Pacifica City Council
June 27, 2022

11.f
Packet Pg. 711 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Biological Site Analysis
570 Crespi Drive Project, Pacifica, California
15 Monk & associates
to note that pursuant to 33 CFR Section 330.4(e), there may be special regional conditions or modifications to NWPs that could have relevance to individual proposed projects. Finally, pursuant to 33 CFR Section 330.6(a), Nationwide permittees may, and in some cases must, request from the Corps confirmation that an activity complies with the terms and conditions of the NWP intended for use (i.e., must receive “verification” from the Corps).

Prior to finalizing design plans, the applicant needs to be aware that the Corps maintains a policy of “no net loss” of wetlands (waters of the United States) from project area development.

Therefore, it is incumbent upon applicants that propose to impact Corps regulated areas to submit a mitigation plan that demonstrates that impacted regulated areas would be recreated (i.e., impacts would be mitigated). Typically, the Corps requires mitigation to be “in-kind” (i.e., if a stream channel would be filled, mitigation would include replacing it with a new stream channel), and at a minimum of a 1:1 replacement ratio (i.e., one acre or fraction there of recreated for each acre or fraction thereof lost). Often a 2:1 replacement ratio is required. Usually the 2:1 ratio is met by recreation or enhancement of an equivalent amount of wetland as is impacted, in addition to a requirement to preserve an equivalent amount of wetland as is impacted by the project. In some cases, the Corps allows “out-of-kind” mitigation if the compensation site has greater value than the impacted site. For example, if project designs call for filling an intermittent drainage, mitigation should include recreating the same approximate jurisdictional area (same drainage widths) at an offsite location or on a set-aside portion of the project area. Finally, there are many Corps approved wetland mitigation banks where wetland mitigation credits can be purchased by applicants to meet mitigation compensation requirements.

Mitigation banks have defined service areas and the Corps may only allow their use when a project would have minimal impacts to wetlands.

10.1.2 APPLICABILITY TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Mr. Monk is a qualified wetlands biologist that has been conducting wetland delineations with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for more than 25 years. Mr. Monk conducted a preliminary wetland delineation according to the Corps’ 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual1in conjunction with the Regional Supplement for the Arid West Region2. Vegetation, hydrology, and soils information from selected data points were recorded. The locations of these data points are indicated on the preliminary wetland delineation map (Exhibit A- Attached). Data points and potential wetland areas were mapped using a Trimble Pro-XR Global Positioning System (GPS) having sub-meter accuracy. GPS data were corrected using base station files from California Survey and Drafting. The delineation map was made from the GPS files using ArcMap 9.0. All spatial data were projected into the California State Plane, NAD 83 coordinate system, Zone 3.

Using GPS technology, the boundaries (within 30 inches) of each delineated wetland was transferred to an aerial photograph of the project site.

Exhibit A indicates that the southern one-half or more of the project site would likely be regarded by the Corps as subject to their jurisdiction pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water

1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station.

Technical Report, Y-87-1. Vicksburg, Mississippi. 100 pp 2 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2008. Regional supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2). Ed. J.S. Wakeley, R.W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-06-16. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (December 2008).

11.f
Packet Pg. 712 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Biological Site Analysis
570 Crespi Drive Project, Pacifica, California
16 Monk & associates
Act. A significant area near the residence was formerly dominated by arroyo willows (was recently cleared), which are a hydrophytic plant species. As willows are deep-rooted they are not necessarily indicative of “wetland conditions.” Hydrology must be within the top 12 inches of the soil profile and soils must also exhibit redoximorphic conditions. The wetland/upland boundary was defined not by the presence of willows. Rather it was defined by soils exhibiting redoximorphic conditions (shown in Exhibit A as “wetland”) vs. those soils that exhibited no or very little redoximorphic conditions (not mapped in Exhibit A as “wetland”). The redoximorphic conditions in this case also helped define hydrology within the top 12 inches of the soil profile.

As the applicant has cleared trees from a likely wetland area, the applicant did not “fill” this wetland area. As the Corps (Clean Water Act) only regulates fill in waters of the U.S., thus far no activities have transpired by the applicant that include vegetation clearing, that likely would require a permit from the Corps. That said any proposed fill of the mapped wetland area would require a permit from the Corps.

Please note that only the Corps can determine the extent of its jurisdiction, but wetland consultants typically render draft delineation maps that are then confirmed by the Corps. No action with the Corps is required if the applicant will avoid all likely Corps’ jurisdictional areas.

To avoid up to two or more years of regulatory hurdles (Corps permitting that includes Section 7 consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service), and expensive wetland and/or species mitigation, M&A highly recommends that any project that is implemented on the project site avoid likely waters of the U.S. (and state). This will best ensure that no permits are required from the Corps for Clean Water Act impacts to waters of the United States.

11. STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD (SWRCB) / CALIFORNIA

REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD (RWQCB)

11.1.1 SECTION 401 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT
The SWRCB and RWQCB regulate activities in "waters of the State" (which includes wetlands) through Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. While the Corps administers a permitting program that authorizes impacts to waters of the United States, including wetlands and other waters, any Corps permit authorized for a proposed project would be inoperative unless it is a NWP that has been certified for use in California by the SWRCB, or if the RWQCB has issued a project specific certification or waiver of water quality. Certification of NWPs requires a finding by the SWRCB that the activities permitted by the NWP will not violate water quality standards individually or cumulatively over the term of the permit (the term is typically for five years). Certification must be consistent with the requirements of the federal Clean Water Act, the California Environmental Quality Act, the California Endangered Species Act, and the SWRCB’s mandate to protect beneficial uses of waters of the State. Any denied (i.e., not certified) NWPs, and all Individual Corps permits, would require a project specific RWQCB certification of water quality.

Additionally, if a proposed project would impact waters of the State, including wetlands, the project applicant must demonstrate that the project is unable to avoid these adverse impacts, or water quality certification will most likely be denied. Section 401 Certification may also be denied based on significant adverse impacts to waters of the United States/State, including wetlands.

11.f
Packet Pg. 713 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Biological Site Analysis
570 Crespi Drive Project, Pacifica, California
17 Monk & associates

11.1.2 APPLICABILITY TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Since the RWQCB does not have a formal method for technically defining what constitutes waters of the state, they typically fall back on the Corps’ methods for delineation of Clean Water Act regulated waters of the State. Any impacts to waters of the State would have to be mitigated to the satisfaction of the RWQCB prior to the time this resource agency would issue a permit for impacts to such features. The RWQCB requirements for issuance of a “401 Permit” typically parallels the Corps requirements for permitting impacts to Corps regulated areas pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Please refer to the Corps Applicability Section above for likely mitigation requirements for impacts to RWQCB regulated wetlands. Also, please refer to the applicability section of the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act below for other applicable actions that may be imposed on the project by the RWQCB prior to the time any certification of water quality is authorized for the project. Please note that any isolated wetlands or other waters that are determined to be on the project site that are not regulated by the Corps pursuant to the SWANCC decision, would still be regulated by the RWQCB pursuant to the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (see below).

To avoid up extensive and expensive wetland, M&A highly recommends that any project that is implemented on the project site avoid likely waters of the state. This will ensure that a Clean Water Act Section 401 permit is not required from the RWQCB.

11.1.3 PORTER-COLOGNE WATER QUALITY CONTROL ACT
The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, Water Code § 13260, requires that “any person discharging waste, or proposing to discharge waste, that could affect the waters of the State to file a report of discharge” with the RWQCB through an application for waste discharge (Water Code Section 13260(a)(1). The term “waters of the State” is defined as any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the State (Water Code § 13050(e)). It should be noted that pursuant to the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, the RWQCB also regulates “isolated wetlands,” or those wetlands considered to be outside of the Corps’ jurisdiction pursuant to the SWANCC decision (see Corps Section above).

The RWQCB generally considers filling in waters of the State to constitute “pollution.” Pollution is defined as an alteration of the quality of the waters of the state by waste that unreasonably affects its beneficial uses (Water Code §13050(1)). The RWQCB litmus test for determining if a project should be regulated pursuant to the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act is if the action could result in any “threat” to water quality.

The RWQCB requires complete pre- and post-development Best Management Practices Plan (BMPs) of any portion of the project site that is developed. This means that a water quality treatment plan for the pre- and post-developed project site must be prepared and implemented.

Preconstruction requirements must be consistent with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). That is, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) must be developed prior to the time that a site is graded (see NPDES section below). In addition, a post construction BMPs plan, or a Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) must be developed and incorporated into any site development plan.

11.f
Packet Pg. 714 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Biological Site Analysis
570 Crespi Drive Project, Pacifica, California
18 Monk & associates

11.1.4 APPLICABILITY TO PROPOSED PROJECT
Since any “threat” to water quality could conceivably be regulated pursuant to the PorterCologne Water Quality Control Act, care will be required when constructing the proposed project to be sure that adequate pre and post construction Best Management Practices Plan (BMPs) are incorporated into the project implementation plans. Please note that any isolated wetlands defined by the Corps on the project site, that are not regulated by the Corps pursuant to the SWANCC decision, would still be regulated by the RWQCB pursuant to the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act.

It should also be noted that prior to issuance of any permit from the RWQCB this agency will require submittal of a Notice of Determination from the City of Pacifica indicating that the proposed project has completed a review conducted pursuant to CEQA.

12. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE PROTECTIONS Pursuant to Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code, California Department of Fish and Wildlife (the Department) regulates activities that divert, obstruct, or alter stream flow, or substantially modify the bed, channel, or bank of a stream which the Department typically considers to include its riparian vegetation.

There are no streams or tributaries occurring on the project site that would be regulated by the Department. Hence, a SBAA with the Department pursuant to 1602 of the Fish and Game Code would not be necessary for any development of the project site.

11.f
Packet Pg. 715 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Biological Site Analysis
570 Crespi Drive Project, Pacifica, California
19 Monk & associates

13. LITERATURE CITED
Bulger, J.B., N.J. Scott, Jr., R.B. Seymour. 2003. Terrestrial activity and conservation of adult California red-legged frogs Rana aurora draytonii in coastal forests and grasslands.

Biological Conservation. Vol. 110. Issue 1. March 2003. pps. 85-95.

Fellers, Gary M. and Patrick M. Kleeman (2007). California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) movement and habitat use: implications for conservation. Western Ecological Research Center, USGS, Point Reyes National Seashore, Point Reyes, California 94956 USA.

Journal of Herpetology. Vol. 31, No. 2, Pages 276-286, 2007. Copyright 2007 Society for the Study of Amphibian and Reptiles.

Hobson, K.,P. Perrine, E.B. Roberts, M.L. Foster and P. Woodin. 1986. A breeding season survey of salt marsh common yellowthroats (Geothlypis trichas sinuosa) in the San Francisco Bay Region. Report of the San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Shuford, W.D. 1993. The Marin County breeding bird atlas: A distributional and natural history of coastal California birds. California Avifauna S
Tatarian, P. J. 2005. Movement patterns of the California red-legged frogs (Rana aurora draytonii) in an inland California environment (Master’s Thesis, Sonoma State University).

USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2002. Recovery plan for the California red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. Viii + 173 pps.

USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) 2010. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants:

Revised Designation of Critical Habitat for California Red-Legged Frog; Final Rule.

Federal Register 50 CFR Part 17 March 17, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 51) Page 12815- 12864

11.f
Packet Pg. 716 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

11.f
Packet Pg. 717 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

11.f
Packet Pg. 718 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

11.f
Packet Pg. 719 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

11.f
Packet Pg. 720 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Habitat Probability on Project Site
Family
TaxonCommon Name Status* Flowering Period
Table 1
Special-Status Plants Known From Within Two Miles of Project Site

MONK & ASSOCIATES
Area Locations
Asteraceae
Centromadia parryi parryi Fed: -
State: -
CNPS: Rank 1B.2
Coastal prairie; meadows and seeps; marshes and swamps; vernally wet grassland (sometimes alkaline).

Site too canopied with trees, and Baltic juncus seasonal wetland to wet and dense to provide opportunity for this species to occur. Not visible during September 2014 site visit.

Pappose tarplant
May-November Record for this species located 0.3 mile south from the project site (Occurrence No. 1).

Cirsium andrewsii Fed: -
State: -
CNPS: Rank 1B.2
Broadleafed upland forest; coastal bluff scrub; [sometimes serpentinite].

No likely habitat occurs. Regardless, this species would be vegetatively evident throughout the summer months. Not present during M&A's September site visit (both onsite or on adjacent Franciscan thistle
June-July Record for this species located 1.0 mile west from the project site (Occurrence No. 2).

Ericaceae
Arctostaphylos montaraensis Fed: -
State: -
CNPS: Rank 1B
Chaparral (maritime), Coastal scrub.

No suitable habitat on the project site for this species. Montara manzanita January-March Record for this species located 1.0 mile northwest from the project site (Occurrence No. 2).

Plantaginaceae
Collinsia multicolor Fed: -
State: -
CNPS: Rank 1B
Closed-cone coniferous forest; shady scrub forest, coastal scrub.

No closed cone conifer or coastal scrub. No suitable habitat on the project site for this species. San Francisco collinsia March-May Record for this species located 1.0 mile west from the project site (Occurrence No. 13).

Polemoniaceae
Leptosiphon croceus Fed: -
State: -
CNPS: Rank 1B.1
Only known from 5 locations. Open, grassy areas, coastal bluffs, No grassland or coastal bluff. No suitable habitat on the project site for this species. Coast yellow leptosiphon April-May Record for this species located 1.0 mile west from the project site (Occurrence No. 3).

11.f
Packet Pg. 721
Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of Habitat Probability on Project Site
Family
TaxonCommon Name Status* Flowering Period
Table 1
Special-Status Plants Known From Within Two Miles of Project Site

MONK & ASSOCIATES
Area Locations
Leptosiphon rattanii Fed: -
State: -
CNPS: Rank 4
Dry openings in conifer forest. 1700 to 2000 meters.

No suitable habitat on the project site for this species. Rattan's leptosiphon May-July Record for this species located 1.4 mile northfrom the project site (Occurrence No. 3).

Polygonaceae
Chorizanthe cuspidata cuspidata Fed: -
State: -
CNPS: Rank 1B
Coastal bluff scrub; coastal dunes; coastal prairie; coastal scrub [sandy] No suitable habitat on the project site for this species. No sandy soils. San Francisco Bay spineflower April-July Record for this species located 1.9 mile north from the project site (Occurrence No. 2).

Thymelaeaceae
Dirca occidentalis Fed: -
State: -
CNPS: Rank 1B.2
Chaparral; riparian, broadleaf, and coniferous woodlands and forests; [mesic locations].

Would be vegetatively visible of present. No observed on or adjacent to the project site. No suitable habitat on the project site for this species.

Western leatherwood
January-April Record for this species located 2.0 mile southeast from the project site (Occurrence No. 53).

11.f
Packet Pg. 722
Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of Habitat Probability on Project Site
Family
TaxonCommon Name Status* Flowering Period
Table 1
Special-Status Plants Known From Within Two Miles of Project Site

MONK & ASSOCIATES
Area Locations
*StatusFederal:FE - Federal EndangeredFT - Federal ThreatenedFPE - Federal Proposed EndangeredFPT - Federal Proposed ThreatenedFC - Federal Candidate State:CE - California EndangeredCT - California ThreatenedCR - California RareCC - California CandidateCSC - California Species of Special Concern CNPS Continued:Rank 2 - Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more common elsewhereRank 2A - Extirpated in California, common elsewhereRank 2B.1 - Seriously endangered in California, but more common elsewhereRank 2B.2 - Fairly endangered in California, but more common elsewhereRank 2B.3 - Not very endangered in California, but more common elsewhereRank 3 - Plants about which we need more information (Review List)Rank 3.1 - Plants about which we need more information (Review List) Seriously endangered in CaliforniaRank 3.2 - Plants about which we need more information (Review List) Fairly endangered in CaliforniaRank 4 - Plants of limited distribution - a watch list CNPS:Rank 1A - Presumed extinct in CaliforniaRank 1B - Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhereRank 1B.1 - Seriously endangered in California (over 80% occurrences threatened/ high degree and immediacy of threat)Rank 1B.2 - Fairly endangered in California (20-80% occurrences threatened)Rank 1B.3 - Not very endangered in California (<20% of occurrences threatened or no current threats known)

11.f
Packet Pg. 723
Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of *Status Habitat Closest Locations Probability on Project Site Table 2
Special-Status Animals Known From Within Two Miles of Project Site Species
monk & associates
Insects
Danaus plexippus
The closest record of overwintering
sites is from Martini Creek near
Montara State Beach about 3 miles
SSW (data from suppressed records of
the CNDDB).

None. Migration roosts are a highly visible
spectacal that are typically quite well known.

None are known to occur on the project site.
(See text).

Fed: -
State: -
Winters in tall trees along the coast. Prefers
eucalyptus, Monterey pine, and Monterey
cypress.

Monarch butterfly
Other:

Callophrys mossii bayensis
Record for this species located 1.9 mile
south from the project site (Occurrence
No. 14).

None. No suitable habitat on or adjacent to the
project site.

Fed: FE
State: -
Coastal, mountainous areas with grassy
ground cover, mainly in the vicinity of San
Bruno Mountain, San Mateo County.

Colonies are located on steep, north facing
slopes within the fog belt. Larval host plant is
Sedum spathulifolium.

San Bruno elfin butterlfy
Other:

Speyeria zerene myrtleae
Record for this species located 1.0 mile
north from the project site (Occurrence
No. 13).

None. No suitable grassland habitat on the
project site.

Fed: FE
State: -
Inhabits coastal terrace prairie, coastal bluff
scrub, and associated non-native grassland
habitats in w. Marin and SW Sonoma
Counties. Extirpated from San Mateo County.

Viola adunca is the larval food plant.

Myrtle's silverspot butterfly
Other:

Fish
Oncorhynchus mykiss
Record for this species located 0.3 mile
south from the project site (Occurrence
No. 12).

Fed: FT None. No suitable habitat.

State: -
From Russian River south to Soquel Creek,
and to Pajaro River. Also found in San
Francisco & San Pablo Bay Basins. Spawn in
clear, cool, well oxygenated streams greater
than 18 cm deep.

Steelhead - Central California Coast ESU
Other:

Amphibians
Rana draytonii
Record for this species located 0.3 mile
south from the project site (Occurrence
No. 652).

None. The seasonal wetalnd on the project site
dries in the late spring or early summer. It does
not constute breeding habitat. This urban infill
project is isolated from migration potential.

Fed: FT
State: CSC
Occurs in lowlands and foothills in deeper
pools and streams, usually with emergent
wetland vegetation. Requires 11-20 weeks of
permanent water for larval development.

California red-legged frog
Other:

11.f
Packet Pg. 724 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of *Status Habitat Closest Locations Probability on Project Site Table 2
Special-Status Animals Known From Within Two Miles of Project Site Species
monk & associates
Reptiles
Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia
Closest record is 1 mile north of the
project site (CNDDB Occurrence
45)(from Suppressed Records). Record
locations in the Pacifica area are all
from sites that support well developed
aquatic habitats that remain inundated
None. Seasonal wetland on and immediately
adjacent to project site dries late in Spring or
early summer, and is isolated from extant
suitable habitats by surrounding development.

See text.

Fed: FE
State: CE
Found in freshwater marshes, ponds, and slowmoving streams on the San Francisco peninsula. Prefers dense cover and water
depths of at least one foot.

San Francisco garter snake
Other:

Birds
Falco columbarius
Record for this species located 1.2 mile
northeast from the project site
(Occurrence No. 12).

None. Does not nest in California. Migrating
birds would not be affected by proposed project.

Fed:

State: WL
Seacoast, tidal estuaries, open woodlands,
savannahs, edges of grasslands and deserts,
farms and ranches. Clumps of trees or
windbreaks are required for roosting in open
country.

Merlin
Other:

Geothlypis trichas sinuosa
Record for this species located 1.8 mile
north from the project site (Occurrence
No. 5).

Unlikely. Willow grove on back of project site
and on adjacent City property could provide
migration habitat. Only a small, limitted area of
suitable habitat in an urban setting. It is not
expected to support nesting birds (see text).

Fed: -
State: CSC
Resident of freshwater and salt water marshes
in the San Francisco Bay region. Requires
thick, continuous cover for foraging and tall
grasses, tules, or willows for nesting.

Saltmarsh common yellowthroat
Other:

Mammals
Lasiurus cinereus
Record for this species located 2.0
miles north from the project site
(Occurrence No. 120).

No longer is a special status bat species. Not
expected to be impacted.

Fed:

State:

This bat prefers roost sites with dense foliage
consisting of medium to large trees. Preferred
sites are hidden from above, with few
branches below, and have ground cover of
low reflectivity.

Hoary bat
Other:

Nyctinomops macrotis
Record for this species located 1.0 mile
northwest from the project site
(Occurrence No. 20).

None. No rocky habitat for roosting which is
the primary roosting habitat. A single family
home is tightly sealed and unlikely to support
bat species.

Fed: -
State: CSC
Roost mainly in crevices and rocks in cliff
situations, although there is some
documentation of roosts in buildings, caves,
and tree cavities.

