the degradation of the study intersections’ levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours.

Under Year 2035 General Plan conditions, the intersection of Monterey Road and Cochrane Road would operate at an unacceptable LOS F during the AM peak-hour. However, the addition of project traffic would not result in the degradation of the level of service during the AM and PM peak hours. The intersection of Monterey Road and Old Monterey Road would continue to operate at an acceptable LOS B.

Based on the results of the intersection level of service analysis, the project would not have an adverse effect on operations at the study intersections. The results of level of service analysis are summarized in Table 2.

The Gates Mixed-Use Development Trip Generation and Operations Analysis July 1, 2022 P a g e | 8
Table 2
Intersection Level of Service Summary

Int. LOS Peak Count Incr. In Incr. In Incr. In Incr. In # Intersection Std Hour Date Delay1 LOS Delay1 LOS Crit. Delay Crit. V/C Delay1 LOS Delay1 LOS Crit. Delay Crit. V/C 1 Monterey Road and E AM 05/08/18 37.3 D 37.6 D 0.5 0.005 93.7 F 93.7 F 0.6 0.005 Cochrane Road PM 05/08/18 26.3 C 26.7 C 1.5 0.046 60.5 E 60.2 E -0.1 0.005 2 Monterey Road and D AM 05/08/18 10.5 B 10.4 B -0.1 0.004 10.1 B 10.1 B 0.0 0.003 Old Monterey Road PM 05/08/18 13.2 B 13.1 B -0.1 0.005 16.2 B 16.1 B 0.0 0.005 Notes: 1The reported delay and corresponding level of service for signalized intersections represent the average delay for all approaches at the intersection.

Existing Existing Plus Project
Year 2035
General Plan
Year 2035 General Plan
with Project

The Gates Mixed-Use Development Trip Generation and Operations Analysis July 1, 2022 P a g e | 9
Site Access
The evaluation of site access is based on the site plan prepared by MH Engineering Company dated April 5, 2022. Site access was evaluated to determine the adequacy of the site’s access points with regard to the following: traffic volume, geometric design, and sight distance. Site access was evaluated in accordance with generally accepted traffic engineering standards and transportation planning principles.

As shown on Figure 2, vehicular access to the project site would be provided via a right-in and right-out access driveway on southbound Monterey Road. The driveway would be located approximately 450 feet south of Cochrane Road. An existing landscaped median along Monterey Road that runs between Cochrane Road and Jarvis Drive would prohibit inbound and outbound left-turns to and from the project driveway.

An internal drive aisle also would provide a connection through the adjacent commercial uses located north of the project site and access to the signalized Monterey Road/Cochrane Road intersection. The commercial plaza is currently accessible via the west leg of the Monterey Road/Cochrane Road intersection and a right-in and right-out access driveway along Monterey Road, approximately 200 feet south of Cochrane Road. The Monterey Road/Cochrane Road intersection will provide access to northbound Monterey Road and Cochrane Road from the project site.

Driveway Operations and Design
Based on the project trip generation and trip assignment, a total of 55 gross vehicle trips (20 inbound and 35 outbound) are expected during the AM peak hour and 92 gross vehicle trips (53 inbound and 39 outbound) are expected during the PM peak hour. Figure 2 shows the estimated project trips at the project driveways and the internal connecting drive aisle. Due to limited access operations at the Monterey Road driveway, significant vehicle delay and queuing are not expected to occur at the project site driveway.

Currently, southbound Monterey Road narrows from two travel lanes to one travel lane just north of the project frontage. The outer travel lane transitions into a merging lane starting approximately 150 feet north of the proposed project driveway and merges into a single lane at the location of the proposed driveway. The project proposes to extend the outer travel lane so that it transitions into a 250-foot merging lane starting just south of the project driveway. Therefore, the proposed lane configuration would provide outbound project traffic an opportunity to first turn right onto the outer travel lane, before merging into a single lane south of the driveway.

It should be noted that the proposed new project driveway along Monterey Road would be located 150 feet south of an existing driveway. The City Street Design Standards require a minimum of 26 feet of separation between two driveway transitions. However, the City Design Standards do not provide specific requirements for driveway spacing based on the characteristics of adjacent roadways. The proposed project driveway will be located along a major arterial roadway. The City standards do require a minimum of 100 feet between a driveway approach and the nearest intersecting street along arterial roadways. The intent of the driveway spacing near intersection is to minimize turn movement conflicts to and from driveways with those through adjacent intersections. When considering the City’s required driveway spacing requirements for adjacent driveways and near intersections, the 150 feet of separation between the project and existing driveway to the north should be adequate.

The City’s Design Standards specify a minimum driveway width of 16 feet for residential uses and a maximum driveway width of 36 feet for commercial uses. The site plan indicates that the project driveway would be 26 feet wide. Therefore, the width of the proposed Monterey Road driveway would meet City standards.

The Gates Mixed-Use Development Trip Generation and Operations Analysis July 1, 2022 P a g e | 1 0
Sight Distance
The project driveway should be free and clear of any obstructions to provide adequate sight distance, thereby ensuring that exiting vehicles can see pedestrians on the sidewalk and other vehicles traveling on Monterey Road. Landscaping and signage should be located in such a way to ensure an unobstructed view for drivers existing the site. Sight distance generally should be provided in accordance with Caltrans standards. The minimum acceptable sight distance is most often the stopping sight distance.

Monterey Road has a posted speed limit of 35 mph. For a design speed of 35 mph, the recommended Caltrans stopping sight distance is 250 feet. Based on the project site plan and observations in the field, vehicles exiting the project site driveway would have sight distance of more than 250 feet to the north along southbound Monterey Road.

Emergency and Truck Vehicle Access
The proposed site access points along Monterey Road and via the internal drive aisle would allow access to firetrucks and garbage collection trucks. Truck turning templates are shown on Figures 4 and

5. Parking
Vehicular Parking
According to the City of Morgan Hill Zoning Regulations (Table 18.72-2), multi-family residential developments are required to provide on-site vehicular parking as specified below:
 Studio or One-Bedroom - 1 covered and 0.5 uncovered per unit  Two Bedroom - 1 covered and 1 uncovered per unit
 Three Bedroom - 1 covered and 1.5 uncovered per units  Guest parking - 1 space per 3 units
The project proposes a total of 49 three-bedroom units. Therefore, the residential component of the project would require a total of 140 vehicular parking spaces consisting of 123 parking spaces for residents (49 covered spaces and 74 uncovered spaces) and 17 guest spaces. Per the site plan, the project proposes to provide a total of 141 parking spaces consisting of 123 parking spaces for residents (98 covered spaces and 25 uncovered spaces) and 18 guest spaces. Therefore, residential vehicle parking as proposed by the project will meet City vehicle parking requirements.

The commercial component would be required to provide parking at a rate of 1 parking space per 250 square feet of floor area. The proposed 4,016 s.f. of commercial space would require a total of 17 parking spaces. Per the site plan, the project proposes to provide 8 new on-site parking spaces for the commercial use and an additional 12 existing parking spaces would be shared with the adjacent commercial plaza. Therefore, commercial vehicle parking as proposed by the project will meet City vehicle parking requirements. An agreement for the shared use of parking spaces should be provided to the City.

The Gates Mixed-Use Development Trip Generation and Operations Analysis July 1, 2022 P a g e | 1 1
Figure 4
Fire Truck Turning Template

The Gates Mixed-Use Development Trip Generation and Operations Analysis July 1, 2022 P a g e | 1 2
Figure 5 (continued)
Fire Truck Turning Template

The Gates Mixed-Use Development Trip Generation and Operations Analysis July 1, 2022 P a g e | 1 3
Figure 6
Garbage Truck Turning Template

The Gates Mixed-Use Development Trip Generation and Operations Analysis July 1, 2022 P a g e | 1 4
Figure 7 (continued)
Garbage Truck Turning Template

The Gates Mixed-Use Development Trip Generation and Operations Analysis July 1, 2022 P a g e | 1 5
Bicycle Parking
According to the City of Morgan Hill Zoning Regulations (Table 18.72-7), multi-family residential developments are required to provide on-site bicycle parking as specified below:
 Short-term spaces – 10% of required automobile spaces; minimum of 4 spaces  Long-term spaces – 1 per 5 units
Commercial uses are required to provide on-site bicycle parking as specified below:
 Short-term spaces – 10% of required automobile spaces  Long-term spaces – 1 per 20 required automobile spaces for uses 10,000 sq. ft. or greater Based on these requirements, the project will be required to provide a total of 23 bicycle parking spaces for the residential use (13 short-term spaces and 10 long-term spaces) and 2 short-term spaces for the commercial use.

The site plan does not indicate the number and location of proposed bicycle parking. The project should provide bicycle parking that meets City bicycle parking requirements.

Transit, Pedestrian, and Bicycle Facility Evaluation
Transit Facilities
The project site is served by VTA bus routes that run along Monterey Road, Cochrane Road and Hale Avenue.
 Express Route 568 (Gilroy Transit Center to San Jose Diridon Transit Center) serves bus stops at the intersection of Cochrane Road and Cochrane Circle, approximately 1000 feet walking distance from the project site.
 Frequent Route 68 (Gilroy Transit Center to San Jose Diridon Transit Center) serves bus stops at the intersection of Hale Avenue and Llagas Road, approximately 0.8-mile walking distance from the project site.
 Local Route 87 (Morgan Hill Civic Center to Burnett Avenue) serves bus stops at the intersection of Cochrane Road and Cochrane Circle, approximately 1000 feet walking distance from the project site.

A typical mode split in Morgan Hill would be a three percent transit share. Assuming up to three percent transit mode share for the project equates to no more than three transit riders during each of the peak hours. The transit ridership demands of the proposed project can be accommodated by the existing transit facilities.