Big free-tailed bat
Other:

11.f
Packet Pg. 725 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of *Status Habitat Closest Locations Probability on Project Site Table 2
Special-Status Animals Known From Within Two Miles of Project Site Species
monk & associates
*Status
Federal:

FE - Federal Endangered
FT - Federal Threatened
FPE - Federal Proposed Endangered
FPT - Federal Proposed Threatened
FC - Federal Candidate
FPD - Federally Proposed for delisting
State:

CE - California Endangered
CT - California Threatened
CR - California Rare
CC - California Candidate
CSC - California Species of Special Concern
FP - Fully Protected
WL - Watch List. Not protected pursuant to CEQA

11.f
Packet Pg. 726 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of

11.f
Packet Pg. 727 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Technical Memorandum
DATE: August 17, 2020
TO: Brendan Murphy, Eamon Murphy
BayWorks Construction, Inc.

P.O. Box 301
San Mateo, CA 94401
FROM: Chris Rogers
SUBJECT: Biological Constraints Analysis - Updated
540 and 570 CrespiDrive, Pacifica CA
A 2014 Biological Constraints Analysis1 report was prepared in 2014 for the single parcel at 570 Crespi Avenue. The current development proposal for this parcel (referred to herein as the Murphy parcel) now also includes the adjacent parcel at 540 Crespi Avenue (APN 540 and 570 Crespi Drive, in Pacifica, CA (APN 022-162-420 and 022-162-310) which is owned by the City of Pacifica. The parcels are owned by the City of Pacifica and by Brendan and Eamon Murphy, respectively, and are referred to here as the City parcel and the Murphy parcel (see Figures 1 and 2). The two parcels are under consideration for being merged and developed by the Murphys.

A peer review of the original biology report2 recommended several information items to enable the City to make planning decisions with regard to biological resources. Because the 2014 report is technically sound (according to the peer review), this memorandum focuses on the items that require update or revision. This memorandum amends the 2014 report in response to the following peer review recommendations:
• Include both parcels that are the subject of the current development proposal. • Include California Rare Plant Rank 3 plants, which should be analyzed during environmental review under CEQA.
• Expand the analysis to include plants, wildlife and natural communities documented in the California Natural Diversity Data Base within five miles of the project site, and preparing an update to Table 1 of the Biological Constraints Report. • Provide analysis of the potential for California red-legged frog to occupy the site, and avoidance and minimization measures, if warranted.
• Provide discussion on protections for migratory birds subject to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code, with recommended avoidance and minimization measures.

In addition to these recommendations to address biological resources, the peer review also recommended an update of the aquatic resources delineation (i.e. wetland delineation) subject to state 1 Monk & Associates. 2014. Biological Constraints Analysis, 570 Crespi Drive, City of Pacifica, San Mateo County, California (APNS: 022-162-310) (~1.7 Acres). Prepared for SC Properties, San Mateo CA. October 8. 2 Madrone Ecological Consulting. 2020. Peer review for the proposed 570 Crespi Drive, City of Pacifica, San Mateo County, California. Letter to Rod Stinson. Raney Planning and Management, Inc. April 4.

WOOD BIOLOGICAL CONSULTING
PO Box 1569
El Granada, CA 94018
(415) 254-4835
[email protected]
www.wood-biological.com

11.f
Packet Pg. 728 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Wood Biological Consulting
Biological Constraints Analysis - Updated 2
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
and federal jurisdiction. A separate report prepared by Wood Biological Consulting3 summarizes the findings of the recently completed delineation of aquatic resources for both the City and Murphy parcels.

Because the site is not located within the Coastal Zone, no Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas (ESHA) subject to regulation under the City’s Local Coastal Plan were documented.

METHODS
Prior to conducting field data collection, Wood Biological Consulting (WBC) reviewed relevant background information, including:
• California Natural Diversity Database records of special-status plant, animal species and natural communities documented as occurring within five miles of the study area4 • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (IPac) database for federally listed species and migratory birds5 • California Native Plant Society Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants6 • a sequence of aerial photo imagery on Google Earth
• Montara Mountain U.S. Geological Survey 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle map, • a topographic survey map of the study area
• CEQA documentation of the City’s recently completed Wet Weather Equalization Basin7 , which
is adjacent to and dues west of the City parcel.

In addition, WBC conferred with Mr. Patrick Kobernus of Coast Ridge Ecology, who acted as the City’s biological compliance monitor during construction of the EQ basin in 2017-2018, during which he made direct observations of biological resources in the study area.

A reconnaissance-level survey for biological resources on both parcels was conducted by WBC senior ecologist Chris Rogers on July 19, 2020. This consisted of walking as much of the parcels as were physically accessible (dense and impenetrable willow scrub is limiting over a large portion of the study area), and making observations of habitats plant and wildlife species on and adjacent to the study area. 3 Wood Biological Consulting. 2020. Aquatic Resources Delineation, 540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica CA.

Technical Report prepared for BayWorks Construction, Inc. 4 California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). 2020. Version 5.89.14c. Query for the Montara Mountain and South San Francisco USGS 7.5’ Quadrangles. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Biogeographic Data Branch. Sacramento, California. Information dated August 1. 5 United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2020. IPaC Trust Resource Report for 540 and 570 Crespi Drive.

Information for Planning and Conservation. Report generated July 18 at https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/ 6 California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2020. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (online edition, v8-03

0.39). Query for the Montara Mountain and San Francisco South USGS 7.5’ Quadrangles. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, CA. Accessed July 18 at www.rareplants.cnps.org/ 7 Terraphase Engineering, Inc. 2016. Wet Weather Equalization Basin Project, Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study. Prepared for City of Pacifica. https://www.cityofpacifica.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=11510

11.f
Packet Pg. 729 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Wood Biological Consulting
Biological Constraints Analysis - Updated 3
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
Botanical taxonomy and nomenclature conforms to The Jepson Manual8, except for recent revisions posted on the Jepson Online Interchange. Vegetation communities described herein conform to A Manual of California Vegetation9
.

Results of Database queries are included as attachments.

SETTING
The study area is located within the Santa Cruz Mountains subsection of the Central California Coast Section as described in the Ecological Subregions of California10 (USDA 1997). Vegetation in the study area is not representative of historic conditions, which likely consisted of coastal scrub, coastal dunes and coastal prairie. Currently, the northern portion of the study area supports several large Monterey cypress trees with an understory (groundcover) of predominantly non-native herbaceous vegetation.

The southern portion of the study area is slightly lower in elevation gradually becomes dominated by perennial wetland vegetation, such as willows, cattails and sedges.

The study area is situated within a residential and commercial neighborhood of Linda Mar, within the City of Pacifica. The study area ranges from approximately 15 ft elevation (relative to a City benchmark in Crespi Drive) at the northeastern end of the Murphy parcel, to about 9 ft at the southwestern end.

The climate is cool and temperate, characteristic of the San Francisco peninsula coastal region. The average annual high temperature in Pacifica is 64°F; the annual average low temperature is 49°F). About

29.5 inches of precipitation falls annually, with the majority of rainfall between October and April11.

VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE HABITATS
Vegetation within the study area consists of arroyo willow scrub, and emergent marsh, non-native annual grassland, and disturbed and ornamental habitats (figure 3). The following are descriptions of the vegetation types occurring within the wetland delineation study area.

Arroyo Willow Scrub
Willow scrub, dominated by arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis), covers the majority of the southern portion of the study area on both parcels (Figure 3). It also occurs in smaller stands along the western and eastern parcel boundaries. The willows form a dense and impenetrable thicket with few associated plant species. The willow scrub is almost entirely within the delineated wetland boundary; the exception is at the northern extent, where soils and hydrology near the edge of the willows failed to meet jurisdictional criteria.
8 Baldwin, B.G, D.H. Goldman, D.J. Keil, R. Patterson, T.J. Rosatti, and D.H. Wilken, editors. 2012. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California. Second edition. Univ. Calif. Press, Berkeley. 1568 pp. Jepson eFlora available online at http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/IJM.html 9 Sawyer, J.O., T. Keeler-Wolf, and J.M. Evens. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation (2nd edition). California Native Plant Society, Sacramento. 1300 pp. Available online at http://vegetation.cnps.org/ 10 U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1997. Ecological Subregions of California: sections and subsections descriptions. USDA, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region. https://web.archive.org/web/20080304224853/http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/projects/ecoregions/` 11 https://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/pacifica/california/united-states/usca0822

11.f
Packet Pg. 730 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Wood Biological Consulting
Biological Constraints Analysis - Updated 4
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
EmergentMarsh
Emergent marsh occupies a shallow topographic depression in the middle part of the study area (Figure 3), corresponding with the small area that used to have shallow ponded water in the winter. Seasonally high groundwater presumably persists, resulting in a predominance of emergent marsh plant species, such as Baltic rush (Juncus balticus), broadleaf cattail (Typha angustifolia), Pacific silverweed (Potentilla anserina ssp. pacifica), and dotted smartweed (Persicaria punctata), among others. All of the emergent marsh is within the delineated wetland boundary.

Non-native Annual Grassland
Non-native grassland vegetation is present on the majority of the northern part of the study area, including the former residence site (Figure 3). Dominant plant species are annual grasses, such as bromes (Bromus diandrus, B. hordeaceus), slender oats (Avena barbata), hare barley (Hordeum murinum ssp. leporinum), and Italian ryegrass (Festuca perennis), with various non-native broad-leaf herbaceous species. A small portion of the non-native annual grassland is situated within the delineated wetland boundary, where it appears to be expanding down the topographic gradient in response to drier soil conditions following groundwater pumping during construction of the City’s Wet Weather Equalization Basin.

Disturbed and Ornamental
Disturbed habitat includes land cleared of vegetation or lands that have undergone frequent or extensive alteration to the extent that the site is dominated by non-native plant species. This type of habitat also includes areas subject to periodic vegetation management, such as mowing or brush clearing, which preclude the re-establishment of native vegetation communities. Within the study area, a parking area adjacent to Crespi Drive that is used by beach visitors, and a gravel staging area used during construction of the Wet Weather Equalization Basin are disturbed habitat (Figure 3).

Ornamental vegetation consists of maintained and unmaintained landscaping using native and nonnative plants. Within the study area, large Monterey cypress trees are remnants of landscaping associated with the former residence on the Murphy parcel. None of this area is within the delineated wetland boundary.

SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES
The laws comprising California’s legal framework and authority for plant species conservation include the federal Endangered Species Act (FESA), California Endangered Species Act (CESA), the Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA), and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Special-status plants include those listed as endangered, threatened, or rare or as candidates for listing by the USFWS and CDFW12, as 12 CDFW. 2020a. State and Federally Listed Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Plants of California. Biogeographic Data Branch, Natural Diversity Database. Quarterly publication. January 2. 13 pp. Available online at https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=109390&inline

11.f
Packet Pg. 731 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Wood Biological Consulting
Biological Constraints Analysis - Updated 5
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
well as those with California Rare Plant Rank of 1 through 313. Additional definitions are given in Section 15380 of the CEQA Guidelines.

Special-status animal species include those listed as endangered, threatened, or rare or as candidates for listing by the USFWS and/or CDFW14. Other species having special status include the “special animals” listed in the CNDDB15 and avian species protected under the Bald Eagle Protection Act16 and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)17. The California Fish and Game Code provides protection for “fully protected birds18”, “fully protected mammals19”, “fully protected reptiles and amphibians20,” and “fully protected fish21.” Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations prohibits the take of amphibians22, reptiles23, and furbearers24 that are listed under CESA, MBTA, or are “fully protected.” Additional definitions are given in Section 15380 of the CEQA Guidelines.

Special-status natural communities are known to have limited distribution in the region, support specialstatus plant or wildlife species, or receive regulatory protection (i.e., waters of the United States, covered under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act [CWA] and/or waters of the State covered under Section 1600, et seq., of the California Fish and Game Code and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act [Water Code Sections 13000–14920]). The California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) has ranked a number of natural communities in terms of their significance and rarity25.

Tables 1 and 2 (plants and wildlife, respectively; see attachments) provide an update of the summary table included in the 2014 Biological Constraints Analysis report. Two species, salt marsh common yellowthroat and California red-legged frog, are evaluated in detail, below.

13 CDFW. 2020b. Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens List. Biogeographic Data Branch, Natural Diversity Database. Quarterly publication. January. 140 pp. Available online at https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=109383&inline 14 CDFW. 2020c. State and Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Animals of California. Biogeographic Data Branch, Natural Diversity Database. July 17. 32 pp. Available online at https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=109405&inline 15 CDFW. 2020d. Special Animals List. Natural Diversity Database. July. 120pp. Available online at https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=109406&inline 16 16 USC 668, et seq. 17 16 USC 703-711, as amended 18 §3511 19 §4700 20 §5050 21 §5515 22 Chapter 5 §41 23 Chapter 5 §42 24 Chapter 5 §460 25 CDFW. 2019. California Sensitive Natural Communities. Biogeographic Data Branch, Natural Diversity Database.

November 8. 63 pp. Available online at https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=153609&inline

11.f
Packet Pg. 732 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Wood Biological Consulting
Biological Constraints Analysis - Updated 6
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
California red-legged frog
The 2014 Biological Constraints Analysis provided a detailed summary of California red-legged frog (CRLF), including its regulatory status (i.e., federal under the Federal Endangered Species Act, and state protection as a species of special concern), its breeding and dispersal habitat requirements, and environmental conditions that facilitate their movement. The analysis also cited the USFWS recovery Plan for California Red-Legged Frog that populations are “most likely to persist where multiple breeding areas are embedded within a matrix of habitats used for dispersal.” “The primary constituent elements for California red-legged frogs are aquatic and upland areas where suitable breeding and non-breeding habitat is interspersed throughout the landscape and is interconnected by unfragmented dispersal habitat”26.

The 2014 Biological Constraints Analysis did not, however provide an analysis of the potential for California red-legged frog to occupy the study area. Based on observations of the emergent wetlands in the study area in July 2020, and conversations with the biologist that monitored the construction of the City’s Wet-Weather Equalization Basin, the study area does provide suitable breeding or dispersal habitat for this species27. The only potentially aquatic feature is a small area within the emergent marsh vegetation that, in the past, ponded seasonally, but not consistently between and within years. In particular, permanent water for the minimum duration of 11-20 weeks required for larval development does not occur. Groundwater level on and around the study area appear to have been drawn down since construction of the Equalization Basin28.

The nearest population of CRLF is just 0.3 miles south of the study area, in San Pedro Creek, but is separated from by dense residential and commercial development, heavily traveled roads (including Highway 1), and frequently-visited Pacifica State Beach. There are no opportunities for CRLF to successfully disperse to the study area from San Pedro Creek. Similarly, populations of CRLF at Calera Creek (1 mile north of the study area; Occ. #504), Laguna Salada (1.9 miles north; Occ. #455), and in Vallemar (1.6 mile northeast; Occ. #918) are separated from the study area high ridges and other topographic barriers precluding line-of-sight migration, residential development and major roads, including Highway 1.

Therefore, the primary constituent elements in the Recovery Plan and cited above are not present.

Therefore, avoidance and minimization measures for CRLF are not warranted.

Saltmarsh common yellowthroat
Regulatory Status: FESA: none; CESA: none; CDFW: none (full species); USFWS: Bird of Conservation Concern; Global/State rarity ranking: G5T3/S3.

Description: Saltmarsh common yellowthroat (Geothlypis trichas sinuosa, hereafter SCY) is a California Species of Special Concern29, a Bird Species of Conservation concern30, and is protected under the 26 USFWS. 2002. Recovery Plan for the California Red-legged Frog (Rana aurora draytonii). Region 1, Portland, Oregon. Viii+173 pp. May 28. 27 Patrick Kobernus, pers. comm. with C. Rogers. July 20, 2020. 28 Wood Biological Consulting. Ibid. 29 CDFW. 2020d. Ibid. 30 USFWS. 2020. Ibid.

11.f
Packet Pg. 733 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Wood Biological Consulting
Biological Constraints Analysis - Updated 7
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code31. Species assigned a ranking of S3 are considered vulnerable, at risk of extirpation in California due to fairly restricted range, relatively very few populations or occurrences, recent or widespread declines, threats, or other factors (CDFW, 2015c). Impacts to nesting saltmarsh common yellowthroat would be a significant adverse impact pursuant to the statutes and guidelines of CEQA; impacts should be addressed in environmental review documents. Impact avoidance measures are warranted, as outlined in the Recommendations section, below.

SCY is a small bird with an olive-brown back and rich yellow throat. This migratory bird ranges from Canada to southern Mexico and winters from the southern United States to the West Indies and Panama. A year-round resident of the San Francisco Bay Area, the SCY inhabits dense vegetation in wetlands, marshes, estuaries, prairies and riparian areas of San Francisco and San Pablo bays, and along the coastal areas of Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo counties32.

SCY requires thick, continuous cover down to the water surface for foraging and tall grasses, tule patches or willows for nesting, and forage on insects and spiders on the ground or within dense vegetation33. Nests are built near the base of dense vegetation, sometimes over water34. Breeding occurs from mid-March to late July, and pair typically double-brood22, 24.

Critical Habitat: The SCY is not listed under FESA; therefore, Critical Habitat has not been designated for the species.

Habitat Suitability and Probability of Occurrence: The 2014 Biological Constraints Analysis referenced the nearest known record (CNNDB Occ. #5) which is 1.8 miles north of the study area, and acknowledged the potential for the willows on the site to provide migratory habitat, but stated that it the study area provided nesting habitat due to its small area and urban setting. Field observations during the July 2020 survey agree with this, but also note the absence of proximity to water that is usually associated with SCY nests, which further supports the conclusion that the study area is not high quality nesting habitat for this species. SCY was observed in the study area during monitoring of the City’s wet-weather equalization basin in 2017-201835, although its nesting status was not determined.

Potential Project-Related Effects: Due to the marginal value of nesting habitat, the species may use the willow thicket within the study area for occasional foraging by periodic transitory individuals. Although the removal or pruning of willows on site is not proposed, disturbance from construction activities could result in direct and indirect impacts on breeding SCY and other migratory birds. Disturbance during the nesting season could result in the potential nest abandonment and mortality of young, which would be a 31 § 3503 32 Shuford, W.D. and T.G. Gardali. Eds. 2008. California Bird Species of Special Concern. A Ranked Assessment of Species, Subspecies, and Distinct Populations of Birds of Immediate Conservation Concern in California. Studies of Western Birds No. 1. Western Field Ornithologists, Camarillo, California and California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento. 65 pp. Available on line at https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=83841 33 Guzy and Ritchison, 1999 34 Baicich and Harrison, 2005 35 Patrick Kobernus, pers. comm. with C. Rogers. July 20, 2020.

11.f
Packet Pg. 734 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Wood Biological Consulting
Biological Constraints Analysis - Updated 8
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
significant adverse effect pursuant to CEQA. Impact avoidance measures are warranted and are outlined in the Recommendations Section, below.

Migratory Birds and Raptors
In addition to special-status birds identified within five miles of the study area in the CNDDB, the USFWS IPaC database also identified 19 species of birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty act and Bald Eagle Protection Act, and are considered Bird Species of Conservation Concern. The IPaC database queery results are included in the Attachments. Of the 19 species listed, two raptors (bald eagle and golden eagle) are not expected to occur in the study area based on lack of suitable habitat. Eight species are not expected to occur in the study area because they are marine birds or shorebirds (black oystercatcher, black turnstone, Clark’s grebe, long-billed curlew, marbled godwit, short-billed dowitcher, whimbrel, and willet). Suitable nesting habitat for three species (Nuttall’s woodpecker, oak titmouse, and tri-colored blackbird) is not present in the study area. The remaining six species (Allen’s hummingbird, rufous hummingbird, song sparrow, spotted towhee, wrentit, and saltmarsh common yellowthroat) have low probability of nesting in the study area, but cannot be entirely ruled out.

Saltmarsh common yellowthroat is discussed in detail above. Impact avoidance measures are warranted and are outlined in the Recommendations Section, below.

Other Special-Status Species
In addition to the special-status species identified within five miles of the study area in the CNDDB query, several additional special-status species were identified in the USFWS and CNPS database searches. These database searches do not include site-specific observations, but instead document species that may occur nearby based on location or that have been observed within the same USGS quadrangle maps. Federal-listed species identified on the USFWS IPaC database for which no habitat is present in the study area includes: two mammals that are limited to marine or tidal saltmarsh habitats (southern sea otter and salt marsh harvest mouse); five bird species of marine, beach or tidal wetland habitats (Ridgway’s [=California] clapper rail, California least tern, marbled murrelet, short-tailed albatross, and western snowy plover; one reptile (green sea turtle); two fish (delta smelt, tidewater goby), and one plant (San Mateo woolly sunflower). The study area also is not within any critical habitat designated for federal listed species. The results of the USFWS IPaC query are provided in the attachments.