Pedestrian Facilities
In the vicinity of the project site, there are sidewalks along the following roadway segments:
 Southbound Monterey Road, between Cochrane Road and 420 feet south of Cochrane Road (along the existing commercial plaza)
 Northbound Monterey Road, until 450 feet north of Cochrane Road  Westbound Cochrane Road, between Cochrane Circle and Monterey Road  Eastbound Cochrane Road, east of Monterey Road

The Gates Mixed-Use Development Trip Generation and Operations Analysis July 1, 2022 P a g e | 1 6
Crosswalks with protected crossing phases are provided at the following signalized intersections:
 Monterey Road/Cochrane Road – all four legs
 Monterey Road/Old Monterey Road – south leg
Pedestrian generators in the project vicinity include commercial uses along Monterey Road (including Downtown Morgan Hill) and Cochrane Road, Ann Sobrato High School, and bus stops discussed above. Access to nearby pedestrian generators is described below:
 Downtown Morgan Hill – Continuous sidewalks provided along northbound Monterey Road between Downtown and Cochrane Road. An east-west crossing across Monterey Road is provided at Monterey Road/Cochrane Road.
 Commercial Uses along Cochrane Road – Continuous sidewalks provided along eastbound Cochrane Road, east of Monterey Road. An east-west crossing across Monterey Road is provided at Monterey Road/Cochrane Road.
 Ann Sobrato High School – No continuous pedestrian route due to missing sidewalk segments along both sides of Monterey Road between Cochrane Road and Burnett Avenue.  Route 87 and 568 Bus Stop at Cochrane Road/Cochrane Circle – Continuous sidewalks provided along both sides of Cochrane Road between Monterey Road and Cochrane Circle. An east-west crossing across Monterey Road is provided at Monterey Road/Cochrane Road.  Route 68 Bus Stop at Hale Avenue/Llagas Road – Continuous pedestrian route provided via sidewalks along northbound Monterey Road, southbound Old Monterey Road, and both sides of Llagas Road. Users must cross Monterey Road at Cochrane Road and again at Old Monterey Road.

The project proposes to construct an approximately 5-foot wide sidewalk along its Monterey Road frontage. Multiple access points from the sidewalks are provided to on-site walkways. Upon construction, the project sidewalks would connect to existing sidewalks to the north along the adjacent commercial plaza. However, there are no existing sidewalks located south of the project site along the westside of Monterey Road. Therefore, pedestrian travel south of the project site will require the use of the controlled-crosswalks at the Monterey Road/Cochrane Road intersection to access the sidewalks along the eastside of Monterey Road.

The construction of a sidewalk along the westside of Monterey Road south of the project site is beyond the means of the proposed project since its construction would require widening and/or reconstruction of the railroad overcrossing of Monterey Road and acquisition of right-of-way that is not controlled by the project applicant.

It should be noted that only the northeastern curb ramp at the Monterey Road/Cochrane Road intersection is ADA-compliant. The City may require that the project contribute to construction of ADAcompliant ramps at the intersection.

Bicycle Facilities
In the project vicinity, there are bike lanes located along Monterey Road (including along the project frontage) and Cochrane Road. The project is not expected to generate a significant amount of bicycle trips. The demand generated by the proposed project could be accommodated by the existing bicycle facilities in the vicinity of the project site. Additionally, the project as proposed will not conflict with any existing or planned bicycle facilities.

The Gates Mixed-Use Development Trip Generation and Operations Analysis July 1, 2022 P a g e | 1 7
Traffic Study Requirements
The need for the preparation of a comprehensive traffic impact analysis for a particular development is based on its estimated trip generation and its effect on surrounding transportation facilities. The City of Morgan Hill requires the completion of a full traffic impact analysis if one of the following criteria are met:

1. Generates 100 or more net new peak hour trips; except that projects located in the 14-block Downtown Core area are exempt from this requirement. Net new peak hour trips are defined as the number of trips generated by the proposed development minus trips generated by existing development on the project site. (This threshold is consistent with the Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) policy.)

2. Adds 50 to 99 net new peak hour trips to the roadway system where nearby intersections are currently operating at or below the City’s LOS standard, or projected to operate at or below the City’s LOS standard with traffic added by approved developments; except that projects located in the 14-block Downtown Core area are exempt from this requirement. Adjacent or nearby intersections are defined as intersections to which the proposed development or proposed land use change adds 10 or more vehicle peak hour trips per lane.

3. Creates a transportation issue that City staff requests to have analyzed.

The proposed project will result in the addition of 55 net new AM peak-hour trips and 84 net new PM peak-hour trips to the roadway system under existing plus project conditions.

The results of the intersection level of service analysis show that the study intersections are currently operating at better than the City’s LOS standard and the addition of project traffic would not result in the degradation of the study intersections’ levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours.

Therefore, the evaluation of trip generation and intersection operations concludes that the proposed project will not result in an adverse effect on operations to intersections in the project area and is consistent with the Morgan Hill 2035 General Plan goals and policies. However, City staff ultimately determines the need for traffic studies for new developments.

The Gates Mixed-Use Development
Technical Appendices
July 1, 2022

Appendix A
Volume Summary

The Gates Residential Development Volumes 04-05-22
AM
6/30/2022
Intersection Number: 1
Traffix Node Number: 101
Intersection Name: Monterey Road and Cochrane Road
Peak Hour: AM
Count Date: 5/8/18
Movements
North Approach East Approach South Approach West Approach Int.

Scenario: RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total
Counts 44 221 278 582 59 141 320 623 110 6 65 87 2,536
Existing Conditions (with 1.5% com 47 235 296 618 63 150 340 662 117 7 69 93 2,697 growth if older than 2 years)
Project Trips 2 2 0 0 4 4 0 0 9 0 16 8 45
Existing Plus Project 49 237 296 618 67 154 340 662 126 7 85 101 2,742 2015 Model 1 331 556 906 2 142 263 462 1 0 1 0 2,665
2035 without Project Model 1 430 956 1057 2 191 246 906 1 0 1 1 3,792 2035 Cumulative without Project 47 334 696 769 63 199 340 1106 117 7 69 94 3,841 2035 Cumulative with Project 49 336 696 769 67 203 340 1106 126 7 85 102 3,886 Intersection Number: 2
Traffix Node Number: 116
Intersection Name: Monterey Road and Old Monterey Road
Peak Hour: AM
Count Date: 5/8/18
Movements
North Approach East Approach South Approach West Approach Int.

Scenario: RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total
Counts 76 319 0 0 0 0 0 845 85 95 0 161 1,581
Existing Conditions (with 1.5% com 81 339 0 0 0 0 0 897 91 101 0 171 1,680 growth if older than 2 years)
Project Trips 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 1 20
Existing Plus Project 81 350 0 0 0 0 0 905 91 101 0 172 1,700 2015 Model 45 394 0 0 0 0 0 556 18 65 0 189 1,267
2035 without Project Model 55 530 0 0 0 0 0 1006 32 93 0 273 1,989 2035 Cumulative without Project 91 475 0 0 0 0 0 1347 105 129 0 255 2,402 2035 Cumulative with Project 91 486 0 0 0 0 0 1355 105 129 0 256 2,422 Intersection Number: 3
Traffix Node Number: 901
Intersection Name: Monterey Road and Project Driveway
Peak Hour: AM
Count Date: 5/8/18
Movements
North Approach East Approach South Approach West Approach Int.

Scenario: RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total
Counts 0 395 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 395
Existing Conditions (with 1.5% com 0 420 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 420 growth if older than 2 years)
Project Trips 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 21
Existing Plus Project 10 420 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 441
2015 Model 0 439 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 439
2035 without Project Model 0 585 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 585 2035 Cumulative without Project 0 566 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 566 2035 Cumulative with Project 10 566 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 587 Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 1485 of 1628 The Gates Residential Development Volumes 04-05-22
PM
6/30/2022
Intersection Number: 1
Traffix Node Number: 101
Intersection Name: Monterey Road and Cochrane Road
Peak Hour: PM
Count Date: 5/8/18
Movements
North Approach East Approach South Approach West Approach Int.

Scenario: RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total
Counts 111 783 1074 180 50 243 198 157 36 24 77 26 2,959 Existing Conditions (with 1.5% com 118 832 1140 192 54 258 211 167 39 26 82 28 3,147 growth if older than 2 years)
Project Trips 5 5 0 0 11 12 0 0 21 0 16 7 77
Existing Plus Project 123 837 1140 192 65 270 211 167 60 26 98 35 3,224 2015 Model 1 629 813 621 2 227 155 130 1 2 3 1 2,585
2035 without Project Model 1 849 1113 1017 2 369 206 229 1 2 3 1 3,793 2035 Cumulative without Project 118 1052 1440 588 54 400 262 266 39 26 82 28 4,355 2035 Cumulative with Project 123 1057 1440 588 65 412 262 266 60 26 98 35 4,432 Intersection Number: 2
Traffix Node Number: 116
Intersection Name: Monterey Road and Old Monterey Road
Peak Hour: PM
Count Date: 5/8/18
Movements
North Approach East Approach South Approach West Approach Int.

Scenario: RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total
Counts 121 993 0 0 0 0 0 327 88 128 0 83 1,740
Existing Conditions (with 1.5% com 129 1054 0 0 0 0 0 348 94 136 0 89 1,850 growth if older than 2 years)
Project Trips 1 16 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 1 38
Existing Plus Project 130 1070 0 0 0 0 0 368 94 136 0 90 1,888 2015 Model 148 716 0 0 0 0 0 215 17 39 0 53 1,188
2035 without Project Model 222 1001 0 0 0 0 0 367 52 147 0 76 1,865 2035 Cumulative without Project 203 1339 0 0 0 0 0 500 129 244 0 112 2,527 2035 Cumulative with Project 204 1355 0 0 0 0 0 520 129 244 0 113 2,565 Intersection Number: 3
Traffix Node Number: 901
Intersection Name: Monterey Road and Project Driveway
Peak Hour: PM
Count Date: 5/8/18
Movements
North Approach East Approach South Approach West Approach Int.

Scenario: RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total
Counts 0 1114 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,114
Existing Conditions (with 1.5% com 0 1183 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,183 growth if older than 2 years)
Project Trips 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 44
Existing Plus Project 27 1183 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 1,227 2015 Model 0 864 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 864
2035 without Project Model 0 1223 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,223 2035 Cumulative without Project 0 1542 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,542 2035 Cumulative with Project 27 1542 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 1,586 Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Page 1486 of 1628 Appendix B
Level of Service Calculations

COMPARE Thu Jun 30 07:52:09 2022 Page 14-1
Traffix 8.0.0715 Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans., San Jose City of Morgan Hill
Monterey Townhomes Development
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Existing AM
Intersection #101: Monterey Road and Cochrane Road
Signal=Protect/Rights=Include
Final Vol: 47 235 296***
Lanes: 0 1 1 0 2
Signal=Protect Signal=Protect
Final Vol: Lanes: Rights=Include Vol Cnt Date: 5/8/2018 Rights=Include Lanes: Final Vol:
93*** 1
Cycle Time (sec): 110
1 618***
0 Loss Time (sec): 12
0 69 1 Critical V/C: 0.757 1 63
0 Avg Crit Del (sec/veh): 41.5 0
7 1 Avg Delay (sec/veh): 37.3 2 150
LOS: D
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 1
Final Vol: 117 662*** 340
Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap
Street Name: Monterey Road Cochrane Road
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 8 May 2018 <<
Base Vol: 117 662 340 296 235 47 93 69 7 150 63 618
Growth 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 Initial Bse: 117 662 340 296 235 47 93 69 7 150 63 618
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 117 662 340 296 235 47 93 69 7 150 63 618
User 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 PHF 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 PHF Volume: 117 662 340 296 235 47 93 69 7 150 63 618
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 117 662 340 296 235 47 93 69 7 150 63 618
PCE 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 MLF 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 FinalVolume: 117 662 340 296 235 47 93 69 7 150 63 618
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 0.98 0.95 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 1.00 0.92 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.66 0.34 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1750 3800 1750 3150 3083 617 1750 1900 1750 3150 1900 1750 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.17 0.19 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.05 0.04 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.35 Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
Green Time: 16.5 25.3 49.6 13.7 22.5 22.5 7.7 34.7 34.7 24.3 51.3 51.3 Volume/Cap: 0.45 0.76 0.43 0.76 0.37 0.37 0.76 0.12 0.01 0.22 0.07 0.76 Delay/Veh: 43.8 43.3 20.9 54.8 38.0 38.0 73.5 26.8 25.9 35.2 16.2 28.3 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 43.8 43.3 20.9 54.8 38.0 38.0 73.5 26.8 25.9 35.2 16.2 28.3 LOS by Move: D D C D D D E C C D B C
HCM2kAvgQ: 4 12 8 6 4 4 5 2 0 2 1 19
Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

COMPARE Thu Jun 30 07:52:09 2022 Page 14-2
Traffix 8.0.0715 Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans., San Jose City of Morgan Hill
Monterey Townhomes Development
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Existing Plus Project AM
Intersection #101: Monterey Road and Cochrane Road
Signal=Protect/Rights=Include
Final Vol: 49 237 296***
Lanes: 0 1 1 0 2
Signal=Protect Signal=Protect
Final Vol: Lanes: Rights=Include Vol Cnt Date: 5/8/2018 Rights=Include Lanes: Final Vol:
101*** 1
Cycle Time (sec): 110
1 618***
0 Loss Time (sec): 12
0 85 1 Critical V/C: 0.762 1 67
0 Avg Crit Del (sec/veh): 42.0 0
7 1 Avg Delay (sec/veh): 37.6 2 154
LOS: D
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 1
Final Vol: 126 662*** 340
Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap
Street Name: Monterey Road Cochrane Road
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 8 May 2018 <<
Base Vol: 117 662 340 296 235 47 93 69 7 150 63 618
Growth 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 Initial Bse: 117 662 340 296 235 47 93 69 7 150 63 618
Added Vol: 9 0 0 0 2 2 8 16 0 4 4 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 126 662 340 296 237 49 101 85 7 154 67 618 User 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 PHF 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 PHF Volume: 126 662 340 296 237 49 101 85 7 154 67 618
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 126 662 340 296 237 49 101 85 7 154 67 618 PCE 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 MLF 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 FinalVolume: 126 662 340 296 237 49 101 85 7 154 67 618 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 0.98 0.95 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 1.00 0.92 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.65 0.35 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1750 3800 1750 3150 3066 634 1750 1900 1750 3150 1900 1750 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.17 0.19 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.00 0.05 0.04 0.35 Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
Green Time: 17.1 25.1 49.6 13.6 21.6 21.6 8.3 34.9 34.9 24.4 51.0 51.0 Volume/Cap: 0.46 0.76 0.43 0.76 0.39 0.39 0.76 0.14 0.01 0.22 0.08 0.76 Delay/Veh: 43.5 43.7 21.0 55.3 38.9 38.9 72.4 27.0 25.8 35.2 16.5 28.8 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 43.5 43.7 21.0 55.3 38.9 38.9 72.4 27.0 25.8 35.2 16.5 28.8 LOS by Move: D D C E D D E C C D B C
HCM2kAvgQ: 5 12 8 6 4 4 5 2 0 2 1 19
Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

COMPARE Thu Jun 30 07:52:09 2022 Page 14-3
Traffix 8.0.0715 Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans., San Jose City of Morgan Hill
Monterey Townhomes Development
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Existing PM
Intersection #101: Monterey Road and Cochrane Road
Signal=Protect/Rights=Include
Final Vol: 118 832 1140***
Lanes: 0 1 1 0 2
Signal=Protect Signal=Protect
Final Vol: Lanes: Rights=Include Vol Cnt Date: 5/8/2018 Rights=Include Lanes: Final Vol:
28 1
Cycle Time (sec): 105
1 192
0 Loss Time (sec): 12
0 82 1 Critical V/C: 0.567 1 54
0 Avg Crit Del (sec/veh): 24.8 0
26*** 1 Avg Delay (sec/veh): 26.3 2 258***
LOS: C
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 1
Final Vol: 39 167*** 211
Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap
Street Name: Monterey Road Cochrane Road
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 8 May 2018 <<
Base Vol: 39 167 211 1140 832 118 28 82 26 258 54 192
Growth 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 Initial Bse: 39 167 211 1140 832 118 28 82 26 258 54 192 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 39 167 211 1140 832 118 28 82 26 258 54 192 User 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 PHF 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 PHF Volume: 39 167 211 1140 832 118 28 82 26 258 54 192 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 39 167 211 1140 832 118 28 82 26 258 54 192 PCE 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 MLF 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 FinalVolume: 39 167 211 1140 832 118 28 82 26 258 54 192 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 0.98 0.95 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 1.00 0.92 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.74 0.26 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1750 3800 1750 3150 3240 460 1750 1900 1750 3150 1900 1750 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.04 0.12 0.36 0.26 0.26 0.02 0.04 0.01 0.08 0.03 0.11 Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
Green Time: 14.3 10.0 23.5 59.5 55.2 55.2 8.9 10.0 10.0 13.5 14.6 14.6 Volume/Cap: 0.16 0.46 0.54 0.64 0.49 0.49 0.19 0.45 0.16 0.64 0.20 0.79 Delay/Veh: 40.4 45.9 37.5 16.2 16.1 16.1 45.3 46.7 44.1 46.8 40.4 59.5 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 40.4 45.9 37.5 16.2 16.1 16.1 45.3 46.7 44.1 46.8 40.4 59.5 LOS by Move: D D D B B B D D D D D E
HCM2kAvgQ: 1 3 7 14 9 9 1 3 1 5 1 7
Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

COMPARE Thu Jun 30 07:52:09 2022 Page 14-4
Traffix 8.0.0715 Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans., San Jose City of Morgan Hill
Monterey Townhomes Development
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Existing Plus Project PM
Intersection #101: Monterey Road and Cochrane Road
Signal=Protect/Rights=Include
Final Vol: 123 837 1140***
Lanes: 0 1 1 0 2
Signal=Protect Signal=Protect
Final Vol: Lanes: Rights=Include Vol Cnt Date: 5/8/2018 Rights=Include Lanes: Final Vol:
35 1
Cycle Time (sec): 105
1 192
0 Loss Time (sec): 12
0 98*** 1 Critical V/C: 0.613 1 65
0 Avg Crit Del (sec/veh): 26.2 0
26 1 Avg Delay (sec/veh): 26.7 2 270***
LOS: C
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 1
Final Vol: 60 167*** 211
Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap
Street Name: Monterey Road Cochrane Road
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 8 May 2018 <<
Base Vol: 39 167 211 1140 832 118 28 82 26 258 54 192
Growth 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 Initial Bse: 39 167 211 1140 832 118 28 82 26 258 54 192 Added Vol: 21 0 0 0 5 5 7 16 0 12 11 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 60 167 211 1140 837 123 35 98 26 270 65 192 User 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 PHF 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 PHF Volume: 60 167 211 1140 837 123 35 98 26 270 65 192 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 60 167 211 1140 837 123 35 98 26 270 65 192 PCE 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 MLF 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 FinalVolume: 60 167 211 1140 837 123 35 98 26 270 65 192 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 0.98 0.95 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 1.00 0.92 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.74 0.26 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1750 3800 1750 3150 3226 474 1750 1900 1750 3150 1900 1750 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.04 0.12 0.36 0.26 0.26 0.02 0.05 0.01 0.09 0.03 0.11 Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
Green Time: 14.1 10.0 24.0 59.0 54.9 54.9 9.1 10.0 10.0 14.0 14.9 14.9 Volume/Cap: 0.26 0.46 0.53 0.64 0.50 0.50 0.23 0.54 0.16 0.64 0.24 0.77 Delay/Veh: 41.3 45.9 36.9 16.6 16.3 16.3 45.5 48.6 44.1 46.6 40.5 57.3 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 41.3 45.9 36.9 16.6 16.3 16.3 45.5 48.6 44.1 46.6 40.5 57.3 LOS by Move: D D D B B B D D D D D E
HCM2kAvgQ: 2 3 7 14 10 10 1 4 1 5 2 7
Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