A query of the CNPS Inventory generated a list of 66 plant species that have been documented as occurring on the Montara Mountain and San Francisco South USGS quadrangle maps. All 30 plant species identified by CNDDB as occurring within five miles of the study area are included in the CNPS Inventory results as well. The remaining 36 plant species are not considered to have potential to occur in the study area due to lack of suitable habitat (such as chaparral, coastal dunes and scrubs, undisturbed or native grasslands, forest and woodlands, chaparral), absence of specialized soils (such as soils derived from serpentinite), distance from well-documented range of occurrence, or because they are perennial plants that would have been detected at the time of the survey. The results of the CNPS Inventory query are provided in the attachments.

11.f
Packet Pg. 735 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Wood Biological Consulting
Biological Constraints Analysis - Updated 9
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA

RECCOMENDATIONS
As described above, marginally suitable habitat is present on site for one special-status animal species, saltmarsh common yellowthroat. In addition, raptors and other migratory bird species protected under state and federal law, if nesting on or near the study area during construction, could be adversely affected by the project. These effects could be reduced to a less-than-significant level with incorporation of the following project design features included as part of the proposed project.

1. Special-Status and Migratory Birds
Although removal or pruning of willow trees and shrubs or other vegetation associated with the arroyo willow scrub and emergent marsh vegetation is not proposed, project construction of the project would temporarily increase noise and human activity levels nearby; these activities could result in indirect impacts on birds by disrupting breeding or causing abandonment of occupied nests. If present at the time of construction, such indirect impacts on special-status and migratory birds, including saltmarsh common yellowthroat, would be considered significant pursuant to CEQA.

The 2014 Biological Constraints Analysis recommended, and we concur, that a pre-construction survey be conducted prior to site grading or other construction work if this work occurs between February 1 and August 31 (the CDFW-designated nesting season for birds) to ensure that if saltmarsh common yellowthroat or any other migratory birds nest are nesting near the project site, they will not be affected by the proposed project. If an active nest is discovered, a protective buffer should be designated by a qualified biologist that is of sufficient size to keep the nesting birds, their eggs/young from being harmed by disturbance associated with implementation of a construction project.

To ensure compliance with protections for migratory birds under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the California Fish and Game Code, the measures outlined below should be implemented prior to the commencement of construction activities. With the incorporation of the measures outlined below, potential impacts would be reduced to a less-than-significant level pursuant to CEQA.

1. If construction activities are scheduled to occur outside of the breeding season (i.e., September 1 through January 31), no pre-construction surveys or other mitigation measures are necessary.

2. If construction activities are scheduled to occur during the breeding season (i.e., February 1 through August 31), a preconstruction nesting bird survey should be conducted of the wharf structures, the identified work area and a buffer zone (see #3, below). The survey should be performed by a qualified biologist no more than two weeks prior to the initiation of work. If no nesting or breeding activity is observed, work may proceed without restrictions. To the extent allowed by access, all active nests identified within 76 m (250 ft) for raptors and 33 m (100 ft) for passerines should be mapped.

3. For any active nests found near the construction limits (76 m [250 ft] for raptors and 33 m [100 ft] for passerines), the project biologist should make a determination as to whether or not construction activities are likely to disrupt reproductive behavior. If it is determined that construction is unlikely to disrupt breeding behavior, construction may proceed. If it is determined that construction may disrupt breeding, the no-construction buffer zone should be expanded; avoidance is the only mitigation available. The ultimate size of the no-construction buffer zone may be adjusted by the project biologist based on the species involved, topography, lines of site between the work area and the nest, physical barriers, and the ambient level of

11.f
Packet Pg. 736 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Wood Biological Consulting
Biological Constraints Analysis - Updated 10
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
human activity. For raptors, the project biologist will contact CDFW and/or the USFWS Division of Migratory Bird Management for guidance regarding site evaluations and buffer adjustments.

If it is determined that construction activities are likely to disrupt raptor breeding, construction activities within the no-construction buffer zone may not proceed until the project biologist determines that the nest is long longer occupied.

4. If maintenance of a no-construction buffer zone is not practicable, active nests should be monitored by a qualified biologist to document breeding and rearing behavior of the adult birds.

If it is determined that construction activities might cause nest abandonment, work should cease until the project biologist determines that the nest is long longer occupied. For raptors, the CDFW and/or the USFWS Division of Migratory Bird Management should be contacted for guidance.

2. Temporary Sediment and Debris Barrier and Wildlife Exclusion Fence Prior to the start of construction, a temporary sediment and debris barrier will be installed on the southern limit of the construction area that slopes toward the arroyo willow and emergent wetland habitat (see Figure 3). The fence also will double as a wildlife exclusion fence during construction. The fence will consist of standard construction silt fence material with a height of 36 inches. The lower six inches of fence material will either be folded toward the construction side of the fence and weighted down with soil or sandbags, or backfilled in a trench; with both methods, the purpose is to completely contact the surface so that water and sediment will not flow under it, and wildlife will not enter the work area from the wetland.

11.f
Packet Pg. 737 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Wood Biological Consulting
Biological Constraints Analysis - Updated 11
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA

ATTACHMENTS
Figure 1. Study Area Location
Figure 2. Study Area Boundary
Figure 3. Habitat Map
Figure 4. Special-Status Plants within Five Miles of the Study Area Figure 5. Special-Status Animals within Five Miles of the Study Area Figure 6. Sensitive Natural Communities within Five Miles of the Study Area Table 1. Special-Status Plant Species within Five Miles of the Study Area Table 2. Special-Status Animal Species within Five Miles of the Study Area Database Search Results:
− California Natural Diversity Data Base – Plants
− California Natural Diversity Data Base – Animals
− California Natural Diversity Data Base – Sensitive Natural Communities − U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service – Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) − California Native Plant Society Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California

11.f
Packet Pg. 738 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Wood Biological Consulting
Biological Constraints Analysis - Updated 12
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
Figure 1. Study Area Location

11.f
Packet Pg. 739 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Wood Biological Consulting
Biological Constraints Analysis - Updated 13
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
Figure 2. Study Area Boundary
N
City parcel
Murphy parcel

11.f
Packet Pg. 740 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Wood Biological Consulting
Biological Constraints Analysis - Updated 14
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
Figure 3. Habitat Map

11.f
Packet Pg. 741 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Wood Biological Consulting
Biological Constraints Analysis - Updated 15
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
Figure 4. Special-Status Plants within Five Miles of the Study Area

11.f
Packet Pg. 742 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Wood Biological Consulting
Biological Constraints Analysis - Updated 16
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
Figure 5. Special-Status Animals within Five Miles of the Study Area

11.f
Packet Pg. 743 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Wood Biological Consulting
Biological Constraints Analysis - Updated 17
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
Figure 6. Sensitive Natural Communities within Five Miles of the Study Area

11.f
Packet Pg. 744 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Wood Biological Consulting
Biological Constraints Analysis - Updated 18
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA

11.f
Packet Pg. 745 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Wood Biological Consulting
Biological Constraints Analysis - Updated 19
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA

11.f
Packet Pg. 746 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Wood Biological Consulting
Biological Constraints Analysis - Updated 20
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA

11.f
Packet Pg. 747 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Wood Biological Consulting
Biological Constraints Analysis - Updated 21
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA

11.f
Packet Pg. 748 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Wood Biological Consulting
Biological Constraints Analysis - Updated 22
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA

11.f
Packet Pg. 749 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) DATE: August 20, 2020
TO:   Brendan Murphy, Eamon Murphy
BayWorks Construction, Inc.

P.O. Box 301
San Mateo, CA 94401
FROM:   Chris Rogers
SUBJECT:   AquaticResourcesDelineation
570CrespiAvenue, Pacifica CA
This memorandum summarizes the results of an assessment of potentially jurisdictional aquatic resources, including wetlands and other waters of the United States and of the state of California, on two parcels located at 540 and 570 Crespi Drive, in Pacifica, CA (APN 022‐162‐420 and 022‐162‐310).

The parcels are owned by the City of Pacifica and by Brendan and Eamon Murphy, respectively, and are referred to here as the City parcel and the Murphy parcel (see Figures 1 and 2). The two parcels are under consideration for being merged and developed by the Murphys.

This report is intended to identify the boundary between jurisdictional and non‐jurisdictional features that could have a bearing on the layout of proposed development for the properties. This delineation also identifies differences between the extent of jurisdictional features as they exist currently exist, and as they were identified in a 2014 Biological Constraints Analysis1 . A peer review of that report
recommended an update of the aquatic resource delineation, and to include the City parcel in the delineation.

METHODS
Prior to conducting field data collection, Wood Biological Consulting (WBC) reviewed relevant background information, including the 2014 biological report, the 2020 peer view, a sequence of aerial photo imagery on Google Earth, National Wetlands Inventory2 , Soil Conservation Service3, Montara
Mountain U.S. Geological Survey 7.5‐minute topographic quadrangle map, a topographic survey map of the parcels, and environmental review documents related to the City’s recently completed Wet Weather Equalization Basin4
, which is adjacent to and dues west of the City parcel.

1 Monk & Associates. 2014. Biological Constraints Analysis, 570 Crespi Drive, City of Pacifica, San Mateo County, California (APNS: 022‐162‐310) (~1.7 Acres). Prepared for SC Properties, San Mateo CA. October 8.   2 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2020. National Wetlands Inventory, Wetlands Mapper. https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html 3   United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2014. Custom Soil Resource Report for, San Mateo County, Eastern Part, and San Francisco County, California: 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica. Natural Resource Conservation Service; Web Soil Survey. Report printed July 28. http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/ (see Attachments) 4 Terraphase Engineering, Inc. 2016. Wet Weather Equalization Basin Project, Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study. Prepared for City of Pacifica. https://www.cityofpacifica.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=11510

WOOD BIOLOGICAL CONSULTING
PO Box 1569
El Granada, CA  94018
(415) 254‐4835
chris@wood‐biological.com
www.wood‐biological.com

11.f
Packet Pg. 750 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

WOOD BIOLOGICAL CONSULTING
Aquatic Resource Delineation 2
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
Aquatic resources on both parcels were assessed in the field by WBC senior ecologist Chris Rogers on July 19, 2020. The field data collection consisted of observations of wetland and upland vegetation in relation to topography. The delineation used the “Routine Determination Method” as described in the 1987 USACE of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual5
, in conjunction with the Regional Supplement to
the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys and Coasts Region (Version 2.0)
6 , hereafter called the “WVMC Supplement.” Wetlands and waters were classified using commonly accepted habitat types. Wetland plant indicator status was determined using the 2018 WVMC Regional Wetland Plant list7
.

Vegetation, soil and hydrology were documented at eight locations on three transects across the wetland-upland boundary. Based on these data, a preliminary jurisdictional wetland boundary (subject to verification by the USACE) was mapped on an aerial photograph. This preliminary delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources includes wetlands that meet the federal three-parameter definition and other waters of the United States. Three positive wetland parameters must normally be present for an area to be considered a wetland: 1) a dominance of wetland vegetation, 2) presence of hydric soils, and 3) presence of wetland hydrology.

Botanical taxonomy and nomenclature conforms to The Jepson Manual8 (Baldwin et al. 2012), except for recent revisions posted on the Jepson Online Interchange. Vegetation communities described herein conform to A Manual of California Vegetation9
.

REGULATORY DEFINITIONS
Wetlands and other waters (e.g., rivers, streams, and natural ponds) are a subset of waters of the U.S. and receive protection under Section 404 of the CWA. The USACE has primary federal responsibility for administering regulations that concern waters of the U.S. and requires a permit if a project proposes placement of structures within navigable waters and/or alteration of waters of the U.S. The USEPA has the ultimate authority under the CWA and can veto the USACE’s issuance of a permit to fill jurisdictional waters of the U.S.

Waters of the State are inclusive of waters of the U.S. under Section 401 of the federal CWA, but also are also regulated more broadly by the Regional Water Quality Control Boards under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Under this law, the RWQCB protects water quality and the beneficial uses of both surface and ground water. Waters regulated under Porter-Cologne include isolated waters that are

5 Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S.

Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss. January. 100 pp. Available online at http://www.spk.usace.army.mil/organizations/cespk-co/regulatory/pdf/delineation_manual.pdf 6 United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, Coast Region (Version 2.0); Final Report. ERDC/EL TR-08-28.

U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS. Available online at https://usace.contentdm.oclc.org/utils/getfile/collection/p266001coll1/id/7646 7 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2018. National Wetland Plant List, version 3.4. http://wetlandplants.usace.army.mil/ 8 Baldwin, B.G, D.H. Goldman, D.J. Keil, R. Patterson, T.J. Rosatti, and D.H. Wilken, editors. 2012. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California. Second edition. Univ. Calif. Press, Berkeley. 1568 pp. Jepson eFlora available online at http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/IJM.html 9 Sawyer, J.O., T. Keeler-Wolf, and J.M. Evens. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation (2nd edition). California Native Plant Society, Sacramento. 1300 pp. Available online at http://vegetation.cnps.org/

11.f
Packet Pg. 751 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

WOOD BIOLOGICAL CONSULTING
Aquatic Resource Delineation 3
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
not regulated by the USACE. Discharges of fill (e.g., waste) to waters of the State must file a Report of Waste Discharge and receive either waste discharge requirements (WDRs) or a waiver to WDRs before beginning the discharge.

Many of the terms used throughout this report have specific meanings with respect to the delineation of Waters of the U.S. These terms are defined below:

Hydric Soil: A soil that is saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part. Hydric soils are often characterized by redoximorphic features (such as redox concentrations, formerly known as mottles), which form by the reduction, translocation, and/or oxidation of iron and manganese oxides. Hydric soils may lack hydric indicators for a number of reasons. In such cases the same standard used to determine wetland hydrology when indicators are lacking can be used (USDA NRCS 2010).

Hydrophytic Vegetation: Hydrophytic vegetation is defined as plant life that occurs in areas where the frequency and duration of inundation or soil saturation produce permanently or periodically saturated soils of sufficient duration to exert a controlling influence on the plant species present. Emphasis is placed on the assemblage of plant species that exert a controlling influence on the character of the plant community, rather than on a single indicator species (i.e., there must be a prevalence of hydrophytic vegetation present in order to satisfy this wetland parameter).

Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM): OHWM is defined in 33 CFR § 328.3[e] as ‘…that line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics, such as a clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of the soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter or debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding area’.

Other Waters: The term “other waters of the United States” includes water bodies, such as rivers and streams that may not meet the full criteria for wetlands designation but that do exhibit evidence of an OHWM and are navigable or hydrologically connected to a navigable water body. Under the latest regulatory guidance, all such waters must have a significant nexus to a navigable water body to be considered jurisdictional by the USACE.

Special Aquatic Sites: Special aquatic sites are geographic areas, large or small, possessing special ecological characteristics of productivity, habitat, wildlife protection, or other important and easily disrupted ecological values. These areas are generally recognized as significantly influencing or positively contributing to the general overall environmental health or vitality of the entire ecosystem of a region.

Special aquatic sites include sanctuaries, refuges, wetlands, vernal pools, coral reefs and mudflats among others.

Study Area: For the purposes of this report, the study area, refers to the entire area surveyed or hereby evaluated, which is inclusive of the City parcel and the Murphy parcel.

Traditionally Navigable Waters (TNW): TNWs are all navigable waters that are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide. TNWs also include all waters that are ‘navigable-infact,’ defined through case law to include those water bodies that are both navigable and have the capacity to be used for the purposes of commerce, whether or not they have ever been used for such a purpose.

11.f
Packet Pg. 752 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

WOOD BIOLOGICAL CONSULTING
Aquatic Resource Delineation 4
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
Waters of the United States: The Code of Federal Regulations (33 CFR § 328.3[a]; 40 CFR § 230.3[s]) defines ‘waters of the United States’ as:
(1) All waters which are currently used, were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide;
(2) All interstate waters including interstate wetlands; (3) All other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mud flats, sand flats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation, or destruction of which could affect interstate or foreign commerce including any such waters which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes; or from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce; or which are used or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce;
(4) All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the United States under the definition;
(5) Tributaries of waters identified in paragraphs (1) through (4); (6) Territorial seas; and
(7) Wetlands adjacent to waters (other than waters that are themselves wetlands) identified in paragraphs (1) through (6).

Wetland Hydrology: This term encompasses all hydrologic characteristics of areas that are periodically inundated or have soils saturated to the surface at some time during the growing season. These include both riverine and non-riverine hydrology indicators, such as sediment deposits, drift lines, and oxidized rhizospheres along living roots in the upper 12 inches of the soil. In the Arid West, hydrologic indicators may be absent in any given year due to annual variability in precipitation and in times of drought. The Arid West Supplement (USACE 2008) cites a technical standard that can be used for disturbed or problematic sites that support wetland vegetation and soils but where wetland hydrology is not apparent. This standard calls for 14 or more consecutive days of flooding, ponding, or saturation.

Wetland Indicator Status: Refers to the probability that a plant will occur in a wetland or not. Indicator status categories are as follows:
• Obligate (OBL): almost always occurs in wetlands
• Facultative wetland (FACW): usually occurs in wetlands, sometimes may occur in uplands • Facultative (FAC): equally likely to occur in wetlands or uplands • Facultative upland (FACU): usually occurs in uplands but may occasionally occur in wetlands • Obligate upland (UPL): almost never occurs in wetlands • No indicator (NI): no indicator assigned due to lack of information Wetlands: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) define wetlands as, “Those areas that are saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for the life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps,

11.f
Packet Pg. 753 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

WOOD BIOLOGICAL CONSULTING
Aquatic Resource Delineation 5
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
marshes, bogs, and similar areas.” USACE wetlands must typically exhibit three parameters: 1) wetland hydrology, 2) hydrophytic vegetation, and 3) hydric soils in order to meet the federal definition.

SETTING
The wetland delineation study area is located within the Santa Cruz Mountains subsection of the Central California Coast Section as described in the Ecological Subregions of California10 (USDA 1997).

Vegetation in the study area is not representative of historic conditions, which likely consisted of coastal scrub, coastal dunes and coastal prairie. Currently, the northern portion of the study area supports several large Monterey cypress trees with an understory (groundcover) of predominantly non-native herbaceous vegetation. The southern portion of the study area is slightly lower in elevation gradually becomes dominated by perennial wetland vegetation, such as willows, cattails and sedges.

The study area is situated within a residential and commercial neighborhood of Linda Mar, within the City of Pacifica. The study area ranges from approximately 15 ft elevation (relative to a City benchmark in Crespi Drive) at the northeastern end of the Murphy parcel, to about 9 ft at the southwestern end.

The climate is cool and temperate, characteristic of the San Francisco peninsula coastal region. The average annual high temperature in Pacifica is 64°F; the annual average low temperature is 49°F). About

29.5 inches of precipitation falls annually, with the majority of rainfall between October and April11.

VEGETATION
Vegetation within the study area consists of arroyo willow scrub, and emergent marsh, non-native annual grassland, and disturbed and ornamental habitats. The following are descriptions of the vegetation types occurring within the wetland delineation study area.

Arroyo Willow Scrub
Willow scrub, dominated by arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis), covers the majority of the southern portion of the study area on both parcels (Figure 3). It also occurs in smaller stands along the western and eastern parcel boundaries. The willows form a dense and impenetrable thicket with few associated plant species. The willow scrub is almost entirely within the delineated wetland boundary; the exception is at the northern extent, where soils and hydrology near the edge of the willows failed to meet jurisdictional criteria.

Emergent Marsh
Emergent marsh occupies a shallow topographic depression in the middle part of the study area (Figure 3), corresponding with the small area that used to have shallow ponded water in the winter. Seasonally high groundwater presumably persists, resulting in a predominance of emergent marsh plant species, such as Baltic rush (Juncus balticus), broadleaf cattail (Typha angustifolia), Pacific silverweed (Potentilla anserina ssp. pacifica), and dotted smartweed (Persicaria punctata), among others. All of the emergent marsh is within the delineated wetland boundary.

10 U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1997. Ecological Subregions of California: sections and subsections descriptions. USDA, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region. https://web.archive.org/web/20080304224853/http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/projects/ecoregions/` 11 https://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/pacifica/california/united-states/usca0822

11.f
Packet Pg. 754 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

WOOD BIOLOGICAL CONSULTING
Aquatic Resource Delineation 6
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
Non-native Annual Grassland
Non-native grassland vegetation is present on the majority of the northern part of the study area, including the former residence site (Figure 3). Dominant plant species are annual grasses, such as bromes (Bromus diandrus, B. hordeaceus), slender oats (Avena barbata), hare barley (Hordeum murinum ssp. leporinum), and Italian ryegrass (Festuca perennis), with various non-native broad-leaf herbaceous species. A small portion of the non-native annual grassland is situated within the delineated wetland boundary, where it appears to be expanding down the topographic gradient in response to drier soil conditions following groundwater pumping during construction of the City’s Wet Weather Equalization Basin.

Disturbed and Ornamental
Disturbed habitat includes land cleared of vegetation or lands that have undergone frequent or extensive alteration to the extent that the site is dominated by non-native plant species. This type of habitat also includes areas subject to periodic vegetation management, such as mowing or brush clearing, which preclude the re-establishment of native vegetation communities. Within the study area, a parking area adjacent to Crespi Drive that is used by beach visitors, and a gravel staging area used during construction of the Wet Weather Equalization Basin are disturbed habitat (Figure 3).