COMPARE Thu Jun 30 07:52:09 2022 Page 14-5
Traffix 8.0.0715 Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans., San Jose City of Morgan Hill
Monterey Townhomes Development
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Existing AM
Intersection #116: Monterey Road and Old Monterey Road
Signal=Protect/Rights=Include
Final Vol: 81 339*** 0
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 0
Signal=Split Signal=Split
Final Vol: Lanes: Rights=Include Vol Cnt Date: 5/8/2018 Rights=Include Lanes: Final Vol:
171*** 2
Cycle Time (sec): 60
0 0
0 Loss Time (sec): 9
0 0 0 Critical V/C: 0.230 0 0
0 Avg Crit Del (sec/veh): 15.3 0
101 1 Avg Delay (sec/veh): 10.5 0 0
LOS: B
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 0
Final Vol: 91*** 897 0
Signal=Protect/Rights=Include
Street Name: Monterey Road Old Monterey Road
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 7 10 0 0 10 10 10 0 10 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 8 May 2018 <<
Base Vol: 91 897 0 0 339 81 171 0 101 0 0 0
Growth 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 Initial Bse: 91 897 0 0 339 81 171 0 101 0 0 0
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 91 897 0 0 339 81 171 0 101 0 0 0
User 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 PHF 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 PHF Volume: 91 897 0 0 339 81 171 0 101 0 0 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 91 897 0 0 339 81 171 0 101 0 0 0
PCE 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 MLF 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 FinalVolume: 91 897 0 0 339 81 171 0 101 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1750 3800 0 0 3800 1750 3150 0 1750 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** ****
Green Time: 13.3 36.2 0.0 0.0 22.9 22.9 14.8 0.0 14.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 Volume/Cap: 0.23 0.39 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.12 0.22 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 19.5 6.3 0.0 0.0 12.7 12.1 18.1 0.0 18.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 19.5 6.3 0.0 0.0 12.7 12.1 18.1 0.0 18.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 LOS by Move: B A A A B B B A B A A A
HCM2kAvgQ: 1 4 0 0 2 1 2 0 2 0 0 0
Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

COMPARE Thu Jun 30 07:52:09 2022 Page 14-6
Traffix 8.0.0715 Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans., San Jose City of Morgan Hill
Monterey Townhomes Development
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Existing Plus Project AM
Intersection #116: Monterey Road and Old Monterey Road
Signal=Protect/Rights=Include
Final Vol: 81 350*** 0
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 0
Signal=Split Signal=Split
Final Vol: Lanes: Rights=Include Vol Cnt Date: 5/8/2018 Rights=Include Lanes: Final Vol:
172*** 2
Cycle Time (sec): 60
0 0
0 Loss Time (sec): 9
0 0 0 Critical V/C: 0.234 0 0
0 Avg Crit Del (sec/veh): 15.2 0
101 1 Avg Delay (sec/veh): 10.4 0 0
LOS: B
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 0
Final Vol: 91*** 905 0
Signal=Protect/Rights=Include
Street Name: Monterey Road Old Monterey Road
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 7 10 0 0 10 10 10 0 10 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 8 May 2018 <<
Base Vol: 91 897 0 0 339 81 171 0 101 0 0 0
Growth 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 Initial Bse: 91 897 0 0 339 81 171 0 101 0 0 0
Added Vol: 0 8 0 0 11 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 91 905 0 0 350 81 172 0 101 0 0 0
User 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 PHF 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 PHF Volume: 91 905 0 0 350 81 172 0 101 0 0 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 91 905 0 0 350 81 172 0 101 0 0 0
PCE 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 MLF 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 FinalVolume: 91 905 0 0 350 81 172 0 101 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1750 3800 0 0 3800 1750 3150 0 1750 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** ****
Green Time: 13.1 36.4 0.0 0.0 23.3 23.3 14.6 0.0 14.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 Volume/Cap: 0.24 0.39 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.12 0.22 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 19.6 6.2 0.0 0.0 12.5 11.9 18.3 0.0 18.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 19.6 6.2 0.0 0.0 12.5 11.9 18.3 0.0 18.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 LOS by Move: B A A A B B B A B A A A
HCM2kAvgQ: 1 4 0 0 2 1 2 0 2 0 0 0
Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

COMPARE Thu Jun 30 07:52:09 2022 Page 14-7
Traffix 8.0.0715 Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans., San Jose City of Morgan Hill
Monterey Townhomes Development
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Existing PM
Intersection #116: Monterey Road and Old Monterey Road
Signal=Protect/Rights=Include
Final Vol: 129 1054*** 0
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 0
Signal=Split Signal=Split
Final Vol: Lanes: Rights=Include Vol Cnt Date: 5/8/2018 Rights=Include Lanes: Final Vol:
89*** 2
Cycle Time (sec): 90
0 0
0 Loss Time (sec): 9
0 0 0 Critical V/C: 0.399 0 0
0 Avg Crit Del (sec/veh): 14.1 0
136 1 Avg Delay (sec/veh): 13.2 0 0
LOS: B
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 0
Final Vol: 94*** 348 0
Signal=Protect/Rights=Include
Street Name: Monterey Road Old Monterey Road
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 7 10 0 0 10 10 10 0 10 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 8 May 2018 <<
Base Vol: 94 348 0 0 1054 129 89 0 136 0 0 0
Growth 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 Initial Bse: 94 348 0 0 1054 129 89 0 136 0 0 0
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 94 348 0 0 1054 129 89 0 136 0 0 0
User 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 PHF 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 PHF Volume: 94 348 0 0 1054 129 89 0 136 0 0 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 94 348 0 0 1054 129 89 0 136 0 0 0
PCE 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 MLF 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 FinalVolume: 94 348 0 0 1054 129 89 0 136 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1750 3800 0 0 3800 1750 3150 0 1750 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.07 0.03 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** ****
Green Time: 10.3 63.5 0.0 0.0 53.2 53.2 17.5 0.0 17.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Volume/Cap: 0.47 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.47 0.12 0.15 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 39.0 4.3 0.0 0.0 10.6 8.2 30.1 0.0 32.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 39.0 4.3 0.0 0.0 10.6 8.2 30.1 0.0 32.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 LOS by Move: D A A A B A C A C A A A
HCM2kAvgQ: 3 2 0 0 8 2 1 0 4 0 0 0
Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

COMPARE Thu Jun 30 07:52:09 2022 Page 14-8
Traffix 8.0.0715 Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans., San Jose City of Morgan Hill
Monterey Townhomes Development
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Existing Plus Project PM
Intersection #116: Monterey Road and Old Monterey Road
Signal=Protect/Rights=Include
Final Vol: 130 1070*** 0
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 0
Signal=Split Signal=Split
Final Vol: Lanes: Rights=Include Vol Cnt Date: 5/8/2018 Rights=Include Lanes: Final Vol:
90*** 2
Cycle Time (sec): 90
0 0
0 Loss Time (sec): 9
0 0 0 Critical V/C: 0.404 0 0
0 Avg Crit Del (sec/veh): 14.0 0
136 1 Avg Delay (sec/veh): 13.1 0 0
LOS: B
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 0
Final Vol: 94*** 368 0
Signal=Protect/Rights=Include
Street Name: Monterey Road Old Monterey Road
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 7 10 0 0 10 10 10 0 10 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 8 May 2018 <<
Base Vol: 94 348 0 0 1054 129 89 0 136 0 0 0
Growth 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 Initial Bse: 94 348 0 0 1054 129 89 0 136 0 0 0
Added Vol: 0 20 0 0 16 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 94 368 0 0 1070 130 90 0 136 0 0 0
User 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 PHF 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 PHF Volume: 94 368 0 0 1070 130 90 0 136 0 0 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 94 368 0 0 1070 130 90 0 136 0 0 0
PCE 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 MLF 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 FinalVolume: 94 368 0 0 1070 130 90 0 136 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1750 3800 0 0 3800 1750 3150 0 1750 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.07 0.03 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** ****
Green Time: 10.2 63.7 0.0 0.0 53.5 53.5 17.3 0.0 17.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Volume/Cap: 0.47 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.47 0.12 0.15 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 39.2 4.3 0.0 0.0 10.5 8.1 30.3 0.0 32.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 39.2 4.3 0.0 0.0 10.5 8.1 30.3 0.0 32.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 LOS by Move: D A A A B A C A C A A A
HCM2kAvgQ: 3 2 0 0 8 2 1 0 4 0 0 0
Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

COMPARE Thu Jun 30 07:51:43 2022 Page 14-1
Traffix 8.0.0715 Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans., San Jose City of Morgan Hill
Monterey Townhomes Development
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Year 2030 Cumulative without Project AM
Intersection #101: Monterey Road and Cochrane Road
Signal=Protect/Rights=Include
Final Vol: 47 334 696***
Lanes: 0 1 1 0 2
Signal=Protect Signal=Protect
Final Vol: Lanes: Rights=Include Vol Cnt Date: 5/8/2018 Rights=Include Lanes: Final Vol:
94*** 1
Cycle Time (sec): 110
1 769***
0 Loss Time (sec): 12
0 69 1 Critical V/C: 1.128 1 63
0 Avg Crit Del (sec/veh): 121.4 0
7 1 Avg Delay (sec/veh): 93.7 2 199
LOS: F
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 1
Final Vol: 117 1106*** 340
Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap
Street Name: Monterey Road Cochrane Road
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 8 May 2018 <<
Base Vol: 117 1106 340 696 334 47 94 69 7 199 63 769
Growth 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 Initial Bse: 117 1106 340 696 334 47 94 69 7 199 63 769 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 117 1106 340 696 334 47 94 69 7 199 63 769 User 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 PHF 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 PHF Volume: 117 1106 340 696 334 47 94 69 7 199 63 769
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 117 1106 340 696 334 47 94 69 7 199 63 769 PCE 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 MLF 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 FinalVolume: 117 1106 340 696 334 47 94 69 7 199 63 769 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 0.98 0.95 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 1.00 0.92 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.75 0.25 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1750 3800 1750 3150 3243 456 1750 1900 1750 3150 1900 1750 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.29 0.19 0.22 0.10 0.10 0.05 0.04 0.00 0.06 0.03 0.44 Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
Green Time: 19.3 27.8 48.0 21.1 29.7 29.7 7.0 28.8 28.8 20.2 42.0 42.0 Volume/Cap: 0.38 1.15 0.44 1.15 0.38 0.38 0.84 0.14 0.02 0.34 0.09 1.15 Delay/Veh: 40.9 121 22.1 130.0 32.9 32.9 92.3 31.2 30.1 39.5 21.8 118.1 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 40.9 121 22.1 130.0 32.9 32.9 92.3 31.2 30.1 39.5 21.8 118.1 LOS by Move: D F C F C C F C C D C F
HCM2kAvgQ: 4 31 9 22 5 5 6 2 0 3 1 43
Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

COMPARE Thu Jun 30 07:51:43 2022 Page 14-2
Traffix 8.0.0715 Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans., San Jose City of Morgan Hill
Monterey Townhomes Development
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Year 2030 Cumulative with Project AM
Intersection #101: Monterey Road and Cochrane Road
Signal=Protect/Rights=Include
Final Vol: 49 336 696***
Lanes: 0 1 1 0 2
Signal=Protect Signal=Protect
Final Vol: Lanes: Rights=Include Vol Cnt Date: 5/8/2018 Rights=Include Lanes: Final Vol:
102*** 1
Cycle Time (sec): 110
1 769***
0 Loss Time (sec): 12
0 85 1 Critical V/C: 1.133 1 67
0 Avg Crit Del (sec/veh): 122.0 0
7 1 Avg Delay (sec/veh): 93.7 2 203
LOS: F
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 1
Final Vol: 126 1106*** 340
Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap
Street Name: Monterey Road Cochrane Road
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 8 May 2018 <<
Base Vol: 117 1106 340 696 334 47 94 69 7 199 63 769
Growth 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 Initial Bse: 117 1106 340 696 334 47 94 69 7 199 63 769 Added Vol: 9 0 0 0 2 2 8 16 0 4 4 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 126 1106 340 696 336 49 102 85 7 203 67 769 User 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 PHF 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 PHF Volume: 126 1106 340 696 336 49 102 85 7 203 67 769 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 126 1106 340 696 336 49 102 85 7 203 67 769 PCE 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 MLF 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 FinalVolume: 126 1106 340 696 336 49 102 85 7 203 67 769 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 0.98 0.95 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 1.00 0.92 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.74 0.26 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1750 3800 1750 3150 3229 471 1750 1900 1750 3150 1900 1750 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.29 0.19 0.22 0.10 0.10 0.06 0.04 0.00 0.06 0.04 0.44 Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
Green Time: 20.0 27.8 48.2 21.1 28.9 28.9 7.0 28.7 28.7 20.3 42.0 42.0 Volume/Cap: 0.40 1.15 0.44 1.15 0.40 0.40 0.92 0.17 0.02 0.35 0.09 1.15 Delay/Veh: 40.5 121 22.0 130.0 33.6 33.6 110.5 31.6 30.2 39.4 21.8 118.1 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 40.5 121 22.0 130.0 33.6 33.6 110.5 31.6 30.2 39.4 21.8 118.1 LOS by Move: D F C F C C F C C D C F
HCM2kAvgQ: 4 31 9 22 5 5 7 2 0 3 1 43
Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

COMPARE Thu Jun 30 07:51:43 2022 Page 14-3
Traffix 8.0.0715 Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans., San Jose City of Morgan Hill
Monterey Townhomes Development
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Year 2030 Cumulative without Project PM
Intersection #101: Monterey Road and Cochrane Road
Signal=Protect/Rights=Include
Final Vol: 118 1052 1440***
Lanes: 0 1 1 0 2
Signal=Protect Signal=Protect
Final Vol: Lanes: Rights=Include Vol Cnt Date: 5/8/2018 Rights=Include Lanes: Final Vol:
28*** 1
Cycle Time (sec): 105
1 588***
0 Loss Time (sec): 12
0 82 1 Critical V/C: 0.993 1 54
0 Avg Crit Del (sec/veh): 86.4 0
26 1 Avg Delay (sec/veh): 60.5 2 400
LOS: E
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 1
Final Vol: 39 266*** 262
Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap
Street Name: Monterey Road Cochrane Road
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 8 May 2018 <<
Base Vol: 39 266 262 1440 1052 118 28 82 26 400 54 588
Growth 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 Initial Bse: 39 266 262 1440 1052 118 28 82 26 400 54 588 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 39 266 262 1440 1052 118 28 82 26 400 54 588 User 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 PHF 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 PHF Volume: 39 266 262 1440 1052 118 28 82 26 400 54 588 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 39 266 262 1440 1052 118 28 82 26 400 54 588 PCE 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 MLF 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 FinalVolume: 39 266 262 1440 1052 118 28 82 26 400 54 588 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 0.98 0.95 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 1.00 0.92 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.79 0.21 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1750 3800 1750 3150 3327 373 1750 1900 1750 3150 1900 1750 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.07 0.15 0.46 0.32 0.32 0.02 0.04 0.01 0.13 0.03 0.34 Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
Green Time: 9.4 10.0 32.4 43.8 44.4 44.4 7.0 16.8 16.8 22.4 32.2 32.2 Volume/Cap: 0.25 0.74 0.49 1.10 0.75 0.75 0.24 0.27 0.09 0.60 0.09 1.10 Delay/Veh: 45.4 53.8 30.2 85.9 27.6 27.6 47.5 39.2 37.7 38.7 26.0 104.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 45.4 53.8 30.2 85.9 27.6 27.6 47.5 39.2 37.7 38.7 26.0 104.0 LOS by Move: D D C F C C D D D D C F
HCM2kAvgQ: 1 6 8 37 15 15 1 2 1 7 1 29
Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

COMPARE Thu Jun 30 07:51:43 2022 Page 14-4
Traffix 8.0.0715 Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans., San Jose City of Morgan Hill
Monterey Townhomes Development
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Year 2030 Cumulative with Project PM
Intersection #101: Monterey Road and Cochrane Road
Signal=Protect/Rights=Include
Final Vol: 123 1057 1440***
Lanes: 0 1 1 0 2
Signal=Protect Signal=Protect
Final Vol: Lanes: Rights=Include Vol Cnt Date: 5/8/2018 Rights=Include Lanes: Final Vol:
35*** 1
Cycle Time (sec): 105
1 588***
0 Loss Time (sec): 12
0 98 1 Critical V/C: 0.997 1 65
0 Avg Crit Del (sec/veh): 86.2 0
26 1 Avg Delay (sec/veh): 60.2 2 412
LOS: E
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 1
Final Vol: 60 266*** 262
Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap
Street Name: Monterey Road Cochrane Road
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 8 May 2018 <<
Base Vol: 39 266 262 1440 1052 118 28 82 26 400 54 588
Growth 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 Initial Bse: 39 266 262 1440 1052 118 28 82 26 400 54 588 Added Vol: 21 0 0 0 5 5 7 16 0 12 11 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 60 266 262 1440 1057 123 35 98 26 412 65 588 User 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 PHF 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 PHF Volume: 60 266 262 1440 1057 123 35 98 26 412 65 588 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 60 266 262 1440 1057 123 35 98 26 412 65 588 PCE 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 MLF 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 FinalVolume: 60 266 262 1440 1057 123 35 98 26 412 65 588 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 0.98 0.95 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 1.00 0.92 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.79 0.21 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1750 3800 1750 3150 3314 386 1750 1900 1750 3150 1900 1750 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.07 0.15 0.46 0.32 0.32 0.02 0.05 0.01 0.13 0.03 0.34 Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
Green Time: 9.3 10.0 32.7 43.8 44.5 44.5 7.0 16.5 16.5 22.7 32.2 32.2 Volume/Cap: 0.39 0.74 0.48 1.10 0.75 0.75 0.30 0.33 0.09 0.61 0.11 1.10 Delay/Veh: 46.8 53.8 30.0 85.9 27.7 27.7 48.1 40.0 38.0 38.7 26.2 104.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 46.8 53.8 30.0 85.9 27.7 27.7 48.1 40.0 38.0 38.7 26.2 104.0 LOS by Move: D D C F C C D D D D C F
HCM2kAvgQ: 2 6 8 37 15 15 1 3 1 7 1 29
Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