Ornamental vegetation consists of maintained and unmaintained landscaping using native and nonnative plants. Within the study area, large Monterey cypress trees are remnants of landscaping associated with the former residence on the Murphy parcel. None of this area is within the delineated wetland boundary.

SOILS
Soils in the study area are mapped as Urban land or Urban land-Orthents, cut and fill complex, 0 to 5 percent slopes12. While this is an accurate description of the adjacent parcels that already have been developed, a more accurate description of the soil on the undeveloped study area is the CandlestickBarnabe complex, which is mapped in the comparable undeveloped parcel west of the skate park, and may have been the native soil type prior to widespread development of the Linda Mar neighborhood.

The Barnabe soil series describes shallow well-drained soils formed from sandstone and shale13, while the Candlestick soil series is moderately steep, well-drained soils14 (i.e., on the surrounding hillsides).

Neither soil series is considered hydric (though this does not preclude hydric soils from forming where these series area mapped).

Soil samples in the study area were typically sandy to sandy loam, with some clay, to depths of greater than 18 inches. Several samples exhibited redoximorphic features in the form of concentrations of oxidized iron minerals indicating the soils have been (but are not necessarily currently) subject to

12 USDA. 2014. Ibid. (soil report, see Attachment). 13 USDA. 2003. Barnabe Series. Official Soil Series Descriptions and Series Classification. https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/OSD_Docs/B/BARNABE.html 14 USDA. 2003. Candlestick Series. Official Soil Series Descriptions and Series Classification. https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/OSD_Docs/C/CANDLESTICK.html

11.f
Packet Pg. 755 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

WOOD BIOLOGICAL CONSULTING
Aquatic Resource Delineation 7
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
saturation by a seasonally high water table. These samples met the “Sandy Redox (S5) hydric soil indicator15.

HYDROLOGY
No wetlands or other surface waters are shown in the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) as occurring on the City or Murphy parcels. Although these maps are often imprecise due to the mapping scale and nation-wide scope, this may be an indication of changes in land use and drainage, and stormwater management. The study area is not located on a stream or near other surface waters. The two parcels are nearly enclosed by surrounding development, from which it has received stormwater runoff (i.e., from the roof of the Crespi Center to the east (580 Crespi Drive), and possibly from the Community Center and parking lot to the west.

Historic aerial photographs from as early as 1946 (predating development of the Pedro Valley and Linda Mar, show that the parcels are not in the path of drainage from either the Linda Mar neighborhood in general, or the remnant stream segments that are located in the hills to the north east, across Crespi Drive. Similar hydrological conditions appear in 1956 (see Figure 4); although residential development was well underway, parcels adjacent to and near the study area are still relatively vacant, and the study area itself is occupied by one or more residences and outbuildings. By 1980, however, following construction of the original parking lot where the City’s Wet Weather Equalization Basin and skate park are now located, there is some evidence of willows or other wetland vegetation beginning to develop at the lowest part of the southwestern end of the parcels (the southwestern end), possibly in response to restriction of runoff imposed by the parking lot (Figure 5).

During 2017 and 2018, construction of the City’s Wet Weather Equalization Basin required groundwater pumping. It is likely that the local water table, including the adjacent City and Murphy parcels, was drawn down to some degree. Soils in the region have a high proportion of sand, which is not effective at retaining water when groundwater is being removed nearby.

Although groundwater extraction is not ongoing as part of operation of the basin, there is a drainage system that removes surface runoff and, presumably, shallow groundwater. This system could continue to remove shallow groundwater from the upper soil horizon within the study area. Observers have remarked that the shallow pond in the study area did not retain water during the winter of 2019-2010.

During this wetland delineation, no samples locations exhibited surface or shallow groundwater, although there was evidence in several samples (redoximorphic features in the form of iron mineral concentrations and reduced matrices) that the soils had developed under conditions that likely included seasonally high groundwater to within 12 inches of the soil surface. However, other evidence (lack of observed water table, abundance of worm burrows, and elevation above the presumed high water line of the former pond), suggest that the redoximorphic evidence is relictual, i.e., indicative of past hydrologic conditions, not current conditions.

This is consistent with a comparison of the extent of the 2014 delineated wetland boundary and the current one, which has shifted slightly toward the southwest, following the topographic contour.

15 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service (USDA NRCS). 2010. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, Version 7.0. L.M Vasilas, G.W. Hurt and C.V. Noble, eds. In cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils. Available online at https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb1046970.pdf

11.f
Packet Pg. 756 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

WOOD BIOLOGICAL CONSULTING
Aquatic Resource Delineation 8
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA

JURISDICTIONAL FEATURES
Table 1 summarizes the areas of federal jurisdictional waters of the U.S. and non-jurisdictional features in the study area. All jurisdictional features are wetlands; there are no open water aquatic features (i.e., other waters of the U.S.). All areas are preliminary and subject to verification by the USACE. Areas of waters of the state within the study area are assumed to equal waters of the U.S.

The jurisdictional boundary is inferred from the location of three sample points where all three jurisdictional criteria were met (sample points 1A, 2A and 3B; see Figure 3). All three points are located at or below the 10-foot contour, as shown on a topographic survey of the Murphy parcel16. Two vegetation types are bisected by the wetland boundary. Therefore, there are jurisdictional and nonjurisdictional components of arroyo willow scrub and non-native annual grassland. This is consistent with the interpretation that site hydrology has changed toward drier conditions since groundwater pumping during construction of the City’s Wet Weather Equalization Basin.

Non-jurisdictional areas were confirmed by six sample pints: 1B, 1C, 2B, 2C, 3C and 3D. A combination of vegetation, soils or hydrology failed to meet the jurisdictional criteria at these locations.

Table 1. Potential Jurisdictional and Non-Jurisdictional Features in the Study Area

AQUATIC RESOURCE TYPE JURISDICTIONAL NON-JURISDICTIONAL TOTAL Arroyo willow scrub 0.630 ac (27,443 sf) 0.008 ac (369 sf) 0.638 ac (27,812 sf) Emergent marsh 0.237 ac (10,312 sf) 0.000 ac (0.0 sf) 0.237 ac (10,312 sf) Non-native annual grassland 0.066 ac (2,876 sf) 0.379 ac (16,540 sf) 0.446 ac (19,416 sf) Disturbed and ornamental 0.000 ac (0.0 sf) 0.523 ac (22,787 sf) 0.523 ac (22,787 sf) Total 0.933 ac (40,631 sf) 0.910 ac (39,696 sf) 1.843 ac (80,327 sf)

JURISDICTIONAL ANALYSIS
On June 22, 2020, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the Army’s (Corps of Engineers) Navigable Waters Protection Rule became effective, and re-codified of the definition of waters of the U.S. The NWPR establishes the scope of federal regulatory authority under the Clean Water Act. Included in the definition are adjacent wetlands17, which includes wetlands that are physically separated from other jurisdictional waters, such as territorial seas that are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide (i.e., the Pacific Ocean), only by an artificial dike, barrier, or similar artificial structure so long as that structure allows for a direct hydrologic surface connection in a typical year, such as through a culvert, flood or tide gate, pump, or similar artificial feature. An adjacent wetland is jurisdictional in its entirety when a road (such as Highway 1) or similar artificial structure divides the wetland, as long as the structure allows for a direct hydrologic surface connection through or over that structure in a typical year.

At the southwestern end of the study area, surface water (i.e., in excess of what percolates on site) can enter a shallow drainage swale that flows west-northwest toward Highway 1, parallel with the backyard

16 B & H Surveying, Inc. 2014. Boundary and Topographic Survey, Lands of Murphy. APN 022-162-310. 17 Code of Federal Regulations, Title-33, Chapter II, Part 328.3(c)(1).

11.f
Packet Pg. 757 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

WOOD BIOLOGICAL CONSULTING
Aquatic Resource Delineation 9
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
fences of houses on Anza Drive. This swale follows the route of a buried 24-inch storm drain culvert. At least two drain inlets to the culvert are located at ground surface level within the undeveloped parcel between the skate park and Highway 1. The culvert crosses Highway 1 under the north entrance to the parking lot for Pacifica State Beach, where it connects to the Anza Pump Station, which discharges directly to the Pacific Ocean. This series of connections, however artificial, meets the federal definition of adjacent wetlands, therefore, the wetlands in the study area are jurisdictional waters of the U.S. under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Waters of the state are inclusive of waters of the U.S. as interpreted by the Regional Water Quality Control Board according to the recently published guidance18.

18 California State Water Resources Control Board. 2019. State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State. Adopted April 2.

11.f
Packet Pg. 758 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) WOOD

BIOLOGICAL CONSULTING
Aquatic Resource Delineation 10
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA

ATTACHMENTS
Figure 1 – Study Area Location
Figure 2 – Study Area Boundary
Figure 3 – Jurisdictional Map
Figure 3 – Aerial photograph, 1956
Figure 4 – Aerial photograph, 1980
Wetland Delineation Data Forms
Representative Photographs
Soils Report
National Wetland Inventory Map

11.f
Packet Pg. 759 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

WOOD BIOLOGICAL CONSULTING
Aquatic Resource Delineation 11
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
Figure 1. Study Area Location

11.f
Packet Pg. 760 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

WOOD BIOLOGICAL CONSULTING
Aquatic Resource Delineation 12
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
Figure 2. Study Area Boundary
N
City parcel
Murphy parcel

11.f
Packet Pg. 761 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

WOOD BIOLOGICAL CONSULTING
Aquatic Resource Delineation 13
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
Figure 3. Jurisdictional Map
Arroyo willow scrub
Disturbed / Ornamental
Non-native annual grassland
Emergent marsh
Upland sample point
Wetland sample point
Wetland boundary
N

11.f
Packet Pg. 762 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

WOOD BIOLOGICAL CONSULTING
Aquatic Resource Delineation 14
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
Figure 4. Aerial photograph, 1956. No evidence of wetland vegetation within the study area, most of which is in active use. No surrounding development has occurred yet.

Study Area

11.f
Packet Pg. 763 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

WOOD BIOLOGICAL CONSULTING
Aquatic Resource Delineation 15
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
Figure 5. Aerial photograph, 1980. Dark vegetation within study area suggests wetlands forming following construction of parking lot, which may have limited lateral movement of shallow groundwater.

Study Area
Parking lot
Community Center
Linda Mar

11.f
Packet Pg. 764 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) WOOD

BIOLOGICAL CONSULTING
Aquatic Resource Delineation
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
Wetland Delineation Data Forms

11.f
Packet Pg. 765 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

11.f
Packet Pg. 766 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

11.f
Packet Pg. 767 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

11.f
Packet Pg. 768 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

11.f
Packet Pg. 769 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

11.f
Packet Pg. 770 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

11.f
Packet Pg. 771 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

11.f
Packet Pg. 772 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

11.f
Packet Pg. 773 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

11.f
Packet Pg. 774 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

11.f
Packet Pg. 775 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

11.f
Packet Pg. 776 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

11.f
Packet Pg. 777 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

11.f
Packet Pg. 778 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

11.f
Packet Pg. 779 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

11.f
Packet Pg. 780 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

11.f
Packet Pg. 781 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

11.f
Packet Pg. 782 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

11.f
Packet Pg. 783 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) WOOD

BIOLOGICAL CONSULTING
Aquatic Resource Delineation
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
Representative Photographs  Sample point 1A in wetland.  Sample point 1B in upland.

11.f
Packet Pg. 784 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) WOOD

BIOLOGICAL CONSULTING
Aquatic Resource Delineation
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA  Sample point 2A in wetland.  Sample point 2B in upland.

11.f
Packet Pg. 785 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) WOOD

BIOLOGICAL CONSULTING
Aquatic Resource Delineation
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA  Sample point 3C in upland.  Sample point 3D in upland.

11.f
Packet Pg. 786 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) WOOD

BIOLOGICAL CONSULTING
Aquatic Resource Delineation
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
Soils Report

11.f
Packet Pg. 787 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) United States
Department of
Agriculture
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
San Mateo County, Eastern
Part, and San Francisco
County, California
Natural
Resources
Conservation
Service
July 28, 2020

11.f
Packet Pg. 788 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.

They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.

Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment.

Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.

The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.

Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951).

Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations.

The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey.

Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 2 11.f
Packet Pg. 789 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
3 11.f
Packet Pg. 790 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Contents
Preface....................................................................................................................2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 Soil Map.................................................................................................................. 8 Soil Map................................................................................................................9 Legend................................................................................................................10 Map Unit Legend................................................................................................12 Map Unit Descriptions........................................................................................ 12 San Mateo County, Eastern Part, and San Francisco County, California.......14 109—Candlestick-Barnabe complex, 30 to 50 percent slopes....................14 131—Urban land.........................................................................................16 132—Urban land-Orthents, cut and fill complex, 0 to 5 percent slopes......16 References............................................................................................................19 4 11.f
Packet Pg. 791 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) How Soil Surveys Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity.

Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA.

The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape.

Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.

Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).

Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 5 11.f
Packet Pg. 792 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research.

The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.

Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.

The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded.

These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape.

Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties.

While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management.

Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil.

Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.

After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and Custom Soil Resource Report
6 11.f
Packet Pg. 793 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.

Custom Soil Resource Report
7 11.f
Packet Pg. 794 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 8 11.f
Packet Pg. 795 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 9 Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
4161490 4161450 4161410 4161370 4161330 4161290 4161250 4161490 4161450 4161410 4161370 4161330 4161290 4161250 543940 543980 544020 544060 544100 544140 544180 544220 544260 544300 544340 543940 543980 544020 544060 544100 544140 544180 544220 544260 544300 544340 37° 35' 58'' N
122° 30' 8'' W
37° 35' 58'' N
122° 29' 51'' W
37° 35' 49'' N
122° 30' 8'' W
37° 35' 49'' N
122° 29' 51'' W
N
0 50 100
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 10N WGS84 200 300
Feet
0 25 50 100 150
Meters
Map Scale: 1:1,910 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet.

Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.

11.f
Packet Pg. 796
Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Landfill
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
Other
Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Rails
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:24,000.

Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.

Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale.

Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.

Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:

Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required.

This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below.

Soil Survey Area: San Mateo County, Eastern Part, and San Francisco County, California
Survey Area Data: Version 16, May 29, 2020
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger.

Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Apr 29, 2019—Jun 5, 2019
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background Custom Soil Resource Report
10 11.f
Packet Pg. 797
Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.

Custom Soil Resource Report
11 11.f
Packet Pg. 798
Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 109 Candlestick-Barnabe complex,
30 to 50 percent slopes

4.4 56.7%
131 Urban land 3.0 38.2%
132 Urban land-Orthents, cut and fill
complex, 0 to 5 percent
slopes

0.4 5.1%
Totals for Area of Interest 7.8 100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.

A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.

Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.

Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape.

The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or Custom Soil Resource Report
12 11.f
Packet Pg. 799 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.

An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.

Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities.

Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.

Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.

Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.

These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.

A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.

The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.

An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.

An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.

Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.

Custom Soil Resource Report
13 11.f
Packet Pg. 800 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) San Mateo County, Eastern Part, and San Francisco County, California 109—Candlestick-Barnabe complex, 30 to 50 percent slopes Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: h9gq
Elevation: 80 to 1,200 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 20 to 30 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 54 to 57 degrees F
Frost-free period: 300 to 350 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Candlestick and similar soils: 45 percent
Barnabe and similar soils: 25 percent
Minor components: 20 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Candlestick
Setting
Landform: Mountain slopes
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Hard fractured residuum weathered from sandstone Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 2 inches: fine sandy loam
H2 - 2 to 20 inches: loam
H3 - 20 to 24 inches: sandy clay loam
H4 - 24 to 28 inches: unweathered bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope: 30 to 50 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 40 inches to lithic bedrock Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Very high
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm)
Available water storage in profile: Low (about 3.6 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
14 11.f
Packet Pg. 801 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Description of Barnabe
Setting
Landform: Mountain slopes
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Residuum weathered from sandstone
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 7 inches: very gravelly sandy loam
H2 - 7 to 12 inches: very gravelly sandy loam
H3 - 12 to 16 inches: unweathered bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope: 30 to 50 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 8 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm)
Available water storage in profile: Very low (about 0.9 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Orthents, cut&fill
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Unnamed
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Kron
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Buriburi
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Rock outcrop
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
15 11.f
Packet Pg. 802 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 131—Urban land
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: h9hf
Elevation: 10 to 320 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 30 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 54 to 57 degrees F
Frost-free period: 275 to 350 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Urban land: 85 percent
Minor components: 14 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Urban Land
Setting
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8s
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Orthents, reclaimed
Percent of map unit: 7 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Orthents, cut&fill
Percent of map unit: 7 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
132—Urban land-Orthents, cut and fill complex, 0 to 5 percent slopes Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: h9hg
Elevation: 30 to 500 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 30 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 54 to 57 degrees F
Frost-free period: 275 to 350 days
Custom Soil Resource Report
16 11.f
Packet Pg. 803 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Urban land: 50 percent
Orthents and similar soils: 45 percent
Minor components: 4 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Urban Land
Setting
Landform: Alluvial fans, marine terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Parent material: Alluvium
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8s
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Orthents
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 5 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8e
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Botella
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Orthents, reclaimed
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Sirdrak
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Unnamed
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
17 11.f
Packet Pg. 804 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Custom Soil Resource Report
18 11.f
Packet Pg. 805 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition.

American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.

Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31.

Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.

Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.

Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States.

National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.

Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service.

U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section.

United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1.

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.

National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.

National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 19 11.f
Packet Pg. 806 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.

National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf Custom Soil Resource Report
20 11.f
Packet Pg. 807 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) WOOD

BIOLOGICAL CONSULTING
Aquatic Resource Delineation
540 and 570 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA
National Wetland Inventory Map

11.f
Packet Pg. 808 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) National wetlands Inventory
Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Wetlands
Estuarine and Marine Deepwater
Estuarine and Marine Wetland
Freshwater Emergent Wetland
Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland
Freshwater Pond
Lake
Other
Riverine
August 20, 2020
0 0.1 0.2 0.05 mi
0 0.15 0.3 0.075 km
1:5,727
This page was produced by the NWI mapper
National Wetlands Inventory (NWI)
This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site.

11.f
Packet Pg. 809
Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Appendix C
Geotechnical Investigation and
Response to Geotechnical Investigation Peer Review

11.f
Packet Pg. 810 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

FOR PROPOSED

NEW TOWNHOUSE COMPLEX
at the
Crespi Drive Property
570 Crespi Drive
Pacifica, California
Report Prepared for:

Mr. Brendan Murphy Report Prepared by:

GeoForensics, Inc.

January 2016

11.f
Packet Pg. 811 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) GE0FoRENs1cs INC. Consulting Soil Engineering
561-D Pilgrim Drive, Foster City, CA 94404
File: 215247
Phone: (650) 349-3369 Fax: (650) 571-1878
January 5, 2016
Mr. Brendan Murphy
P.O. Box 301
San Mateo. CA 9440 l
Subject:

Dear Mr. Murphy:

Crespi Drive Property
570 Crespi Drive
Pacifica, California

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR

PROPOSED NEW TOWNHOUSE COMPLEX

AND COMMERCIAL BUILDING
In accordance with your authorization, we have performed a subsurface investigation into the geotechnical conditions present at the location of the proposed improvements. This report summarizes the conditions we measured and observed, and presents our opinions and recommendations for the design and construction of the proposed new townhouse complex and commercial building.

Site Description
The subject site is a relatively level, rectangularly-shaped parcel located on the south side of Crespi Drive (at the approximate location shown on Figure l ). For purposes of description in this report, it is assumed that the property faces north. The property is bounded by a commercial building to the east, the Pacifica Community Center to the west, developed single family residential lots to the south, and Crespi Drive to the north.

The site is currently occupied by a one-story, wood-framed residence situated on the northern end of the lot. There is an attached garage at the northwest comer of the house. The wooden house floors are supported above crawlspace areas, while the garage has a concrete slab-on-grade floor. A concrete driveway leads from the street to the garage.

The ground surface in the site vicinity bas an overall gentle slope down towards the west (as shown on Figure 2). At the site, the ground also slopes gently down towards the west. Surface gradients range from level to 20:1 (horizontal:vertical, H:V).

The grounds around the residence are vegetated with a variety of small to medium sized bushes and shrubs, numerous small to large trees, and various other native plants and grasses. There is a concrete walkway across the front of the house.

11.f
Packet Pg. 812 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) file: 21524 7
January 5. 201 6
Proposed Constmction
We understand that the current derelopment for the site proposes the demolition of the existing residence. and the subsequent construction of a ne\\ to\\llhouse complex and a commercial building \\·ith upper le\'el Ii,·ing space. The structures are lo be of con\'entional. ,,·ood-framed construction.

Ne\\' foundation loads are expected to be typical for these types of structures (i.e. light).

Excaration work at the site is expected to be limited to cra\\'lspace and foundation excarntions. o significant fill placement is anticipated as part of this work. o significant retaining walls are anticipated fo r this scope of \\"Ork. No basements are planned for the to,,nhouses or commercial building.

INVESTlGA TION
Scope and Purpose
The purpose of our im·estigation ,,·as to determine the nature of the subsurface soil conditions so that we could proride geotechnical recommendations for the construction of the proposed ne\\ to,,n.house complex and commercial building. In order to achiere this purpose. ,re hare performed the following scope of ,,ork:

I - risited the property to obsen·e the geotechnical setting of the area to be dereloped:
2 - re,·ie\\"ed releYant published geotechnical maps:
3 - drilled three borings near the location of the proposed impro,·ements:
4 - performed laboratory testing on collected soil samples:
5 - assessed the collected information and prepared this report.

The findings of these \\·ork items are discussed in the folio,, ing sections of this report.

Site Observations
We ,·isited the site on December 8. 2015 to observe the geotechnically rele,·ant site conditions.

During our ,·isit. we noted the follo\\·ing conditions:

A - The existing house appears to be supponed by a perimeter concrete footLng \\'ith isolated interior ,,·ooden posts resting on concrete pedestals. The foundation system appeared to be in good condition. \\'ith no major cracks (as obsen·ed from the exterior).

B - We obser"ed hairline to ¼ inch ,ride cracks in the concrete of the \\"alk\\'ays and the drire\\'ay.

C - The exterior house \\·alls were co,·ered ,,·ith wood siding. The wood siding "alls ,rere generally in a state of disrepair.
2 11.f
Packet Pg. 813 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) File: 2152-+7
January 5. 2016
D - We consider the drai1rnge around the house to be poor. The ground surface near the house. and oYer much of the lot. is Clat without sufficient slope away from the house lo adequately carry water a\\'ay from the house. ·Trapped .. planters and Io,, areas also exist near the house fo undations. Additionally. there are no roof do,,11Spouts. as ,, ater is allo,, ed to sheet flo"· onto the ground surface near the house foundations. Water \\'hich is discharged. collected. or trapped by the house foundations ma~· seep into the cra\\'lspace.

E - We \\'Ould characterize the drainage 0\'er the majority lot to be sheet flo"· to the " ·est.

Geologic Map Review
We re,·ie\\'ed the Geolog11 of the Onshore Port of Son Mateo County. Cal(lornia: Derived.from the Digital Database Open-File 98-13 7. by Earl E. Brabb. R. W. Graymer. and D.L. Jones ( I 998). The rele,·ant portion of the Brabb. Gray mer. and Jones map has been reproduced in Figure 3.

The Brabb. Graymer. and Jones map indicate that the site is underlain by Allu,·ial Fan and Flu,·ial Deposits (map symbol ··Qhaf") and Artificial Fill (map symbol --an.

Brabb. Graymer. and Jones describe Alluvial Fan and Flu\'ial Deposits as consisting of --brown or tan. medium dense to dense. gra\'elly sand or sandy grm el that generally grades up\\'ard 10 sandy or silty clay. ear the distal fan edges. the nu, ial deposits are typical!~· bro\\n. medium dense sand that fines up"·ard to sandy or silty clay.··
Artificial Fill has been described as consisting of ··loose to \'ery \\'ell consolidated gra,·el. sand. silt. clay. rock fragments. organic matter. and man-made debris in rarious combinations. Thickness is ,·ariable and may exceed 30 meters in some places. Some is compacted and quite firm. but fil l made befo re 1965 is nearly e\'ery\\'here not compacted and consists simply of dumped materials.·· Our subsurface exploration (see below) encountered silt. clay. sand. and organic materials ,,·hich \Ye judged to be consistent \\'ith the ArtiCicial Fill mapping.

The acti,·e San Gregorio Fault is mapped approximately 2.0 miles (3.2 km) soutlrn·est of the site.

Subsmface Exploration
On December 8. 2015 we drilled three borings at the site at the locations sho\\11 on Figure 4. The borings were drilled using a Mobile B-2-+ truck-mounted drilling rig equipped "ith -4.0 inch diameter. helical Clighl augers. Logs of the soils encowllered during drilling record our obserrntions of the cuttings tra,·eling up the augers and of relati, ely undisturbed samples collected from the base of the ad,·ancing holes. The final boring logs are based upon the field logs \\ith occasional modifications made upon further laboratory examinations of the reco,·ered samples and laboratory test results. The Cina! logs are anached in Appendix A 3 11.f
Packet Pg. 814 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) File: 21524 7
January 5. 20 16
The relati\'ely undisturbed samples \\'ere obtained by driring a 3.0 inch (outer diameter) lodified California Sampler and a Standard Penetration Sampler (as noted on logs) into the base of the adrnncing hole by repeated blo,,·s from a 1-W pound hammer lifted 30 inches. On the logs. the number of blo\\'S required to dri,·e the sampler the final 12 inches of the 18 inch dri, e. ha,·e been recorded as the Bio"· Counts. These blo\\"s hare not been adjusted to reClect equiralent blo\\'s of any other type of sampler or hammer. or to account for the different samplers used.

Subsmface Conditions
Boring I first penetrated 4 feet of loose sand. This \\'as underlain by clay " ·ith sand to a depth of

6.5 feet. Belo\\' this \\'as soft to firm silt with an organic smell to 12.5 feet. At 12.5 feet. the boring encountered stiff silty clay \\'ith varying amounts of organics do\\·n to the terminated boring depth of 17.5 feet.

Borings 2 and 3 both penetrated 6 feet of loose to medium dense silty sand orer soft silt " ·ith organics. This was underlain by stiff to rery stiff silty clay "ith , arying amounts of sand and rock fragments do\\11 to the terminated boring depths of 23.5 and 29.5 feet.

Please refer to Appendix A for a more detailed description of each boring.

Initially. groundwater was encountered at depths of 16 feet (Boring 1). 12.5 feet (Boring 2). and at 11 feet (Boring 3) during the drilling of the holes. In Boring I. the lernl of the" ater rose to a depth of 13 feet after 3 hours. In Boring 2. the lernl of the" ater rose to 12 feet after 1.5 hours. Ho\\'e,·er. during periods of hea,·y rain or late in the "inter. grow1d\\ ater seepage may exist at e, en shallower depths.

Laborato1y Testing
The relati\'ely undisturbed samples collected during the drilling process "ere returned to the laboratory for testing of engineering properties. In the lab. selected soil samples were tested for moisture content. density. plasticity. and consolidation. The results of the laboratory tests are attached to this report in Appendix B.

Organic Content Testing conducted on a sample of the site soils (Sample 2-2 iJ.,, 9 feet) indicated that 86. 7 percent of the ··soil'· at this depth consists of organic matter. Due to the soils hm·ing greater than 50 percent organic matter. the testing lab and our office describe the soil as peat.

Plasticity Index (PJ) testing performed on a sample of the site near surface materials (the sample of the peat at 9 feet) produced a Pl result of 210. This testing sho\\·ed that the peat has a rnry high liquid limit. \\'hich led to the high plasticity index of 210. Typically. a plasticity index of greater than about 30 correlates to a highly expansi,·e soil. Ho\\'e\'er. peat has a tendency to produce unusual test results. Therefore. this number does not necessarily indicate that the peat is highly expanst\'e.

11.f
Packet Pg. 815 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) File: 215247
January 5. 2016
The Consolidation test conducted on a sample of the site soils (the sample of the peat at 9 feet) indicated that the soils haYe a preconsolidation pressure of about 1000 psf \\'hich is approximately the same as the oYerburden pressure currently pressing on top of these soils. Therefore. \\'e consider the upper soils to be normally consolidated.

CONCLUSIO s
Gener~I
Based upon our in\'estigation. \\'e belie\'e that the proposed improrements can be safely constructed.

Geotechnical de\'elopment of the site is controlled by the presence of a layer of highly organic soils (peat) that is highly compressible. Therefore. it will be necessary to utilize a foundation system which deri,·es its support from the deeper. more stable soils beneath the peat or use a stiff foundation system and accept some o,·erall tilt of the structure. We recommend a mat slab supported by deep foundation elements be used to reach the more stable materials as the best alternative (a\'oiding settlements). or. altemati,·ely. a ,,·ame may be utilized under a mat slab if tilting is acceptable.

The recommendations in this report should be incorporated into the design and construction of the proposed new tO\\nhouse complex and commercial building.

Seismicity
The greater San Francisco Bay Area is recogniLed by Geologists and Seismologists as one of the most active seismic regions in the United States. Se,·eral major fault zones pass through the Bay Area in a northwest direction which haYe produced approximately 12 earthquakes per century strong enough to cause structural damage. The faults causing such earthquakes are pan of the San Andreas Fault System. a major rift in the earth's crust that extends for al least 700 miles along western California The San Andreas Fault System includes the San Andreas. San Gregorio, Hay\\'ard. Calaveras Fault Zones. and other faults.

During 1990. the U.S. Geological Sur\'ey cited a 67 percent probability that an earthquake of Richter magnitude 7, similar to the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake, ,,·ould occur on one of the acti,·e faults in the San Francisco Bay Region in the follo\\'ing 30 ~·ears. Recently. this probability was increased to 70 percent. as a result of studies in the ,·icinity of the Hay\\'ard Fault. A 23 percent probability is still attributed specifically to the potential for a magnitude 7 earthquake to occur along the San Andreas Fault by the year 2020.

Ground Rupture - The lack of mapped acti, e fault traces through the site. suggests that the potential for primary rupture due to fault offset on the property is lo\\·. 5 11.f
Packet Pg. 816 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) File: 215247
January 5. 20 16
Ground Shaking - The subject site is likely to be subject to , ery strong to violent ground shaking during its life span due to a major earthquake in one of the abore-listed fault zones. Current (20 13) building code design may be followed by the structural engineer to minimize damages due to seismic shaking. using the fo llowing input parameters from the USGS Jam Ground Motion Parameter Calculator based upon ASCE 7-10 design parameters:

Site Class - D SMs = 2.065 SM1 = 1.33--l I SDs = 1.377 SD 1 = 0.889 Landsliding - We note that the subject site and the surrounding area are generally lerel. Therefo re. the hazard due to seismically-induced landsliding is. in our opinion. ,·ery low for the site.

Liquefaction - Liquefaction most commonl~- occurs during earthquake shaking in loose fine sands and silty sands associated with a high ground water table. These conditions were demonstrated to be absent in the upper 11 feet of site materials. Although Lhere are some loose sand deposits at the site, they are not saturated. and hence are unlikely to be subject to liquefaction. Studies hare fow1d that when these soils are co,·ered by at least 10 feet (3 meters) of non-liquefiable soils. the impacts of the liquefaction tend to be regional mo,·ements. rather than more dramatic localized problems.

Although liquefaction is unlikely to hare a significant efTect on the subject property, the proposed rigid foundation should help to minimize an~· morements eren further. Therefore. it is our opinion that the potential for any serere damages or collapse due to liquefaction at the site are ,·ery low.

Grnund Subsidence - Ground subsidence may occur \\hen poor!~- consolidated soils densify as a result of earthquake shaking. Since the proposed building site is underlain at shallo\\· depths by resistant materials. the hazard due to ground subsidence is. in our opinion. considered to be low.

Lateral Spreading - Lateral spreading may occur when a weak layer of material. such as a sensiti,·e silt or clay. loses its shear strength as a result of earthquake shaking. Orerlying blocks of competent material may be translated lat erally to\\ ards a free face. Free face conditions are not present proximate to the site. hence. the hazard due to lateral spreading is. in our opinion. considered to be low.

Site Preparation and Grading
All debris resulting from the demolition of existing impro,ements should be remo,·ed from the site and may not be used as (ill. Any existing underground utility lines lo be abandoned should be remo,·ed from within the proposed building envelope and their ends capped outside of the building enrelope.

Any regetation and organically contaminated soils should be cleared from the building area. All holes resulting from removal of tree stumps and roots, or other buried objects. should be overexcarnted into firm materials and then backfilled and compacted with natire materials. 6 11.f
Packet Pg. 817 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) File: 2152-P
January 5. 2016
The placement of fills at the site is expected to include: utility trench backlill. slab subgrade materials. and finished drainage and landscaping grading. These and all other fills should be placed in conformance \\·ith the follo\\'ing guidelines:

Fills may use organic-free soils available at the site or import materials. Import soils should be free of construction debris or other deleterious materials and be non-expansi,·e. A minimum of 3 days prior to the placement of any ./ill. our o.ffice should be supplied with a 30 pound sample (approximare/y a full 5 gallon bucket) of any sorl or baserock robe used as _fill (including narive and imporr mareria/s)for testing and approval.

All areas 10 recei, e fills should be stripped or organics and loose or soft near-surface soils. Fills should be placed on le, el benches in lifts no greater than 6 inches thick (loose) and be compacted to at least 90 percent of their Maximum Dry Density (MOD). as determined by ASTM D-1557. In pa,·ement (concrete or asphalt) areas to recei,·e ,·ehicular traffic. all baserock materials should be compacted to at least 95 percent of their MDD. Also. the upper 6 inches of soil subgrade beneath any pa,·emems should be compacted 10 at least 95 percent of its MOD.

V11less additional work is done to stre11gthe11 and tleusify the upper 10 to 12feet of site mat erials, the grades slwuld ,wt be increased more than 6 inches higher titan existing site grades.

Othen vise, e.·,.:cessh•e settlements of tlte underlying compressible soils may occur. If fills in excess of 6 inches are to be placed, our office sltould be contacted for f urther recomme11datiow;.

Temporary. dry-\\ eather. Yertical exca, at ions should remain stable for short periods of time 10 heights of 3 feet. All excavations should be shored or sloped in accordance ,, ith OSHA standards.

Cuts deeper than 11 feet may encounter ground\\·ater and will require temporary (and perhaps permane111) de,rntering.

Permanent cut and/or fill slopes should be no steeper than 2: I (H:V). Ho\\·e\'er. eren at this gradient, minor sloughing of slopes may still occur in the future. Positire drainage improrements (e.g. drainage swales, catch basins. etc.) should be pro,·ided to pre\'ent \\'ater from nowing o,·er the tops of cut and/or fill slopes.

Townhouse and/or Commercial Building Foundation - Mat Slab with Piers The to,rnhouse and/or commercial building foundations may be supported by a mat slab supported by drilled piers. helix augers. or pipe piles founded in the deeper materials beneath the peat.

Dtilled Piers - Piers should penetrate a minimum of 25 feet below lo" est adjacent grade. The piers should ha,·e a minimum diameter of 16 inches and be nominally reinforced with a minimum of four #4 bars vertically. Piers should be spaced a ma"Ximum of 15 feet center to center, and be spaced no closer than 4 diameters. center to center.

Holes greater than 11 feet may encounter g.-oundwater. The contractor should be prepared to tremmie the piers, dlill and pour the piers, and/or case the piers in the event of caving. 7 11.f
Packet Pg. 818 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) File: 215247
January 5, 2016
Actual pier depth, diameter, reinforcement, and spacing should be determined by the structural engineer based upon the following design criteria:

A friction value of 500 psf may be assumed to act on that portion of the pier below a depth of 12 feet. Lateral support may be assumed to be developed along the length of the pier below 12 feet, using a passive pressure of 350 pcf Equivalent Fluid Weight (EFW). Passive resistance may be assumed to act over 1.5 projected pier diameters. Above 12 feet, no frictional or lateral support may be assumed. These design values may be increased 1/3 for transient loads (i.e. seismic and wind).

The upper 12 feet of the pier will experience down drag as the peat decomposes. We recommend that a down drag friction of 500 psf be used on the upper LL feet of pier.

Even though piers are designed to derive their vertical resistance through skin friction, the bases of the piers holes should be clean and firm prior to setting steel and pouring concrete. lf more than 6 inches of slough exists in the base of the pier holes after drilling, then the slough should be removed. lf less than 6 inches of slough exists, the slough may be tamped to a stiff condition. Piers should not remain open for more than a few days prior to casting concrete. In the event of rain, shallow groundwater, or caving conditions it may be necessary to pour piers immediately.

All perimeter piers, and piers under load-bearing walls, should be connected by concrete grade beams. Perimeter grade beams should penetrate a minimum of 6 inches below crawlspace grade (unless a perimeter footing drain is installed to intercept water attempting to enter around the perimeter). Interior grade beams do not need to penetrate below grade. All other isolated floor supports must also be pier supported, however, they do not need to be connected by grade beams.

All improvements connected directly to any pier supported structure, also need to be supported by piers. This includes, but is not limited to: porches, decks, entry stoops and columns, etc. lf the designer does not wish to pier support these items, then care must be taken to structurally isolate them (with expansion joints, etc.) from the pier supported structure.

If the above recommendations are followed, total foundation settlements should be less than 1 inch, while differential settlements should be less than ½ inches.

Pipe Piles - Pipe piles may be used in lieu of drilled concrete piers. If used, they should be driven into the ground until the required capacity for structural loading and down drag are achieved by the driving equipment, and then filled with grout. Actual pile depth, pipe diameter, and spacing should be determined by the structural engineer. However, we recommend the pipe piles should be driven a minimum of 25 feet below lowest adjacent grade.

Helical Piers - Helical piers (Chance Augers) consist of a solid metal shaft fitted with a metal plate ( or series of plates) warped into a screw thread on the tip of the lead shaft. The auger is screwed down into the ground until the required torque is achieved, indicating that adequate bearing pressures are also available. The helix then will accept vertical loads from the foundations and 8 11.f
Packet Pg. 819 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) File: 2152-P
January 5. 20 I 6
transmit them to bearing pressures on the plates at the tip of the augers. The design process of these augers is based upon proprietary information de,eloped by the Chance Company. and the calculations and designs can be prepared based upon the information contained in other sections and figures in this report.

Floor - The to,mhouse or commercial building Ooors should consist of a mat slab spanning between support elements. The entire slab should be underlain by at least 6 inches of clean. crushed drain rock. The drain rock should be cO\·ered by a moisture barrier \\hich conforms to ASTM E 1745-97 (e.g. Stego Wrap or an appro\'ed equi\'alent). Perforated collector pipes should be embedded ,,ithin the drain rod. around the perimeter of the slab and at 20 foot spacing (one-\\ay) under the slab to carry any ,rnter ,,·hich gathers ,, ithin the drain rock to the drain discharge location.

The need for any sand o,·er the top of the ,·apor barrier should be determined by the slab designer or architect.

Altem ative Townhouse and/or Commercial Building Foundation - Warne System Alternati\'ely, the new foundation system may consist of a series of interlocking grade beams \\'hich \\'ill create a rigid system to support a structurally spanning slab for the ne\\' tO\mhouse/commercial building. To pro\'ide the most rigid system it \\'ill be important that long. narro\\' protrusions be minimiLed from the design in fa,·or of the most rectangular (ideally square) footprint geometry possible. It should be noted that use of a ,,ame S\'Stem mm still result in differential settlements . . rel at i, e to the grades surrounding the to\\ nhouse complex or commercial building. resulting in elerntion differences across building/garage entrances and thresholds. as \\'ell as an o,·erall tilt to the building.

The grade beams should be a minimum o[36 inches tall and be capable of spanning or cantile,·ering the follo\\'ing distances and amounts:

Settlements - 20 foot diameter area any\\·here in the interior: IO feet of lost support along the perimeter: and. 5 feet of lost support al any comer.

The mo, ements under the foundations must not result in a deflect ion of the foundation grade beam system in excess of a ratio of I :360. To achie, e this rigidity. it is anticipated that foundation grade beams ,, ill need to be on the order of 3 feet tall. a minimum of 18 inches \\ ide. and spaced at no more than 17 feet in any direction. Ideally. grade beams should be located under all first story interior walls so as to maximize the rigidity under these \\'alls.

The grade beams \\'ill all need lo bear on stiff soils as identified by our office in the field. Should localized areas of expansive soils be encountered. we may direct the contractor to specially treat those areas to eliminate localized uplift. Such directions may include: the use of mid form materials in sub-slab areas. O\'er-excarntion. or other methodology deemed appropriate by our engineer.
9 11.f
Packet Pg. 820 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) File: 215247
January 5. 20 16
The grade beam system may be designed for a bearing capacity of 2000 psf may be used. For resistance lo lateral forces. the embedded faces of the grade beams may be assumed to de\'elop a passi,·e resistance of200 psf
Due to the presence of the peat layer, the total dead load across the building footp1int should not exceed 500 psf. If this value is exceeded, please contact our office for fui1her recommendations.

Slabs-on-Grade
The 10,mhouse garage/lower le,·el floors and the commerciaJ building floors should not consist of com·entional concrete slabs-on-grade. ho\\'e,·er. may consist of mat slabs supported by piers or \\'aille foundation elements. The drirn\\'ay. any sidewalks or patios may consist of conventional concrete slabs-on-grade. though it should be expected that some post-construction shifiing of such slabs may occur. We ha,·e pro,·ided guidelines to help reduce post-construction mo\'ements, however, it is nearly impossible to economically eliminate all shifting.