COMPARE Thu Jun 30 07:51:43 2022 Page 14-5
Traffix 8.0.0715 Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans., San Jose City of Morgan Hill
Monterey Townhomes Development
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Year 2030 Cumulative without Project AM
Intersection #116: Monterey Road and Old Monterey Road
Signal=Protect/Rights=Include
Final Vol: 91 475 0***
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 0
Signal=Split Signal=Split
Final Vol: Lanes: Rights=Include Vol Cnt Date: 5/8/2018 Rights=Include Lanes: Final Vol:
255*** 2
Cycle Time (sec): 60
0 0
0 Loss Time (sec): 9
0 0 0 Critical V/C: 0.512 0 0
0 Avg Crit Del (sec/veh): 7.8 0
129 1 Avg Delay (sec/veh): 10.1 0 0
LOS: B
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 0
Final Vol: 105 1347*** 0
Signal=Protect/Rights=Include
Street Name: Monterey Road Old Monterey Road
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 7 10 0 0 10 10 10 0 10 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 8 May 2018 <<
Base Vol: 105 1347 0 0 475 91 255 0 129 0 0 0
Growth 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 Initial Bse: 105 1347 0 0 475 91 255 0 129 0 0 0
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 105 1347 0 0 475 91 255 0 129 0 0 0
User 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 PHF 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 PHF Volume: 105 1347 0 0 475 91 255 0 129 0 0 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 105 1347 0 0 475 91 255 0 129 0 0 0
PCE 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 MLF 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 FinalVolume: 105 1347 0 0 475 91 255 0 129 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1750 3800 0 0 3800 1750 3150 0 1750 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.06 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.05 0.08 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** ****
Green Time: 16.9 41.0 0.0 0.0 24.1 24.1 10.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Volume/Cap: 0.21 0.52 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.13 0.49 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 16.7 4.8 0.0 0.0 12.4 11.4 23.4 0.0 23.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 16.7 4.8 0.0 0.0 12.4 11.4 23.4 0.0 23.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 LOS by Move: B A A A B B C A C A A A
HCM2kAvgQ: 2 6 0 0 3 1 3 0 3 0 0 0
Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

COMPARE Thu Jun 30 07:51:43 2022 Page 14-6
Traffix 8.0.0715 Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans., San Jose City of Morgan Hill
Monterey Townhomes Development
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Year 2030 Cumulative with Project AM
Intersection #116: Monterey Road and Old Monterey Road
Signal=Protect/Rights=Include
Final Vol: 91 486 0***
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 0
Signal=Split Signal=Split
Final Vol: Lanes: Rights=Include Vol Cnt Date: 5/8/2018 Rights=Include Lanes: Final Vol:
256*** 2
Cycle Time (sec): 60
0 0
0 Loss Time (sec): 9
0 0 0 Critical V/C: 0.515 0 0
0 Avg Crit Del (sec/veh): 7.8 0
129 1 Avg Delay (sec/veh): 10.1 0 0
LOS: B
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 0
Final Vol: 105 1355*** 0
Signal=Protect/Rights=Include
Street Name: Monterey Road Old Monterey Road
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 7 10 0 0 10 10 10 0 10 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 8 May 2018 <<
Base Vol: 105 1347 0 0 475 91 255 0 129 0 0 0
Growth 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 Initial Bse: 105 1347 0 0 475 91 255 0 129 0 0 0
Added Vol: 0 8 0 0 11 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 105 1355 0 0 486 91 256 0 129 0 0 0
User 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 PHF 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 PHF Volume: 105 1355 0 0 486 91 256 0 129 0 0 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 105 1355 0 0 486 91 256 0 129 0 0 0
PCE 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 MLF 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 FinalVolume: 105 1355 0 0 486 91 256 0 129 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1750 3800 0 0 3800 1750 3150 0 1750 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.06 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.05 0.08 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** ****
Green Time: 16.9 41.0 0.0 0.0 24.1 24.1 10.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Volume/Cap: 0.21 0.52 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.13 0.49 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 16.7 4.9 0.0 0.0 12.4 11.4 23.4 0.0 23.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 16.7 4.9 0.0 0.0 12.4 11.4 23.4 0.0 23.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 LOS by Move: B A A A B B C A C A A A
HCM2kAvgQ: 2 6 0 0 3 1 3 0 3 0 0 0
Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

COMPARE Thu Jun 30 07:51:43 2022 Page 14-7
Traffix 8.0.0715 Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans., San Jose City of Morgan Hill
Monterey Townhomes Development
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Year 2030 Cumulative without Project PM
Intersection #116: Monterey Road and Old Monterey Road
Signal=Protect/Rights=Include
Final Vol: 203 1339*** 0
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 0
Signal=Split Signal=Split
Final Vol: Lanes: Rights=Include Vol Cnt Date: 5/8/2018 Rights=Include Lanes: Final Vol:
112 2
Cycle Time (sec): 90
0 0
0 Loss Time (sec): 9
0 0 0 Critical V/C: 0.628 0 0
0 Avg Crit Del (sec/veh): 19.2 0
244*** 1 Avg Delay (sec/veh): 16.2 0 0
LOS: B
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 0
Final Vol: 129*** 500 0
Signal=Protect/Rights=Include
Street Name: Monterey Road Old Monterey Road
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 7 10 0 0 10 10 10 0 10 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 8 May 2018 <<
Base Vol: 129 500 0 0 1339 203 112 0 244 0 0 0
Growth 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 Initial Bse: 129 500 0 0 1339 203 112 0 244 0 0 0
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 129 500 0 0 1339 203 112 0 244 0 0 0
User 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 PHF 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 PHF Volume: 129 500 0 0 1339 203 112 0 244 0 0 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 129 500 0 0 1339 203 112 0 244 0 0 0
PCE 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 MLF 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 FinalVolume: 129 500 0 0 1339 203 112 0 244 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1750 3800 0 0 3800 1750 3150 0 1750 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.35 0.12 0.04 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** ****
Green Time: 10.6 61.0 0.0 0.0 50.5 50.5 20.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Volume/Cap: 0.63 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.63 0.21 0.16 0.00 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 43.9 5.4 0.0 0.0 14.0 9.9 28.4 0.0 34.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 43.9 5.4 0.0 0.0 14.0 9.9 28.4 0.0 34.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 LOS by Move: D A A A B A C A C A A A
HCM2kAvgQ: 4 2 0 0 13 3 2 0 8 0 0 0
Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

COMPARE Thu Jun 30 07:51:43 2022 Page 14-8
Traffix 8.0.0715 Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc. Licensed to Hexagon Trans., San Jose City of Morgan Hill
Monterey Townhomes Development
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative)
Year 2030 Cumulative with Project PM
Intersection #116: Monterey Road and Old Monterey Road
Signal=Protect/Rights=Include
Final Vol: 204 1355*** 0
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 0
Signal=Split Signal=Split
Final Vol: Lanes: Rights=Include Vol Cnt Date: 5/8/2018 Rights=Include Lanes: Final Vol:
113 2
Cycle Time (sec): 90
0 0
0 Loss Time (sec): 9
0 0 0 Critical V/C: 0.633 0 0
0 Avg Crit Del (sec/veh): 19.2 0
244*** 1 Avg Delay (sec/veh): 16.1 0 0
LOS: B
Lanes: 1 0 2 0 0
Final Vol: 129*** 520 0
Signal=Protect/Rights=Include
Street Name: Monterey Road Old Monterey Road
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 7 10 0 0 10 10 10 0 10 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 8 May 2018 <<
Base Vol: 129 500 0 0 1339 203 112 0 244 0 0 0
Growth 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 Initial Bse: 129 500 0 0 1339 203 112 0 244 0 0 0
Added Vol: 0 20 0 0 16 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 129 520 0 0 1355 204 113 0 244 0 0 0
User 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 PHF 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 PHF Volume: 129 520 0 0 1355 204 113 0 244 0 0 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 129 520 0 0 1355 204 113 0 244 0 0 0
PCE 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 MLF 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 FinalVolume: 129 520 0 0 1355 204 113 0 244 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1750 3800 0 0 3800 1750 3150 0 1750 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.36 0.12 0.04 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** ****
Green Time: 10.5 61.2 0.0 0.0 50.7 50.7 19.8 0.0 19.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 Volume/Cap: 0.63 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.63 0.21 0.16 0.00 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 44.3 5.4 0.0 0.0 14.0 9.8 28.5 0.0 35.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 44.3 5.4 0.0 0.0 14.0 9.8 28.5 0.0 35.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 LOS by Move: D A A A B A C A D A A A
HCM2kAvgQ: 4 3 0 0 13 3 2 0 8 0 0 0
Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Memorandum
Date: July 1, 2022
To: Nick Pappani, Raney Planning & Management
From: Robert Del Rio, T.E., Luis Descanzo
Subject: VMT Assessment for the Proposed The Gates Mixed-Use Development in Morgan Hill, California
Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. has completed a vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) assessment for The Gates Mixed-Use Development project located at 18545-18565 Monterey Road (APNs 764-10- 013, -015) in Morgan Hill, California (see Figure 1). The project as proposed would consist of 49 townhome units and 4,016 square feet (s.f.) of ground-floor retail space on a vacant lot located along the westside of Monterey Road just north of Jarvis Drive. Approximately 15% of the units will be affordable residential units. The purpose of this memorandum is to provide an assessment of the project’s effect on VMT. The VMT assessment methodology and results are discussed below.

VMT Assessment Methodology and Results
Pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 743, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 2019 Update Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b) states that VMT will be the metric in analyzing transportation impacts for land use projects for CEQA purposes. VMT is the total miles of travel by personal motorized vehicles a project is expected to generate in a day. VMT measures the full distance of personal motorized vehicle-trips with one end within the project.

The City of Morgan Hill, at the time of this report, is undertaking a process of updating its General Plan policies to incorporate VMT methodologies and significance thresholds to be consistent with SB 743 but has not released draft thresholds. In the absence of an adopted, or a draft, City policy with impact standards and thresholds, this assessment relies on the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) guidelines in analyzing the project’s effects on VMT.

OPR Screening Recommendations
The Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA published by OPR in December 2018 provides recommendations regarding VMT evaluation methodology, significance thresholds, and screening thresholds for the evaluation of land use projects.