To help reduce cracking. we recommend slabs be a minimum of 5 inches thick and be nominal)~· reinforced \\'ith #• bars at I 8 inches on center. each \\'ay. Slabs \Yhich are thinner or more lightly reinforced may experience undesirable cosmetic cracking. Howe\'er. actual reinforcement and thickness should be determined by the structuraJ engineer based upon anticipated usage and loading. ln large non-interior slabs (e.g. patios. garage. etc.). score joints should be placed at a ma'\imum of IO feet on center. In side,,·alks. score joints should be placed at a ma'\imum of 5 feet on center. All slabs should be separated from adjacent impro,·ements (e.g. footings. porches. columns. etc.) with expansion joints. Interior Ooor slabs will experience shrinkage cracking. These cosmetic cracks may be sealed with epo:--.~· or other measures specified by the architect.

All interior slabs (including garage slab) should be underlain by • inches of clean ¾ inch crushed drain rock. The drain rock should be co\'ered by a rapor barrier which conforms to ASTM EI 745- 97 (e.g. Stego Wrap or an approYed equi, alent). The architect or structural engineer should determine if sand is required o,·er the rapor barrier.

Slabs \\'hich \Yill be subject to light vehicular loads and through \\'hich moisture transmission is not a concern (e.g. dri,·eway) should be underlain by at least 6 inches of compacted baserock. in lieu of any sand and gra\'el. Exterior landscaping flatwork (e.g. patios and side\\'alks) may be placed directly on proof-rolled soil subgrade materials (e.g. no granular subgrade), howeYer. they ,,·ill be potentially subject to shifting and moisture transmission.

As stated previously. in pavement (concrete or asphalt) areas to receive vehicular traffic. all baserock materials should be compacted to at least 95 percent of their MOD. Also. the upper 6 inches of natirn soil subgrade beneath any pa\'ements should be compacted lo at least 95 percent of its MOD.
10 11.f
Packet Pg. 821 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) File: 21 5247
January 5. 2016
The to,mhouse garage/lower ler el slabs and commercial building slabs should be tied to the foundations to limit differential movements.

Drainage
Due to the flat nature of the site, it " ·ill be important to pro, ide good drainage impro,·ements at the property.

Surface Drainage - Adjacent to any buildings. the ground surface should slope at least 5 percent away from the fo undations " ·ithin 5 feet of the perimeter. Impen·ious surfaces should have a minimum gradient of 2 percent away from the foundation.

Surface water should be directed away from all buildings into drainage S\\ ales. or into a surface drainage system (i.e. catch basins and a solid drain line). ·"Trapped .. planting areas should not be created ne.xt to any buildings " ·ithout proriding means for drainage (i.e. area drains).

All roof ea\'es should be lined with gutters. The do,mspouts ma~· be connected to solid drain lines. or may discharge onto paved surfaces " ·hich drain away from the structure. The do" nspouts ma~· be connected to the same drain line as any catch basins. but must not connect to any perforated pipe drainage system. If splash blocks are preferred. then a perimeter footing drain system must be installed.

Footing Drain - Due to the potential fo r changes to surface drainage prorisions. it ,rould be "ise (though not required) to install a perimeter footing drain to intercept ,rater attempting to enter under the garage/floor slab. lf a footing drain is not installed. some moisture transmission up through the slab may occur. Such penetration should not be detrimental to the performance of the structure. but can possibly cause humidity and mildew problems within the to\\nhouse and commercial building. or seepage up through the slab floors.

The footing drain system if installed. should consist of a 12 inch wide gra, el-filled trench. dug a, leas, 12 inches below 1he elevmion of 1he adjace111 slab subgrade. The trench should be lined with a layer of lilter fabric (Mirafi 140 or equiralent) to prerent migration of silts and clays into the gra,·el. but still permit the flow of water. Then I to 2 inches of drain rock (clean crushed rock or pea grarel) should be placed in the base of the lined trench. ext a perforated pipe (minimum 3 inch diameter) should be placed on top of the thin rock layer. The perforations in the pipe should be face do" ·n. The trench should then be backfilled with more rock to " ·ithin 6 inches of finished grade. The filt er fa bric should be wrapped orer the top of the rock. Abo,·e the filt er fabric 6 inches of nati ve soils should be used to cap the drain. If concrete slabs are to directly overlay the drain. then the gravel should continue to the base of the slab. " ithout the 6 inch soil cap. This drain should not be connected to an,· surface drainage s,·stem If a floor slab is used, an under-slab drain system may also be installed, consisting of a perforated coll ector pipes spread no more than 20 feet apart. embedded " ·ithin the sub-slab drain rock. to eracuate any water which gathers "ithin the drain rock.

I I

11.f
Packet Pg. 822 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) File: 215247
January 5. 20 16
Drainage Discharge - The surface drain lines should discharge at least 15 feet a\\'ay from the tomlhouse and commercial building. preferably at the street. The discharge location(s) may need to be protected by energy dissipaters to reduce the potential for erosion. Care should be taken not direct concentrated flo,,·s of water towards neighboring properties. This may require the use of multiple discharge points.

The footing drain lines (if installed) should discharge independently from the surface drainage systems. A sump pump may be required for the foo ting drain discharge systems. The surface and subsurface drain systems should not be connected to one another.

Drainage Matetials - Drain lines should consist of hard-walled pipes (e.g. SDR 35 or Schedule 40 PVC). In areas where rehicle loading is not a possibility. SDR 38 or HOPE pipes may be used.

Corrugated. flexible pipes may not be used in any drain system installed at the property.

Surface drain lines (e.g. downspouts. area drains, etc.) should be laid \\ith a minimum 2 percent gradient (¼ inch of fall per foot of pipe). Any subsurface drain systems (e.g. footing drains) should be laid with a minimum I percent gradient ( 1/8 inch of fall per foot of pipe).

Utility Lines
Unless they pass through the perimeter footing drain system all utility trenches should be backfilled with compacted on-site clay-rich materials within 5 feet of any buildings. This \\i ll help to prevent migration of surface water into trenches and then w1derneath the structures" perimeter. The rest of the trenches may be compacted \\'ith other nati,·e soils or clean imported Cill. Only mechanical means of compaction of trench backfill " ·ill be allowed. Jetting of sands is not acceptable. Trench backfill should be compacted to at least 90 percent of its MOD. Howerer. under pavements. concrete Oat work. and footings the upper 12 inches of trench backfill must be compacted to at least 95 percent of its MOD.

If deeply s11pportetifo111ulations are 11sed, jlexible pipeline con11ectio11s should be used where the utilities enter/exit the structures. Where 011-grade fm111datio11s are 11sed, it would be prudent to prm•itle drainage lines witlt greater than normal slope, or to install s11ch lines where access to replace any sags or reverse slopes ca11 be easily corrected.

Pavement
The ne\\ dri, eway may consist of concrete. interlocking pa,·ers. or asphaltic concrete o, er Caltrans Class lJ aggregate base (baserock). The asphalt should hare a minimum thickness of 2½ inches.

The baserock should ham a minimum thickness of 6 inches. All of the baserock and the upper 6 inches of soil subgrade should attain a minimum compaction of 95 percent of its MOD. Any Cill below this layer should attain a minimum of 90 percent relati, e compaction. 12 11.f
Packet Pg. 823 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) File: 21524 7
January 5.2016
Plan Review and Const111ction Observations
The use of the recommendations contained \\'ithin this report is contingent upon our being contracted to reYie" the plans. and to obsen e geotechnically releYant aspects of the construction.

We should be proYided \\'ith a full set of plans 10 re,·ie\\ at the same time the plans are submilled 10 the building/planning department for re, ie" . A minimum of one" orking "eek should be pro, ided for re\'ie" of the plans.

At a minimum. our obserrntions should include: compaction testing of fills and subgrades: footing excaYations: pier drilling: installation of helix piers or pipe piles: slab and dri,·e\\'ay subgrade preparation: installation of any drainage system (e.g. wider-slab. foo ting. and surface). and linal grading. A minimum of 48 hours notice should be pro\'ided for all construction obser\'ations.

LIMITATI01 S
This report has been prepared for the exclusi, e use of the addressee. and their architects and engineers fo r aiding in the design and construction of the proposed de,·elopment. It is the addressee's responsibility to proYide this report to the appropriate design professionals. building officials, and contractors to ensure correct implementation of the recommendations.

The opinions. comments and conclusions presented in this report \\'ere based upon information deri\'ed from our field inrnstigation and laboratory testing. Conditions bet\\'een or beyond our borings may rnry from those encowitered. Such rnriations may result in changes to our recommendations and possibly rnriations in project costs. Should any additional in fo rmat ion become mailable. or should there be changes in the proposed scope of \\'Ork as outlined aboYe. then we should be supplied "ith that information so as 10 make any necessary changes 10 our opinions and recommendations. Such changes may require additional im estigation or analyses. and hence additional costs may be incurred.

Our \\'Ork has been conducted in general conformance " ·ith the standard of care in the field of geotechnical engineering currently in practice in the San Francisco Bay Area for projects of this nature and magnitude. We make no other \\'arranty either expressed or implied. By utilizing the design recommendations \Yithin this report. the addressee acknO\dedges and accepts the risks and limitations of de,·elopment at the site. as outlined " ·ithin the report.

Respectfully Submilled:

GeoForensics, Inc.

Daniel F. Dyckman. PE. GE
Senior Geotechnical Engineer. GE 2145
cc: 5 to addressee
13 Bernard A. Atendido
Field Engineer

11.f
Packet Pg. 824 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) , , , , /
., ,
•
LINDA
HAR
Source: Thomas Bros.

GEOFOREN ,cs. I C.
\ '·
561 Pilgrim Dr., Suitt D. Fosttr City. CA 94404
Tri: (6SO) 349-3369 Fax: (650) S71-1878
.

I
'
'
•
• I
' I
J
J
I
t
RD
Figure 1 - Site Location

11.f
Packet Pg. 825 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) GEoFORE
1c • lNc.
561 Pilgrim Dr., Suilt D, Fosler City, CA 94404
Tc:1: (650) 349-3369 Fax: (650) 571-1878
Figure 2 - Vicinity Topography

11.f
Packet Pg. 826 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Artificial fill (Historic)-Loose to Yery well consolidated gra,·el. sand. silt. clay. rock fi:ag1nents. organic nianer. and man-iuade debris in af Yru1ous co111binations. Tilickness is Yruiable and niay exceed 30 111 in places. Some i co111pacted and quite finn. but fill 1nade before 1965 is nearly e\"er)'\Yhere not compacted and consists simply of dumped materials
Alluvial fan and fluvial deposits (Holocene) -Alluvial fan deposits are bro\\·n or tan. mediu1n dense to de1r e. gra,;ely sand or sandy gra\"el Qh a f that generally grades upward to sandy 01 silty clay. ~ear the di tal fan edges. the flu,·ial deposits are typically bro\\U. ne,·er reddish. meditm1 dense sand that fines upward to 5andy or silty clay Source: Geology of the Onshore part of San Mateo County, California: derived from the digital database open-file 98-137. E.E .. Brabb, R.W. Graymer, and D.L.Jones (1998) G EOFORE ICS, I C.
56 1 Pilgrim Dr., Suite D, Foster City, CA 94404
Tel: (650) 349-3369 Fu: (650) 571-1878
Figure 3 - Geologic Map

11.f
Packet Pg. 827 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

APPENDIX A - BORING LOGS

11.f
Packet Pg. 828 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

LOG OF BORING
VI
u ~ v; >- 0
t: .., g " ::::, <lJ VI UJ ~
~ UJ a: o~ a: ~ UJ u ~ z ~ ::::, z
I _J UJ _J UJ ..... 0.. co ~ UJ 0.. ~;j MATERIAL DESCRIPTION O u t ~~ ~ >- .e, VI ~ o ~ -z UJ <( ::::, <( _J - a: Oo 0 VI Z VI co 0 ~u
lo y D; a bro n; sli 1h I oi t (S )
1 -1 ~ 8 silty SAND; green brown; slightly moist; loose (SM) 101.2 11.0 " silty CLAY with sand; greenish gray to dark gray; moist (CH) 1-2 ~ 6 SILT with organics; dark brown; moist; soft to firm (ML) - - (strong organic smell)
rn
1-3 5 No recovery. Soil pulled out of sampler. - -
silty CLAY with some organics; blue green; slightly moist; 1-4 9 - 21.5 1 "
stiff (CH)
1-5 ~ 17 silty CLAY; blue green; slightly moist; stiff (CH) - 21.3' -,n
Bottom of Borina at 17.5 feet
Groundwater innitially encountered at 16 feet
7" Rose to 1 3 feet after 3 hours
~o
Logged by: BA B-24 Truck Mounted Drilling Rig Mod.Cal'~ Job# 215247 140 Pound Hammer Sampler
Drilled on 12/ 9/15 Groundwater to 13 feet SPT Sampler
G EOFORE~SICS. b e.
561 Pilgrim Dr .• "uile D. Fos1rr Cit). C:.\ 94404 Figure A 1 - Log of Boring 1 Tel: (650) 349-3369 Fax: (650) 571-1878

11.f
Packet Pg. 829 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

LOG OF BORING
VI
u ~ .;; >- 0 f- ,..._ .., 9 ::, QJ vi LU ~ ~ LU a: 0 £ z a: ~ ....J LU LU u ~ LU:::' ::, LU ::i: ....J 0.. c:o 0.. ~;::; MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Ou ti; I- ~ ~~ ~ o ~ >- E: -z LU <( ::, <( ....J ~ a: Oo 0 VI Z VI c:o 0 ~u
c;
2-1 111111111111111 22 silty SAND; green brown; slightly moist; medium dense (SM) 109. 7 8.0 10 2-2 111111111111111 5
SILT with organics; dark brown; slightly moist to moist; soft (ML) (strong organic smell)
2-3 11 silty CLAY; blue green; slightly moist; stiff (CH) 1 c;
2-4
)()
2-5
2-6 ~() ..... --+-•
Logged by: BA
Job# 215247
Drilled on 12/9/ 15
12 16
15 silty sandy CLAY with pockets of sand; green brown; slightly moist to moist; stiff (CL)
silty sandy CLAY with rock fragments; orange brown and
green brown; slightly moist; very stiff (CL)
silty sandy CLAY; orange brown and green brown; slightly moist; stiff to very stiff (CL)
Bottom of Borine at 29.5 feet
Groundwater initially encountered at 12.5 feet
Rose to 12 feet after 1.5 hours
8-24 Truck Mounted Drilling Rig
140 Pound Hammer
Groundwater to 12 feet
GcoFORE~. 1c . b e.
561 PUgrl.m D", ulre 0 , Foster Cir;,. CA 9-1-10-1
Tel: (650) 3-19-3369 Fnx: (650) s-I- 187
Figure A2 - Log of Boring 2

20.2 18.0

23.1 20.6
Mod.Cal'~ Sampler
SPT Sampler

11.f
Packet Pg. 830 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

LOG OF BORING
Vl
u ~ vi >- 0 !::: ,..__
J:'. 9 :::, a, LU ~ 0 .c Vl LU C:: LU u ~ z ~ c:: ~ I ....J LU 0.. CD ....J LU "-- :::) LU 0.. 3: N MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Ou tri I- I- ~~ ~ >- E: 0..

LU <( :::, gs -z <( a: Oo 0 Vl z Vl CD 0 ~ u
3-1 l,A 15 silty SAND; green brown; slightly moist; medium dense (SM) 9.6 5 SILT with organics; dark brown; moist (ML)
10 3-2 12 silty sandy CLAY; blue green; slightly moist; stiff (CL) 18.3 )()
L.._--+- 3-3 ... r:i --+-si-lty- sa_n_d_y_c_LA_v_; _or_a_nge_- br_o_w_n_a_n_d_g_re_e_n_b_r_ow- n;_s_lig_h_t_ly~t----+----t ... 1..11 ,- 12 moist; stiff (CL) - 19.1 30 Logged by: BA
Job# 215247
Drilled on 12/ 9/ 15
GEOFORE~ IC ' h e.

Bottom of Borio~ at 23.5 feet
Groundwater encountered at 11 feet
B-24 Truck Mounted Drilling Rig
140 Pound Hammer
Groundwater at 11 feet
561 PUg1i111 Dr., . uile D, Fosler Ci~. CA 9-140~
Tel: (650) J-t9-3369 Fax: (650) 5 1-1878
Figure A3 - Log of Boring 3
Mod.Cal'~ Sampler
SPT Sampler

11.f
Packet Pg. 831 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

APPENDIX B - LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

11.f
Packet Pg. 832 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) ~ODP~ Moisture-Density-Porosity Report
Cooper Testing Labs, Inc. (ASTM 07263b)
CTLJob No: 060-2387a Project No. 215247 By: RU
Client: Geo Forensics Date: 12/16/15
Project Name: Crespi Remarks:

Boring: 1-1 1-4 1-5 2-1 2-3 2-4 2-5 2-6
Sample:

Depth, ft: 2 14 17 4 14 1 24 29
Visual Olive Olive Gray Olive Gray Olive Olive Gray Olive Olive Olive Description: Brown CLAY w/ Sandy Brown Sandy Brown Brown Brown Clayey Sand CLAY Sandy CLAY Sandy CLAYw/ CLAYw/
SAND w/ CLAY CLAY Sand Sand
Gravel
Actual G.

Assumed G. 2.70 2.70
Moisture, % 11.0 21 .5 21 .3 8.0 20.2 18.0 23.1 20.6
Wet Unit wt. pcf 112.3 118.5
Ory Unit wt, pcf 101.2 109.7
Dry Bulk Dens.pb, (glee) 1.62 1.76
Saturation, % 44.5 40.3
Total Porosity, % 40.0 34.9
Volumetric Waw Cont,8w. ,i, 17.8 14.1
Volumetric Air Cont., 8a, % 22.2 20.9
Void Ratio 0.67 0.54
Series 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Note· All reported parameters are from the as-recerved sample condition unless otherwise noted. If an assumed specific gravity (Gs) was used then the saturation, porosities, and void ratio should be considered approximate.

Moistllre-Oensity
Zero Air-voids Curves. Soeafic Gravitv
140 -
~ ~ The Zero Air-Voids curves DSeries 1 130 represent the dry density at 0 100% saturation for each value
of specific gravity ASenes 2
120 '
x Series 3
'R_ 110 )K xSeries 4
f .,
• C • Series 5 100 ~ - +Series 6
90 - Series 7
80 - -Senes 8
10 I - - 0.0 5.0 10 0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0
Moisture Content, %

11.f
Packet Pg. 833 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) qf@P~ Moisture-Density-Porosity Report
Cooper Testing Labs, Inc. (ASTM 07263b)
CTL Job No: 060-2387b Project No. 215247 By: RU
Client: Geo Forensics Date: 12/16/15
Project Name: Crespi Remarks: 3-1 @ 3' - sample disturbed; m/c onlv.

Boring: 3-1 3-2 3-3
Sample:

Depth, ft: 3 13.5 23
Visual Olive Olive Gray Olive
Description: Brown CLAYw/ Brown
Sandy Sand Sandy

CLAY CLAY
Actual G.

Assumed G.

Moisture, % 9.6 18.3 19.1
Wet Unit wt, pcf
Ory Unit wt, pcf
Dry Bulk Dens.pt), (glee)
Saturation, %
Total Porosity, %
Volumetric W1tar Cont,9w,%
Volumetric Air Cont., ea,%
Void Ratio
Series 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Note: All reported parameters are from the as-received sample condition unless otherwise noted. If an assumed specific gravity (Gs) was used then the saturation, porosities. and void ratio should be considered approximate.

Moisture-Density
Zero Air-voids Curves. Soecific Gravitv
140
0 ~ The Zero Air-V0tds curves a Series 1
130 represent the dry density at
~ 100% saturation for each value
of t.Series 2 specific gravrty
120
x Series 3
i 110 xSeries 4
~ .;
C • Series 5 100 ~
+Series 6
90 • Series 7
"L -Series 8
70 - 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0
Moisture Content, %

11.f
Packet Pg. 834 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) ~p~ Organic Content Test
ASTM D 297 4-00 (Method C - 440 °C)
CTL JOB NO. 060-2387 PROJECT: Crespi DATE: 12/16/2015
CLIENT: GeoForensics PROJECT NO.: 215247 BY: RU
Boring: 1-2
Sample:

Depth (ft.):

Visual Description: Black Peat
Dish No.

Dish wt., gm 67.88
Soil, Org, Dish & H20 , gm 128.79
Oven Dry wt (105°C), gm 78.29
Furnace Dry wt. (440°C), gm 69.26
Moisture Content,
% of Oven Orv Mass 485.1
Organic Matter, % 86.7
Note: ASTM provides no guidelines for including information about the organic content of a sample in the description when the wet/dry liquid limit data is not available. CTL developed the following guidelines to fill this gap:
0-5%: The organics are either not mentioned or mentioned as being "trace". 5-15%: The soil is considered as inorganic and is classified, as per ASTM 2487, with "with organics" included in the desc 15-50%: The soil is considered as organic and is described, per ASTM 2487. > 50%: The soil is described as "Peat".

11.f
Packet Pg. 835 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of

LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT
110 _
Dashed
upper limit
line
boundary
indicates
for
the
natural~
approximate / I
I
~ 90
,_,,,/'
X
oY..
u.J / I ~y,. 0 - 0
~ 70 -
t / / I
u / ./ I
.== 50 -
/ I en i ,_,,,/' :5 I
/ I I a. I
30 / V I I r
n\..
_ / . C,~
I
1i ML or OL I MH or OH I
10 30 50 70 90 110 130 150 170 190

LIQUID LIMIT
610 i I r
I I I
I I I
600 I ~
I
~ r--
Iz I
~ I
~ 590
z ""- I
0 I
(.) ! - ~ I
a:::
~ 580
< ~ - ~ I
I "'-....
570 ' l I ~ I
I 5605 I r
10 20 25 30 40

NUMBER OF BLOWS
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LL PL Pl ¾<#40 ¾<#200 uses
• Black Peat 580 370 210
Project No. 060-2387 Client: Geoforensics Remarks:

Project: Crespi - 21524 7 • Sample was prepared using the wet prep method.
• Source: 1-2

LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT
COOPER TESTING LABORATORY Fioure

11.f
Packet Pg. 836 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Job No.: 060-2387
Client: GeoForensics
Project: Crespi• 215247
Soil Type: Black Peat

0.0 ~

5.0 10.0

15.0 I

20.0 Ill
":-- 0 ~
c 25.0 ni
..

U)

30.0 35.0
40 0

45.0 50.0 I
10 Consolidation Test
ASTM 02435
Boring: 2-2 Run By:

Sample: Reduced:

Depth, ft.: Checked:

Date:

Strain-Log-P Curve
I -- .--' I
~~r--. ~ ... I
~
·- - ~ ~
' \ :\ I
I""'' \ "'-
"' K I ~
l'r-,
""'
~ ' -
I
100 1000
Effective Stress, psf
Assumed Gs 2.2 Initial Final Remarks:
t-- -:M-:-o-:i-st-u-re---:-:%:-:----t===:3=1=== 3::::::: _6~~===21::::::5==.4==!\ Dry Density, pcf: 15.6 19.5
Void Ratio: 7.792 6.059
% Saturation: 88.5 100.0
MD
PJ
PJ/DC
1/4/2016
,.. ,- -
J
I
~ I
\ I
\
' \ -..... ...... r-,. ' .... ~.
10000

11.f
Packet Pg. 837 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) GEOFORENSICS INC. Consulting Soil Engineering
303 Vintage Park Drive, Suite 220, Foster City, CA 94404 Phone: (650) 349-3369 Fax: (650) 571-1878 File: 215247
April 30, 2020
Mr. Brendan Murphy
P.O. Box 301
San Mateo, CA 94401
Subject: Crespi Drive Property
570 Crespi Drive
Pacifica, California

RESPONSE TO GEOTECHNICAL PEER REVIEW
Mr. Murphy:

This letter has been prepared to provide our responses to the issues raised in the March 2, 2020 Peer Review letter by Engeo. We have used the numbering system which starts on Page 3 of the report in order to avoid reproducing long sections of print.
1 – As noted in our report, any construction debris left on the site is to be removed from the site and may not be used as fill. While we concur that the old construction materials will need to be removed, it is our opinion that such work is best conducted during construction when the large equipment necessary to expose the site conditions is available, as opposed to doing massive disturbance to the site with localized backhoe test pits. Based upon our borings, the fills are relatively uniform at a thickness of 6 feet. This is consistent with subsurface information reported in the Construction Testing Services report (3/5/16) for the adjacent property at 540 Crespi Drive, who reported artificial fill to depths of 3 to 7 feet at their property.
2 – We have consulted with the project structural engineer who informs us that according to exception of Section 11.48 of ASCE 7-16, no site-specific response analysis is required. We have updated the values presented in our previous report to reflect current CBC (2019) and ASCE 7-16 values below:

Site Class SMS S1 SDS Fa Fv TL PGAM
D 2.329 0.778 1.553 1.2 N/A 12 0.983
3 – From our review of the current civil plans, it appears that up to about 6 feet of fill is to be placed at the site, increasing in thickness from front to rear. Our calculations indicate that the placement of 6 feet of fill is likely to result in about 9.5 inches of total settlement, while 4 feet of fill is likely to result in roughly 8 inches of total settlement. We would therefore expect that differential settlements could be as great as 4 inches across the length of the building due to differential fill thicknesses and presence of peat (which tends to settle differentially to a greater degree than does bay mud). Building loads (assumed at a uniform 500 psf) would produce total settlements on the order of 8 inches. Differentials due to building loads would be dependent upon stiffness of foundation system. 4 – Our borings found a relatively level ground water table located between 11 and 13 feet below grade, which would place the ground water table at an elevation of approximately 1 foot. Water table measurements from the adjacent parcel borings report ground water at a depth of 3 feet, or elevation of

11.f
Packet Pg. 838 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) File: 216003
April 30, 2017
2 about 2 feet. Based upon that elevation of water table, the Peat materials and deeper soils would be saturated, but not the upper sandy fills. It is our belief that the Peat materials would not tend to be subject to liquefaction. However, the reviewer is correct, there could be some dry soil settlements associated with the upper relatively loose fill sands (note that the laboratory identified these materials as clayey sand or sandy clays, whereas we identified them as silty sands). The relatively high fines content will help to reduce seismic settlements for this relatively thin layer of fill to roughly 1 inch of potential differential settlement.
5 – While we have presented various options for foundation support, the review consultant has suggested the potential use of a mat slab over improved ground conditions. We concur that this is another viable option, particularly with the anticipated ground settlements to be spawned by the relatively thick amount of fill proposed for the site. The ground improvement may include the removal and recompaction of the upper 12 feet of soils as engineered fill (please note that excavations to this depth is likely to encounter ground water towards the base of the excavation). Based stabilization of the excavation would likely be required, and may consist of a 2 foot thick layer of drain rock, or control density fill (sand cement slurry), or other methods suggested by the contractor and approved by our office. Please note that only the existing sandy fills would be suitable for re-use as engineered fill (assuming that there is no construction debris included). Another alternative would be to use rammed stone displacement columns, soil concrete piers, or other methods to penetrate through the upper layers. These later options are typically design build options through various specialty contractors, so specific recommendations are not included in this letter, but the proposed design should be provided for our review prior to permitting.

Corrosion testing on the adjacent site (540 Crespi) was performed at depths of 15 feet, 20 feet, 76 feet, and 105 feet. None of the samples were considered to be corrosive. However, it is unlikely that the improvements at the subject site will be this deeply embedded. Further, the nature of the soils which may be used as fill is currently unknown. Hence we concur that once the foundation system and any remedial grading work has been determined, it would be wise to conduct corrosivity testing on the soils at the appropriate elevations (i.e. within the fills).
6 – Our pavement recommendations were provided assuming an R-value of 5, with a TI of 4. If the pavement will receive a higher traffic loading, please contact our office to revise the required pavement section. Also note that we have used a very low R-value, and depending upon the fill materials used to raise the grade, a better value may be achieved which could reduce the pavement section for any Traffic Index necessary.

Should you have any questions please contact the undersigned.

Respectfully Submitted;
GeoForensics, Inc.

Daniel F. Dyckman, PE, GE
Senior Geotechnical Engineer, GE 2145
Email cc: 1 to addressee

11.f
Packet Pg. 839 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Appendix D
Environmental Noise Assessment

11.f
Packet Pg. 840 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Prepared for:

Raney Planning and Management, Inc.
1501 Sports Drive
Sacramento, CA 95834
Prepared by:

Saxelby Acoustics LLC
Luke Saxelby, INCE Bd. Cert.

Principal Consultant
Board Certified, Institute of Noise Control Engineering (INCE) 570 Crespi Drive
City of Pacifica, California
October 1, 2021
Project # 200204
Environmental Noise Assessment

11.f
Packet Pg. 841 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com
Page i
\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING.............................................................................................................. 3 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON NOISE .......................................................................................... 3 EXISTING NOISE AND VIBRATION ENVIRONMENTS .......................................................................... 8 EXISTING NOISE RECEPTORS.......................................................................................................... 8 EXISTING GENERAL AMBIENT NOISE LEVELs..................................................................................... 8 EVALUATION OF TRANSPORTATION NOISE SOURCES ON THE PROJECT SITE .................................... 9 ON‐SITE TRANSPORTATION NOISE PREDICTION METHODOLOGY ...........................................................9 FUTURE TRAFFIC NOISE ENVIRONMENT AT OFF‐SITE RECEPTORS................................................... 11 OFF‐SITE TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY .........................................................11 CONSTRUCTION NOISE ENVIRONMENT.......................................................................................... 13 CONSTRUCTION VIBRATION ENVIRONMENT.................................................................................. 17 REGULATORY CONTEXT ................................................................................................................. 20 FEDERAL.................................................................................................................................20 STATE ....................................................................................................................................20 LOCAL....................................................................................................................................20 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES ......................................................................................... 28 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE .................................................................................................... 28 PROJECT‐SPECIFIC IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES .................................................................30 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................. 35 Appendices
Appendix A: Acoustical Terminology
Appendix B: Field Noise Measurement Data
Appendix C: Traffic Noise Calculations

11.f
Packet Pg. 842 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com
Page ii
\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx List of Figures
Figure 1: Site Plan..........................................................................................................................................4 Figure 2: Noise Measurement Sites and Receptor Locations....................................................................... 5 Figure 3: Future Noise Contours................................................................................................................. 10 Figure 4: Construction Noise Contours and Point Levels ‐ without Pile Driving......................................... 17 Figure 5: Construction Noise Contours and Point Levels – with Pile Driving.............................................. 18 List of Tables
Table 1: Typical Noise Levels......................................................................................................................... 6 Table 2: Summary of Existing Background Noise Measurement Data ......................................................... 9 Table 3: Traffic Noise Levels at Project Facades......................................................................................... 11 Table 4: Predicted Traffic Noise Level and Project‐Related Traffic Noise Level Increases.........................12 Table 5: Baseline Traffic Noise Level and Project‐Related Traffic Noise Level Increases...........................12 Table 6: Cumulative Traffic Noise Level and Project‐Related Traffic Noise Level Increases ......................13 Table 7: Construction Equipment Noise Levels for Primary Construction Phases .....................................14 Table 8: Predicted Construction Noise Levels by Loudest Phases.............................................................. 15 Table 9: Vibration Levels for Various Construction Equipment.................................................................. 19 Table 10: Proposed General Plan Update Land Use Compatibility For Community Noise.........................22 Table 11: Proposed General Plan Update Allowable Noise Exposure ........................................................ 23 Table 12: Proposed General Plan Noise Level Performance Standards for Stationary Noise Sources.......23 Table 13: Effects of Vibration on People and Buildings.............................................................................. 27 Table 14: Significance of Changes in Noise Exposure ................................................................................. 29

11.f
Packet Pg. 843 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx

INTRODUCTION
The 570 Crespi Drive residential project islocated along the south side of Crespi Drive, east of Highway 1 in the City of Pacifica, California. The project consists of the construction of 3 separate buildings containing 15 residential units and 3,165 s.f. of commercial space.

Figure 1 shows the project site plan. Figure 2 shows an aerial photo of the project site.

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON NOISE
Fundamentals of Acoustics
Acoustics is the science of sound. Sound may be thought of as mechanical energy of a vibrating object transmitted by pressure wavesthrough a medium to human (or animal) ears. If the pressure variations occur frequently enough (at least 20 times per second), then they can be heard and are called sound.

The number of pressure variations per second is called the frequency of sound, and is expressed as cycles per second or Hertz (Hz).

Noise is a subjective reaction to different types of sounds. Noise is typically defined as (airborne) sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected or undesired, and may therefore be classified as a more specific group of sounds. Perceptions of sound and noise are highly subjective from person to person.

Measuring sound directly in terms of pressure would require a very large and awkward range of numbers. To avoid this, the decibel scale was devised. The decibel scale uses the hearing threshold (20 micropascals), as a point of reference, defined as 0 dB. Other sound pressures are then compared to this reference pressure, and the logarithm is taken to keep the numbers in a practical range. The decibelscale allows a million‐fold increase in pressure to be expressed as 120 dB, and changesin levels (dB) correspond closely to human perception of relative loudness.

The perceived loudness of sounds is dependent upon many factors, including sound pressure level and frequency content. However, within the usual range of environmental noise levels, perception of loudness is relatively predictable, and can be approximated by A‐weighted sound levels. There is a strong correlation between A‐weighted sound levels (expressed as dBA) and the way the human ear perceives sound. For this reason, the A‐weighted sound level has become the standard tool of environmental noise assessment.

11.f
Packet Pg. 844 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive
City of Pacifica, California
Figure 1
Project Site Plan

11.f
Packet Pg. 845 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Drive
City of Pacifica, California
Figure 2
Noise Measurement Sites

11.f
Packet Pg. 846 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx The decibel scale is logarithmic, not linear. In other words, two sound levels 10‐dB apart differ in acoustic energy by a factor of 10. When the standard logarithmic decibel is A‐weighted, an increase of 10‐dBA is generally perceived as a doubling in loudness. For example, a 70‐dBA sound is half asloud as an 80‐dBA sound, and twice as loud as a 60 dBA sound.

Community noise is commonly described in terms of the ambient noise level, which is defined as the all‐encompassing noise level associated with a given environment. A common statistical tool is the average, or equivalent, sound level (Leq), which corresponds to a steady‐state A weighted sound level containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given time period (usually one hour).

The Leq is the foundation of the composite noise descriptor, Ldn, and shows very good correlation with community response to noise.

The day/night average level (DNL or Ldn) is based upon the average noise level over a 24‐hour day, with a +10‐decibel weighing applied to noise occurring during nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) hours. The nighttime penalty is based upon the assumption that people react to nighttime noise exposures as though they were twice as loud as daytime exposures. Because Ldn represents a 24‐hour average, it tends to disguise short‐term variations in the noise environment.

Table 1 lists several examples of the noise levels associated with common situations. Appendix A provides a summary of acoustical terms used in this report.

TABLE 1: TYPICAL NOISE LEVELS
Common Outdoor Activities Noise Level (dBA) Common Indoor Activities ‐‐110‐‐  Rock Band
Jet Fly‐over at 300 m (1,000 ft.)  ‐‐100‐‐
Gas Lawn Mower at 1 m (3 ft.)  ‐‐90‐‐
Diesel Truck at 15 m (50 ft.),
at 80 km/hr. (50 mph) ‐‐80‐‐  Food Blender at 1 m (3 ft.)Garbage Disposal at 1 m (3 ft.) Noisy Urban Area, Daytime
Gas Lawn Mower, 30 m (100 ft.) ‐‐70‐‐  Vacuum Cleaner at 3 m (10 ft.) Commercial Area
Heavy Traffic at 90 m (300 ft.) ‐‐60‐‐  Normal Speech at 1 m (3 ft.) Quiet Urban Daytime  ‐‐50‐‐  Large Business Office
Dishwasher in Next Room
Quiet Urban Nighttime  ‐‐40‐‐  Theater, Large Conference Room (Background) Quiet Suburban Nighttime  ‐‐30‐‐  Library
Quiet Rural Nighttime  ‐‐20‐‐  Bedroom at Night, Concert Hall (Background) ‐‐10‐‐  Broadcast/Recording Studio
Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing  ‐‐0‐‐  Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing Source: Caltrans, Technical Noise Supplement, Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. September, 2013.

11.f
Packet Pg. 847 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx Effects of Noise on People
The effects of noise on people can be placed in three categories:
 Subjective effects of annoyance, nuisance, and dissatisfaction  Interference with activities such as speech, sleep, and learning  Physiological effects such as hearing loss or sudden startling Environmental noise typically produces effects in the first two categories. Workers in industrial plants can experience noise in the last category. There is no completely satisfactory way to measure the subjective effects of noise or the corresponding reactions of annoyance and dissatisfaction. A wide variation in individual thresholds of annoyance exists and different tolerances to noise tend to develop based on an individual’s past experiences with noise.

Thus, an important way of predicting a human reaction to a new noise environment is the way it compares to the existing environment to which one has adapted: the so‐called ambient noise level.

In general, the more a new noise exceeds the previously existing ambient noise level, the less acceptable the new noise will be judged by those hearing it.

With regard to increases in A‐weighted noise level, the following relationships occur:
 Except in carefully controlled laboratory experiments, a change of 1‐dBA cannot be perceived;  Outside of the laboratory, a 3‐dBA change is considered a just‐perceivable difference;  A change in level of at least 5‐dBA is required before any noticeable change in human response would be expected; and
 A 10‐dBA change is subjectively heard as approximately a doubling in loudness, and can cause an adverse response.

Stationary point sources of noise – including stationary mobile sources such as idling vehicles – attenuate (lessen) at a rate of approximately 6‐dB per doubling of distance from the source, depending on environmental conditions (i.e. atmospheric conditions and either vegetative or manufactured noise barriers, etc.). Widely distributed noises, such as a large industrial facility spread over many acres, or a street with moving vehicles, would typically attenuate at a lower rate.

11.f
Packet Pg. 848 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx

EXISTING NOISE AND VIBRATION ENVIRONMENTS

EXISTING NOISE RECEPTORS
Some land uses are considered more sensitive to noise than others. Land uses often associated with sensitive receptors generally include residences, schools, libraries, hospitals, and passive recreational areas. Sensitive noise receptors may also include threatened or endangered noise sensitive biological species, although many jurisdictions have not adopted noise standards for wildlife areas. Noise sensitive land uses are typically given special attention in order to achieve protection from excessive noise.

Sensitivity is a function of noise exposure (in terms of both exposure duration and insulation from noise) and the types of activities involved. In the vicinity of the projectsite, sensitive land uses include existing single‐family residential useslocated towardsthe southwest and multi‐family residential uses located to the north and northeast.

EXISTING GENERAL AMBIENT NOISE LEVELs
The existing noise environment in the project area is primarily defined by traffic on Highway 1 and Crespi Drive.

To quantify the existing ambient noise environment in the project vicinity, Saxelby Acoustics conducted continuous (24‐hr.) noise level measurements at one location on the project site and short term measurements at 2 locations in the project vicinity.

Noise measurement locations are shown on Figure 2. A summary of the noise level measurement survey results is provided in Table 2. Appendix B contains the complete results of the noise monitoring.

The sound level meters were programmed to record the maximum, median, and average noise levels at each site during the survey. The maximum value, denoted Lmax, represents the highest noise level measured. The average value, denoted Leq, represents the energy average of all the noise received by the sound level meter microphone during the monitoring period. The median value, denoted L50, represents the sound level exceeded 50 percent of the time during the monitoring period.

Larson Davis Laboratories (LDL) model 820 and 831 precision integrating sound level meters were used for the ambient noise level measurement survey. The meters were calibrated before and after use with a B&K Model 4230 acoustical calibrator to ensure the accuracy of the measurements. The equipment used meets all pertinent specifications of the American National Standards Institute for Type 1 sound level meters (ANSI S1.4).

11.f
Packet Pg. 849 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx TABLE 2: SUMMARY OF EXISTING BACKGROUND NOISE MEASUREMENT DATA Site Date
Average Measured Hourly Noise Levels, dBA
CNEL/Ldn
Daytime
(7:00 am ‐ 10:00 pm)
Nighttime
(10:00 pm – 7:00 am)
Leq L50 Lmax Leq L50 Lmax
LT‐1 04/09/20‐04/10/20 58 54 51 73 51 45 67
ST‐1 04/09/20‐1:05 p.m.   N/A 55 44 93 N/A N/A N/A
ST‐2 04/10/20‐1:21 p.m.   N/A 48 47 58 N/A N/A N/A
Source: Saxelby Acoustics – 2020

EVALUATION OF TRANSPORTATION NOISE SOURCES ON THE PROJECT SITE ON‐SITE TRANSPORTATION NOISE PREDICTION METHODOLOGY
Saxelby Acoustics used the SoundPLAN noise model to calculate traffic noise levels at the proposed residential uses due to traffic on Crespi Drive and Highway 1. The proposed project buildings and surrounding structures were input into the SoundPLAN model to determine the traffic noise exposure on the project site. Future (2041) traffic noise levels were calculated by assuming a 1% per year increase in traffic volumes on Highway 1 and Crespi Drive.  The results of this analysis are shown on Figure 3.  Based upon the SoundPLAN noise model, Table 3 shows the maximum predicted traffic noise levels at the residential floors of the projects closest to Crespi Drive.

11.f
Packet Pg. 850 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive
City of Pacifica, California
Figure 3Project Noise Contours (dBA Ldn)
1st Floor: 64 dBA
2nd Floor: 64 dBA
3rd Floor: 64 dBA
1st Floor: 64 dBA
2nd Floor: 64 dBA
3rd Floor: 63 dBA 1st Floor: 55 dBA
2nd Floor: 56 dBA
3rd Floor: 58 dBA
1st Floor: 52 dBA
2nd Floor: 53 dBA
3rd Floor: 55 dBA

11.f
Packet Pg. 851
Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx TABLE 3: TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS AT PROJECT FACADES
Location Exterior Noise
Level, Ldn
Estimated Interior
Noise Level, Ldn1
Building A ‐ Northwest 63.6 dBA 38.6 dBA
Building A ‐ Northeast 63.2 dBA 38.2 dBA
Multifamily West 58.4 dBA 33.4 dBA
Multifamily East 54.9 dBA 29.9 dBA
1 Assumes typical 25 dBA exterior‐to‐interior noise level reduction.