The OPR provides screening threshold recommendations that are intended to identify when a project should be expected to cause a less-than-significant impact without conducting a detailed VMT evaluation. The OPR screening thresholds recommendations are based on project size, maps, transit availability, and provision of affordable housing. The OPR recommendations include the screening threshold criteria listed below:

The Gates Mixed-Use Development VMT Assessment July 1, 2022 Page | 2
Figure 1
Site Location
Cochrane Rd Cochrane Rd
Madrone Pkwy Madrone Pkwy
Monterey Rd Monterey Rd
Main Ave Main Ave
Butterfield Blvd Butterfield Blvd
Monterey Rd
Monterey Rd
Dunne Ave Dunne Ave
101
NORTH
Not to Scale
Hale Ave
Hale Ave
Peebles Ave Peebles Ave
Burnett Ave Burnett Ave
= Project Site Location
= City of Morgan Hill
LEGEND:

Old Monterey Rd

The Gates Mixed-Use Development VMT Assessment July 1, 2022 Page | 3
Figure 2 Site Plan

The Gates Mixed-Use Development VMT Assessment July 1, 2022 Page | 4
 OPR recommends that office or residential projects not exceeding a level of 15 percent below existing VMT per capita and employee may indicate a less-than-significant impact on VMT.
 OPR recommends that projects (including office, residential, retail, and mixed-use developments) proposed within ½ mile of an existing major transit stop or within ¼ mile of an existing stop along a high-quality transit corridor may be presumed to have a less-thansignificant impact on VMT.  OPR recommends that 100 percent affordable residential development in infill locations be presumed to have a less-than-significant impact on VMT.  OPR recommends that projects that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day generally may be assumed to cause a less-than-significant impact on VMT.  OPR recommends that local-serving retail developments (considered to be less than 50,000 s.f. in size) may be assumed to cause a less-than-significant impact on VMT.

Residential VMT Evaluation
Per OPR’s technical advisory, VMT per resident (capita) is the recommended metric to evaluate CEQArelated transportation impacts for the project’s residential component. As stated in the technical advisory, OPR recommends an impact threshold of 15% below the existing VMT levels for residential land uses. OPR allows the existing VMT to be measured as regional or citywide VMT per capita.

Therefore, 15% below the citywide residential VMT per capita is established as the impact threshold for residential uses.

The evaluation of the project’s effects on VMT was completed using VTA’s VMT Evaluation Tool. The VMT tool identifies the existing average VMT per capita and VMT per employee for the project area based on the assessor’s parcel number (APN) of a project. Based on the project location, type of development, project description, and proposed trip reduction measures, the evaluation tool calculates the project VMT. Projects located in areas where the existing VMT is above the established threshold are referred to as being in “high-VMT areas”. Projects in high-VMT areas are required to include a set of VMT reduction measures that would reduce the project VMT to the greatest extent possible.

Baseline VMT
The VTA’s VMT Evaluation Tool indicates that the citywide average VMT per capita is currently 24.64.

Therefore, the OPR recommended impact threshold of 15% below the citywide average VMT per capita equates to 20.94 VMT per capita.

Project VMT
The results of the VMT analysis using the VTA’s VMT Evaluation Tool indicate that the existing VMT (20.09) per capita for residential uses in the project vicinity is less than the citywide average VMT per capita.

The results also indicate that the project is projected to generate VMT per capita (19.4), that would not exceed the OPR’s recommended impact threshold of 20.94 VMT per capita. Therefore, the residential component of the project would not result in an impact on the transportation system based on OPR’s VMT impact criteria.

The VTA VMT Evaluation Tool output sheets are shown in Figure 3.

The Gates Mixed-Use Development VMT Assessment July 1, 2022 Page | 5
Retail VMT Evaluation
The project’s retail component consists of 4,016 s.f. of ground-floor retail space. Since the proposed retail use would be less than 50,000 s.f. in size, it may be presumed to be a local-serving facility and would therefore have a less-than-significant impact on VMT. The OPR guidelines suggest that by adding retail opportunities into the urban fabric and thereby improving retail destination proximity, localserving retail development tends to shorten trips and reduce VMT. As a result of the project having tripmaking characteristics of a local-serving retail facility, it can be presumed that the retail component of the project would have a less-than-significant impact on VMT.

The Gates Mixed-Use Development VMT Assessment July 1, 2022 Page | 6
Figure 3
VTA VMT Evaluation Tool Output

1 The Gates Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Responses to Public Comments and Errata
The Santa Clara Valley Water District (“Valley Water”) provided a comment letter on The Gates Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND). The letter, dated December 12, 2022, identifies the need for several minor corrections to the IS/MND regarding the description of the existing and proposed drainage systems for The Gates project (“proposed project”). The document provides the needed corrections and clarifications to the IS/MND, which do not affect the adequacy of the environmental analysis, as described in the following section.

1. In response to the comment, page 7 of the IS/MND is hereby corrected as follows:

Currently, the majority of the site is undeveloped ruderal grassland consisting of various shrubbery scattered throughout and small trees located along the eastern and western borders. The project site also includes 28 parking spaces for the existing Starbucks located to the northwest and an existing man-made, storm-drain easement which drains into the Butterfield Retention Basin across Monterey Roadoff-site. The topography of the site is relatively flat, with an elevation of approximately 105 meters above mean sea level (AMSL).

The project site is generally bounded by Monterey Road along the east and south, UPRR tracks along the west, and a commercial center to the north.

Additional surrounding land uses include an existing apartment complex and the under-construction Butterfield Village Apartments project to the east; undeveloped land to the west, beyond the UPRR tracks and singlefamily residences further to the west, beyond Old Monterey Road; the Monterey Gateway project to the south, beyond the UPRR tracks and Monterey Road; and the Butterfield Retention existing detention Bbasin to the southeast, across Monterey Road.

These corrections clarify the name of the existing detention basin located southeast of the project site and the direction of flow from said basin, all of which are correct in the technical documents supporting the IS/MND. The above corrections, and those shown below, serve to make all descriptions of the existing and proposed drainage systems consistent.

2. Figure 1, page 7, of the IS/MND, as shown on the following page, is hereby corrected to accurately reflect the project location. All existing setting information and impact analyses contained within the IS are based on the correct project site location. Thus, this correction is for clerical purposes only and does not affect the adequacy of the environmental analysis.

3. Figure 2, page 8, of the IS/MND, as shown on the following page, is hereby revised to correct the name of the existing detention basin located southeast of the project site. This represents a correction to the name only and does not affect the adequacy of the environmental analysis.

2 Figure 1
Regional Project Location
Project Site

3 Figure 2
Project Vicinity Map
Commercial
Center
Single-Family
Residences
Butterfield Village
Apartments Project
Butterfield
Retention
Detention Basin
Multi-Family
Residences
Monterey
Gateway Project

4 4. Page 11 of the IS/MND, under the Utilities header, is hereby revised to bring the description of the existing and proposed drainage systems into full conformance with the stormwater reports for the proposed project. The below description accurately notes that project runoff from the proposed detention basin in the southern portion of the project site would drain from the basin into the existing headwall along the western property line, adjacent to the UPRR tracks. Given this, the corresponding drainage system write-up on page 73 of the IS (Section G, Section X, Hydrology and Water Quality, conclusion ci-ciii) is revised for consistency purposes, as shown below.

Utilities
Water for the proposed development would be provided by the City through a new connection to an existing eight-inch water line in Monterey Road, and sewer service would be provided by the City through a new connection to an existing six-inch line in the commercial center to the north (see Figure 5). Stormwater would be collected by a series of drain inlets along the internal circulation system and transported, by way of underground storm drains to the bioretention/detention pond in the southern portion of the project site, where stormwater would be treated and discharged to the existing headwall along the western boundary of the project site, adjacent to the UPRR tracks. The existing storm-drain easement on-site would be re-configured into three, 24-inch culverts to avoid disrupting the flow of runoff from neighboring properties that currently flow through the open ditch on the project site. Treated water from the existing Butterfield detention basin, located 0.3-mile southeast along Monterey Road, and the existing multi-family residences to the north, would be directed to flow across the site into the existing headwall mentioned above, as such flows currently do. On-site stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces from the proposed project would not enter the proposed culvert (additional details are provided in Section X, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this IS/MND). Each residence would include a solar-energy system sufficient to produce 100 percent of the electricity demand for the residence.

hereby clarified as follows:
ci-iii. The project site is undeveloped and consists of ruderal grassland, various shrubbery scattered throughout, and small trees located along the eastern and western borders. The project site also includes 28 parking spaces within the existing Starbucks parking lot located to the northwest and an existing manmade ditch.

Development of the proposed project would include approximately 112,024 square feet of impervious surfaces, which would alter the existing drainage pattern of the site. However, as discussed above, on-site stormwater runoff would be collected by a series of drain inlets and transported by way of underground storm drain lines to a bioretention/detention pond. The bioretention/detention pond would allow stored runoff to infiltrate underlying soils in a manner similar to what currently occurs on-site. During large storm events, excess

5 runoff would be discharged to the City’s public storm drain system located in Old Monterey Roadat the western property line through the existing concrete headwall and outlet pipe to preserve the existing drainage patterns and release points on the project site.

The bioretention/detention pond would treat and retain runoff from the project site and also maintain peak runoff flows such that they do not exceed pre-project flows, in accordance with the stormwater management requirements adopted by Resolution R3-2013-0032.

Also, in response to the comment, as stated on page 73 of the IS/MND, the proposed bioretention/detention pond would (treat and) retain runoff from the project site and also maintain peak runoff flows under a 100-year storm event such that they do not exceed pre-project flows, in accordance with the stormwater management requirements adopted by Resolution R3-2013-0032. MH Engineering’s Drainage Analysis & Storm Water Management Calculations for “The Gates” (October 20, 2021) confirms that “All runoff has been detained so that all post-development runoff is equal to, or less than, predevelopment levels.”

5. Page 31 (Section IV, Biological Resources) of the IS/MND is hereby revised to correct the name of the existing detention basin southeast of the project site, as follows:

Special-Status Amphibians and Reptiles
Three of the 11 special-status species require specialized habitats that occur within the site, including the presence of ponding water that occurs periodically or seasonally both within the project site and across Monterey Road, at the Butterfield Retention Bexisting detention basin. Such species include California tiger salamander, California red-legged frog, and western pond turtle. However, the features are unlikely to provide habitat for California tiger salamander because the species is isolated from known populations of the species and habitat corridors are not present for existing populations. The same is true for California red-legged frog and western pond turtle, both of which require ponded water for survival. Known populations of the California red-legged frog and western pond turtle are currently restricted to the undeveloped foothills surrounding the City of Morgan Hill, and the project area is isolated from both species populations by dense urban development. Therefore, development of the project site is not expected to result in any effect to California tiger salamander, California red-legged frog, or western pond turtle.

6. Page 33 (Section IV, Biological Resources) of the IS/MND is hereby revised to correct the name of the existing detention basin southeast of the project site, as follows:

Nesting Migratory Birds and Raptors
According to the Biological Assessment, the existing on-site trees represent potential nesting habitat for nesting and migratory birds protected by the MBTA, such as special-status white-tailed kite, Swainson’s hawk, and tricolored blackbird. White-tailed kite is a CDFW Fully-Protected

6 Species. Swainson’s hawk and tricolored blackbird are State-listed threatened species.

The closest documented occurrence for white-tailed kite is approximately

2.25 miles north of the project area. In addition to the project site representing potential nesting habitats for the aforementioned birds, the project site also represents potential foraging habitat for white-tailed kite and Swainson’s hawk; however, records of Swainson’s hawk were not found within a 3-mile radius. Furthermore, tricolored blackbirds may encounter nesting habitats at the property located east of Monterey Road at the Butterfield Retention Bexisting detention basin and may forage at the project site. The initial survey of the site found that the southern end of the site is within 250 feet of the Butterfield Retention Bexisting detention basin, which represents potential nesting substrate. Therefore, the project has potential to affect white-tailed kite, Swainson’s hawk, and tricolored blackbirds.

7. Page 36, Mitigation Measure IV-6, of the IS/MND is hereby revised to correct the name of the existing detention basin located southeast of the project site, as follows:

Tricolored Blackbird
IV-4. Consistent with Condition 17 of the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan, prior to any ground disturbance related to covered activities, a qualified biologist shall investigate whether the nearby Butterfield Retention Bexisting
detention basin, located southeast of the project site, has been occupied by nesting tricolored blackbirds within the past 5 years. This shall include checking the California Natural Diversity Database, contacting local experts, and conducting a preconstruction survey in all accessible areas identified as supporting potential tricolored blackbird nesting habitat. The survey shall document the current, and to the extent possible, historical presence or absence of nesting colonies of tricolored blackbird. Surveys shall conclude no more than two calendar days prior to construction. If a tricolored blackbird nesting colony is present or has been within the past 5 years, a 250-foot buffer shall be applied from the outer edge of all hydrophytic vegetation associated with the site and the site plus buffer shall be avoided. The Wildlife Agencies shall be notified immediately of nest locations. All survey results shall be submitted to the City of Morgan Hill Development Services Department prior to the start of construction. If current or recent tricolored blackbird nesting colonies are not identified, further action is not required.

If construction takes place during the breeding season when an active colony is present, a qualified biologist shall monitor

7 construction to ensure that the 250-foot buffer zone is enforced. If monitoring indicates that construction outside of the buffer is affecting a breeding colony, the buffer shall be increased if space allows (e.g., move staging areas farther away). If space does not allow, construction shall cease until the colony abandons the site or until the end of the breeding season, whichever occurs first. The biological monitor shall also conduct training of construction personnel on the
avoidance procedures, buffer zones, and protocols in the event that tricolored blackbirds fly into an active construction zone (i.e., outside the buffer zone).

8. Page 68, Section IX, Hydrology and Water Quality, Question a, of the IS/MND has been corrected to render the IS/MND drainage system description consistent with the technical reports prepared for the project. These adjustments in terminology do not affect the adequacy of the impact analysis.

Currently, the project site contains a manmade ditch that conveys stormwater run-on flows from neighboring properties through the central portion of the site to through three 24-inch corrugated metal pipe (CMP) culverts that traverse the central portion of the site,. which proceed The three CMPs extend under Monterey Road and release accept discharged runoff to from a 48-inch culvert. From the 48-inch culvert, flows are then discharged, which is connected to an off-site detention basin to the east of Monterey Road and the UPRR tracks. In addition, run-on is also conveyed from the on-site ditch to an existing 18-inch culvert, which flows northwest along the project frontage before discharging into an existing storm drain along Monterey Road (see Figure 9). Finally, an existing storm drain line is located along the site’s western boundary.

As part of the proposed project, the existing on-site drainage infrastructure would be reconfigured by backfilling the manmade ditch and extending the three 24-inch culverts and 18-inch culvert towards the west from the project site’s eastern boundary to the site’s western property line, which would avoid disrupting the existing conveyance of flows from neighboring properties that currently drain flows through the project site to the off-site detention basin (see Figure 10). Additionally, on-site stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces overlain as part of the project would not enter the proposed culvert extension. Instead, runoff from on-site impervious surfaces would be collected by a series of new drain inlets along the internal parking areas, drive aisles, and paved walkways. From the inlets, flows would be transported by way of new internal storm drain lines to the proposed bioretention/detention pond, which would be sited in a Private Storm Drainage Easement in the southern portion of the project site (see Figure 11).

8 As detailed in the Preliminary Stormwater Control Plan, the bioretention/detention pond would be used for the required retention volume storage and peak-flow management. The bioretention/detention pond would be located at the lowest point on-site to conform to the existing terrain and watersheds with a bottom elevation of 347.85 feet. The proposed bioretention/detention pond would retain stormwater from a 100- year storm until an elevation of 348.85 feet to meet the required retention volumes. Once water surface elevation rises above 348.85 feet, the bioretention pond would release below pre-development levels through a 10-inch standpipe into the City’s existing storm drain system along Old Monterey Road to the existing headwall and outlet pipe along the western boundary of the project site. Pursuant to the Preliminary Stormwater Control Plan, the bioretention/detention pond would provide 11,961 cubic feet of retention volume, which would exceed the required minimum volume of 11,907 cubic feet.

9. Please see the response to comment #8. The proposed detention pond has been sized to detain the 100-year storm event.

10. The IS/MND text referenced in the comment is from the Morgan Hill General Plan EIR (page 4.9-18).

11. In response to the comment, Page 73 of the IS/MND, Questions ‘b,e’ is hereby revised to provide additional information, as follows:

Additionally, as the exclusive groundwater management agency for Santa Clara County, the SCVWD serves as the local Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA), in accordance with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). The SGMA requires local agencies to form GSAs, which develop and implement Groundwater Sustainability Plans to avoid undesirable results and mitigate overdraft within 20 years. The SCVWD-adopted 2016 Groundwater Management Plan (GWMP) for the Santa Clara and Llagas Subbasins describes SCVWD’s groundwater sustainability goals, and the strategies, programs, and activities that support such goals. In 2019, the Department of Water Resources (DWR) approved the GWMP for both the Santa Clara and Llagas Subbasins, determining it satisfies the objectives of SGMA. In 2021, SCVWD submitted to DWR the first required periodic update of the GWMP that describes updated groundwater management outcome measures, programs, and activities. According to DWR, the Santa Clara Subbasin is a mediumhighpriority subbasin.

12. Please see the clarifying revisions made in #11 above. In addition, footnote 29 of the IS/MND is hereby revised as follows:
29 Santa Clara Valley Water District. 20162021 Groundwater Management Plan, Santa Clara and Llagas Subbasins [pg. 1-1]. November 20162021.

9 13. Comment noted.

In addition, the City of Morgan Hill has identified a change to Mitigation Measure IX-1 of the IS/MND, as follows:

IX-1. Prior to commencement of construction activities associated with the project site, the project applicant shall implement the recommendations included in the Additional Arsenic Assessment prepared by Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. for the proposed project, including the excavation and disposal of the on-site soils specified in the Assessment (i.e., associated with HA-1, HA-2, HA-3), and the collection of confirmation soil samples to be analyzed by a state-certified hazardous waste testing laboratory for arsenic, to confirm removal of the arsenic to the proposed cleanup level of 11.0 mg/kg. Verification of proper excavation, disposal, and confirmation testing shall be submitted to the Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health (SCCDEH) and Morgan Hill Development Services Department.

The change recognizes that the City of Morgan Hill has the discretion to determine whether the results of the testing require additional review by subject matter experts.

City of Morgan Hill Page 1
The Gates Project November 2022

PLANNING DIVISION
17575 Peak Avenue Morgan Hill CA 95037 (408) 778-6480 Fax (408) 779-7236 Website Address: www.morgan-hill.ca.gov

MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
I. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:

Date: November 30, 2022
Application #s: GPA2021-0005/ZA2021-0006/SD2021-0006/EA2021-0016 APNs: 764-10-013 and -015
Project Title: The Gates Project
Project Location: 18545-18565 Monterey Road
Morgan Hill, CA 95037
Project Proponent: City Ventures, LLC
444 Spear Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94105
Project Description: The Gates Project (proposed project) would include construction of seven residential buildings with a total of 44 townhomes, as well as one mixed-use building with five townhomes, four 665- square-foot commercial spaces, and one 1,350 square foot commercial space. The proposed project would include a children’s play area, bocce ball courts, a seating plaza, and barbeque areas, as well as a detention basin in the southern portion of the site. Each townhome would include a two-car garage, with 25 uncovered parking spaces provided throughout the site. Primary site access would be provided by Monterey Road through a new driveway to the site, as well as through the internal roadways that would connect to the commercial center to the north. The project would also include widening and improvements of the Monterey Road frontage. In addition, the existing man-made, storm-drain easement that bisects the property would be reconfigured as three 24-inch culverts and would be extended past Monterey Road to continue to convey offsite flows through the project site towards the west.

The project would require the approval of the following discretionary entitlements: General Plan Amendment from Commercial to Mixed Use Flex; Rezone from PD and CG to Mixed Use Flex (MU-F); Tentative Parcel Map; and Design Permit.

II. DETERMINATION
In accordance with the City of Morgan Hill procedures for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has completed an Initial Study to determine whether the proposed project may

3.10