FUTURE TRAFFIC NOISE ENVIRONMENT AT OFF‐SITE RECEPTORS
OFF‐SITE TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
To assess noise impacts due to project‐related traffic increases on the local roadway network, traffic noise levels are predicted at sensitive receptors for existing and future, project and no‐project conditions.

Existing, Background, and Cumulative noise levels due to traffic are calculated using the Federal Highway Administration Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA RD‐77‐108). The model is based upon the Calveno reference noise factors for automobiles, medium trucks and heavy trucks, with consideration given to vehicle volume, speed, roadway configuration, distance to the receiver, and the acoustical characteristics of the site.

The FHWA model was developed to predict hourly Leq values for free‐flowing traffic conditions. To predict traffic noise levels in terms of Ldn, it is necessary to adjust the input volume to account for the day/night distribution of traffic.

Project trip generation volumes were provided by the project traffic engineer (RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering 2020), truck usage and vehicle speeds on the local area roadways were estimated from field observations.  The predicted increasesin traffic noise levels on the local roadway network for Existing, Baseline, and Cumulative conditions which would result from the project are provided in terms of Ldn.

Traffic noise levels are predicted at the sensitive receptors located at the closest typical setback distance along each project‐area roadway segment. In some locations sensitive receptors may not receive full shielding from noise barriers, or may be located at distances which vary from the assumed calculation distance.

Table 4, 5, and 6 summarize the modeled traffic noise levels at the nearest sensitive receptors along each roadway segment in the Project area. Appendix C provides the complete inputs and results of the FHWA traffic modeling.

11.f
Packet Pg. 852 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx TABLE 4: EXISTING TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL AND PROJECT‐RELATED TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL INCREASES Roadway Segment
Predicted Exterior Noise Level (dBA Ldn) at
Closest Sensitive Receptors
Existing No
Project
Existing +
Project Change
Highway 1 Hwy 1 North to Reina Del Mar Ave 69.8 69.8 0.0 Highway 1 Reina Del Mar Ave to Fassler Ave 72.4 72.4 0.0 Highway 1 Fassler Ave to Crespi Dr 70.2 70.2 0.0
Highway 1 Crespi Dr to Linda Mar Blvd 66.3 66.3 0.0
Highway 1 Linda Mar Blvd to Hwy 1 South 66.6 66.6 0.0
Reina Del Mar Ave Hwy 1 to Reina Del Mar Ave East 62.3 62.3 0.0 Fassler Ave Hwy 1 to Fassler Ave East 61.2 61.2 0.1
Crespi Dr East of Hwy 1 62.7 62.8 0.1
TABLE 5: BACKGROUND TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL AND PROJECT‐RELATED TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL INCREASES Roadway Segment
Predicted Exterior Noise Level (dBA Ldn) at
Closest Sensitive Receptors
Background
No Project
Background +
Project Change
Highway 1 Hwy 1 North to Reina Del Mar Ave 69.8 69.9 0.0 Highway 1 Reina Del Mar Ave to Fassler Ave 72.4 72.5 0.0 Highway 1 Fassler Ave to Crespi Dr 70.2 70.2 0.0
Highway 1 Crespi Dr to Linda Mar Blvd 66.3 66.3 0.0
Highway 1 Linda Mar Blvd to Hwy 1 South 66.6 66.6 0.0
Reina Del Mar Ave Hwy 1 to Reina Del Mar Ave East 62.3 62.3 0.0 Fassler Ave Hwy 1 to Fassler Ave East 61.2 61.3 0.1
Crespi Dr East of Hwy 1 62.8 62.9 0.1

11.f
Packet Pg. 853 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx TABLE 6: CUMULATIVE TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL AND PROJECT‐RELATED TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL INCREASES Roadway Segment
Predicted Exterior Noise Level (dBA Ldn) at
Closest Sensitive Receptors
Cumulative
No Project
Cumulative +
Project Change
Highway 1 Hwy 1 North to Reina Del Mar Ave 69.9 69.9 0.0 Highway 1 Reina Del Mar Ave to Fassler Ave 72.5 72.5 0.0 Highway 1 Fassler Ave to Crespi Dr 70.2 70.3 0.0
Highway 1 Crespi Dr to Linda Mar Blvd 66.4 66.4 0.0
Highway 1 Linda Mar Blvd to Hwy 1 South 66.6 66.6 0.0
Reina Del Mar Ave Hwy 1 to Reina Del Mar Ave East 62.3 62.3 0.0 Fassler Ave Hwy 1 to Fassler Ave East 61.3 61.3 0.0
Crespi Dr East of Hwy 1 62.7 62.8 0.1

CONSTRUCTION NOISE ENVIRONMENT
The Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) was used to predict noise levels for standard construction equipment used for roadway improvement projects.

The assessment of potential significant noise effects due to construction is based on the standards and procedures described in the Federal Transit Authority (FTA) guidance manual and FHWA’s RCNM.

The RCNM is a Windows‐based noise prediction model that enables the prediction of construction noise levels for a variety of construction equipment based on a compilation of empirical data and the application of acoustical propagation formulas. It enables the calculation of construction noise levels in more detail than the manual methods, which eliminates the need to collect extensive amounts of project‐specific input data. RCNM allows for the modeling of multiple pieces of construction equipment working either independently or simultaneously, the character of noise emission, and the usage factors for each piece of equipment.

Construction noise varies depending on the construction process, type of equipment involved, location of the construction site with respect to sensitive receptors, the schedule proposed to carry out each task (e.g., hours and days of the week), and the duration of the construction work.

Noise sources in the RCNM database include actual noise levels and equipment usage percentages.

This source data was used in this construction noise analysis. Table 7 shows predicted construction noise levels for each of the project construction phases.

11.f
Packet Pg. 854 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx TABLE 7: CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT NOISE LEVELS FOR PRIMARY CONSTRUCTION PHASES Equipment Quantity Usage (%) Maximum, Lmax
(dBA at 50 feet)
Hourly Average, Leq
(dBA at 50 feet)
Site Preparation
Graders 1 40 85 81
Rubber Tired Dozers 1 40 82 78
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 40 78 74
Total: 83
Grading
Graders 1 40 85 81
Rubber Tired Dozers 1 40 82 78
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 40 78 74
Total: 83
Foundations
Pile Driver 1 20 101 94
Total: 94
Building Construction
Cranes 1 16 81 73
Forklifts 1 40 83 79
Generator Sets 1 50 73 70
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 40 78 74
Welders 3 40 74 70
Total: 82
Paving
Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 40 79 75
Pavers 1 50 77 74
Paving Equipment 1 50 77 74
Rollers 1 20 80 73
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 40 78 74
Total: 81
Architectural Coating
Air Compressors 1 40 78 74
Total: 74
Source: FHWA, Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM), January 2006.

Based upon the Table 7 data, the loudest phase of construction with an average noise exposure of 94 dBA Leq at 50 feet would occur during pile driving activities.  The next loudest phase would be grading and site preparation at 83 dBA Leq at 50 feet.  Saxelby Acoustics used the SoundPLAN noise model to calculate noise levels at the nearest sensitive receptors in terms of the City’s day/night average (Ldn) noise level criterion.  It should be noted that the Ldn calculation conservatively assumes twelve hours of continuous construction between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. The results of the construction

11.f
Packet Pg. 855 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx noise analysis are shown graphically on Figure 4 (without pile driving) and Figure 5 (with pile driving).

A summary of the noise prediction results for each phase of construction are shown in Table 8.

TABLE 8: PREDICTED CONSTRUCTION NOISE LEVELS BY LOUDEST PHASES Receiver (Use) Measured Daytime Noise
Level, Ldn1
Predicted Construction
Noise Level, Ldn
Change
Site Preparation
R1 (Residential) 58 dBA 66 dBA +8 dBA
R2 (Residential) 58 dBA 62 dBA +4 dBA
R3 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 40 dBA +0 dBA
R4 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 60 dBA +8 dBA
R5 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 60 dBA +8 dBA
R6 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 59 dBA +7 dBA
R7 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 59 dBA +7 dBA
R8 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 58 dBA +6 dBA
Grading
R1 (Residential) 58 dBA 66 dBA +8 dBA
R2 (Residential) 58 dBA 62 dBA +4 dBA
R3 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 40 dBA +0 dBA
R4 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 60 dBA +8 dBA
R5 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 60 dBA +8 dBA
R6 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 59 dBA +7 dBA
R7 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 59 dBA +7 dBA
R8 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 58 dBA +6 dBA
Foundations (Pile Driving)
R1 (Residential) 58 dBA 76 dBA +18 dBA
R2 (Residential) 58 dBA 72 dBA +14 dBA
R3 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 51 dBA +0 dBA
R4 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 71 dBA +19 dBA
R5 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 71 dBA +19 dBA
R6 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 70 dBA +18 dBA
R7 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 70 dBA +18 dBA
R8 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 69 dBA +17 dBA
Building Construction
R1 (Residential) 58 dBA 65 dBA +7 dBA
R2 (Residential) 58 dBA 61 dBA +3 dBA
R3 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 39 dBA +0 dBA
R4 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 59 dBA +7 dBA

11.f
Packet Pg. 856 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx 1 As measured at Site LT‐1.

R5 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 59 dBA +7 dBA
R6 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 58 dBA +6 dBA
R7 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 58 dBA +6 dBA
R8 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 57 dBA +5 dBA
Paving
R1 (Residential) 58 dBA 64 dBA +6 dBA
R2 (Residential) 58 dBA 60 dBA +2 dBA
R3 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 38 dBA +0 dBA
R4 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 58 dBA +6 dBA
R5 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 58 dBA +6 dBA
R6 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 57 dBA +5 dBA
R7 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 57 dBA +5 dBA
R8 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 56 dBA +4 dBA
Architectural Coating
R1 (Residential) 58 dBA 57 dBA +0 dBA
R2 (Residential) 58 dBA 53 dBA +0 dBA
R3 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 31 dBA +0 dBA
R4 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 51 dBA +0 dBA
R5 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 51 dBA +0 dBA
R6 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 50 dBA +0 dBA
R7 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 50 dBA +0 dBA
R8 (Residential) 52‐58 dBA 49 dBA +0 dBA

11.f
Packet Pg. 857 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive
City of Pacifica, California
Figure 3
Predicted Loudest Construction Noise
Levels (dBA, Ldn)
R1
1 st Floor: 63 dBA
2 nd Floor: 64 dBA
3 rd Floor: 66 dBA
R3
40 dBA
R2
1 st Floor: 60 dBA
2 nd Floor: 61 dBA
3 rd Floor: 62 dBA
R4
60 dBA
R5
60 dBA
R6
59 dBA
R7
59 dBA
R8
58 dBA

11.f
Packet Pg. 858 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Drive
City of Pacifica, California
Figure 5, Pile Driving Construction
Noise Levels
Predicted Loudest Construction Noise
Levels (dBA, Ldn)
R1
1 st Floor: 74 dBA
2 nd Floor: 75 dBA
3 rd Floor: 76 dBA
R3
51 dBA
R2
1 st Floor: 70 dBA
2 nd Floor: 71 dBA
3 rd Floor: 72 dBA
R4
71 dBA
R5
71 dBA
R6
70 dBA
R7
70 dBA
R8
69 dBA

11.f
Packet Pg. 859 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx

CONSTRUCTION VIBRATION ENVIRONMENT
The primary vibration‐generating activities would occur during pile driving, grading, utilities placement, and parking lot construction. Table 9 shows the typical vibration levels produced by construction equipment.

TABLE 9: VIBRATION LEVELS FOR VARIOUS CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT Type of Equipment
Peak Particle Velocity at
25 feet
(inches/second)
Peak Particle Velocity at
50 feet
(inches/second)
Peak Particle Velocity at
100 feet
(inches/second)
Large Bulldozer 0.089 0.031 0.011
Loaded Trucks 0.076 0.027 0.010
Small Bulldozer 0.003 0.001 0.000
Auger/drill Rigs 0.089 0.031 0.011
Jackhammer 0.035 0.012 0.004
Pile Driving (impact) 0.644 0.228 0.081
Pile Driving (sonic) 0.170 0.060 0.023
Vibratory Hammer 0.070 0.025 0.009
Vibratory Compactor/roller 0.210
(Less than 0.20 at 26 feet) 0.074 0.026
Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Guidelines. Federal Transit Administration. May 2006.

11.f
Packet Pg. 860 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx

REGULATORY CONTEXT

FEDERAL
There are no federal regulations related to noise that apply to the Proposed Project.

STATE
The State Building Code, Title 24, Part 2 of the State of California Code of Regulations, establishes uniform minimum noise insulation performance standards to protect persons within new buildings which house people, including hotels, motels, dormitories, apartment houses, and dwellings other than single‐family dwellings. Title 24 mandates that interior noise levels attributable to exterior sources shall not exceed 45 dB Ldn or CNEL in any habitable room. Title 24 also mandates that for structures containing noise‐sensitive uses to be located where the Ldn or CNEL exceeds 60 dB, an acoustical analysis must be prepared to identify mechanisms for limiting exterior noise to the prescribed allowable interior levels. If the interior allowable noise levels are met by requiring that windows be kept closed, the design for the structure must also specify a ventilation or air conditioning system to provide a habitable interior environment.

LOCAL
City of Pacifica 1980 General Plan
The 1980 City of Pacifica General Plan has a Noise Element. However, that document suggests that 60 dB CNEL / Ldn is considered to be a "higher noise level". The City staff have used the 60 dB threshold as the test of significance when evaluating projects. The City of Pacifica is in the process of updating the General Plan. However, that General Plan Update and associated EIR have not been adopted.

City of Pacifica General Plan Update
The noise level standards and guiding policies in the City of Pacifica General Plan are consistent with the State of California guidelines for determining land use compatibility and are similar to those used throughout the State. The thresholds for community land use compatibility which are contained within the proposed General Plan Noise Element are shown in Table 10. For proposed land uses in areas where noise exposure may be expected to be greater than the “normally acceptable” threshold, maximum allowable noise exposure with noise mitigation measure is defined in Table 11. Table 12 provides noise emission standards for new stationary noise sources. Listed below are the noise goals, policies, and implementation measures that would be applicable to the proposed project:

Community Noise Exposure
Table 9‐1 presents the community noise exposure matrix, establishing criteria the City can use to evaluate land use compatibility based on noise levels. This matrix is adapted from guidelines provided by the Office of Planning and Research. Noise exposure levels are classified as being “normally

11.f
Packet Pg. 861 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx acceptable,” “conditionally acceptable,” “normally unacceptable,” or “clearly unacceptable” for different land use types.

Normally Acceptable
 Indoor Uses: Either the activities associated with the land use are inherently noisy orstandard construction methods will sufficiently attenuate exterior noise to an acceptable level; for land use types that are compatible because of inherent noise levels, sound attenuation must be provided for associated office, retail, and other noise‐sensitive indoor spaces sufficient to reduce exterior noise to an interior maximum of 50 dB CNEL.  Outdoor Uses: Outdoor activities associated with the land use may be carried out with minimal interference.

Conditionally Acceptable
 Indoor Uses: Noise reduction measures must be incorporated into the design of the project to attenuate exterior noise to the indoor noise levels listed in Table 9‐2  Outdoor Uses: Noise reduction measures must be incorporated into the design of the project to attenuate exterior noise to the outdoor noise levels listed in Table 9‐2. Acceptability is dependent upon characteristics of the specific use
Normally Unacceptable
 Indoor Uses: Extensive mitigation techniques are required to make the indoor environment accept‐ able for indoor activities. Noise level reductions necessary to attenuate exterior noise to the indoor noise levels listed in Table 9‐2 are difficult to achieve and may not be feasible.
 Outdoor Uses: Severe noise interference makes the outdoor environment unacceptable for out‐ door activities. Noise level reductions necessary to attenuate exterior noise to the outdoor noise levels listed in Table 9‐2 are difficult to achieve and may not be feasible.

Clearly Unacceptable
 New construction or development should generally not be undertaken.

11.f
Packet Pg. 862 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx TABLE 10: PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN UPDATE LAND USE COMPATIBILITY FOR COMMUNITY NOISE ENVIRONMENTS

11.f
Packet Pg. 863 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx TABLE 11: PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN UPDATE ALLOWABLE NOISE EXPOSURE TABLE 12: PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN NOISE LEVEL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR STATIONARY NOISE SOURCES Guiding Policies
NO‐G‐1 Coordination with Other Agencies
Continue to work with other agencies, airports and jurisdictions to reduce noise levels in Pacifica created by their operations.

NO‐G‐2 Acceptable Noise Environment
Strive to achieve an acceptable noise environment for the environmental, health and safety needs of present and future residents of Pacifica.

NO‐G‐3 Sensitive Land Uses
Protect noise sensitive land uses, such as schools, hospitals, and senior care facilities, from encroachment of and exposure to excessive levels of noise.

11.f
Packet Pg. 864 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx Implementing Policies
NO‐I‐1 Community Noise Level Standards
Use the Community Noise Level Exposure Standards, shown in Table 9‐1, as review criteria for new land uses. Require all new development that would be exposed to noise greater than the “normally accept‐ able” noise level range to reduce interior noise through design, sound insulation, or other measures.

NO‐I‐2 Design Features for Noise Reduction
Require noise‐reducing mitigation to meet allowable outdoor and indoor noise expo‐ sure standards in Table 9‐2. Noise mitigation measures that may be approved to achieve these noise level targets include but are not limited to the following:
 Construct façades with substantial weight and insulation;  Use sound‐rated windows for primary sleeping and activity areas;  Use sound‐rated doors for all exterior entries at primary sleeping and activity areas;  Use minimum setbacks and exterior barriers;
 Use acoustic baffling of vents for chimneys, attic and gable ends;  Install a mechanical ventilation system that provides fresh air under closed window conditions.

Alternative acoustical designs that achieve the prescribed noise level standards may be approved, provided that a qualified Acoustical Consultant submits information demonstrating that the alternative designs will achieve and maintain the specific targets for outdoor activity areas and interior spaces.

NO‐I‐3 Best Available Control Technology
Require new, fixed noise sources (e.g. mechanical equipment) to use best avail‐ able control technology (BACT) to minimize noise and vibration.

Noise from mechanical equipment can often be reduced by applying soundproofing materials, mufflers, or other controls provided by the manufacturer.

NO‐I‐4 Mechanical Equipment for New Residential Development Ensure that building regulations require that noise‐generating appliances serving new multi‐family or mixed‐use residential development are located or adequately insulated to protect residents from the noise.

NO‐I‐5 Noise Criteria for City Equipment
Develop noise criteria for new equipment purchased by the City.

11.f
Packet Pg. 865 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx NO‐I‐6 Construction Noise
Continue to limit hours for certain construction and demolition work to reduce construction‐related noises.

NO‐I‐7 Noise from Highways and Buses
Work with Caltrans and Sam Trans to mitigate transportation‐related noise impacts on residential areas and sensitive uses. This may include encouraging installation of sound barriers or bus stop relocation in selected locations.

NO‐I‐8 Airport Noise Disclosure Requirements
Update the Municipal Code to ensure that special disclosure requirements concerning airport noise refer to the most current CNEL noise contours developed for San Francisco International Airport.

NO‐I‐9 Airport Noise Abatement Program
Continue to work with the airport in improving and implementing its noise abatement program.

NO‐I‐10 Residential Sound Insulation Program
If the airport’s federally‐approved 65 dB CNEL annual noise contour is mapped within the City, request that the San Fran‐ cisco Airport’s Residential Sound Insulation Program allocate available federal and airport funding to sensitive, noise‐affected properties in Pacifica.

NO‐I‐11 Noise Ordinance
Update the noise ordinance to implement General Plan policies and noise standards.

NO‐I‐12 Noise Enforcement
Establish a Noise Abatement Unit made up of members of the Police and other departments to enforce the City’s noise regulations and assign primary responsibility for coordinating overall noise control effort to one City department.

11.f
Packet Pg. 866 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx City of Pacifica Municipal Code
The City of Pacifica Municipal Code ‐ Section 8‐1.08 limits hours of construction to 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on weekdays, and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on weekends.

Criteria for Acceptable Vibration
Vibration is like noise in that it involves a source, a transmission path, and a receiver. While vibration is related to noise, it differs in that in that noise is generally considered to be pressure waves transmitted through air, whereas vibration usually consists of the excitation of a structure or surface.

As with noise, vibration consists of an amplitude and frequency. A person’s perception to the vibration will depend on their individual sensitivity to vibration, as well as the amplitude and frequency of the source and the response of the system which is vibrating.

Vibration can be measured in terms of acceleration, velocity, or displacement. A common practice is to monitor vibration measures in terms of peak particle velocities in inches per second. Standards pertaining to perception as well as damage to structures have been developed for vibration levels defined in terms of peak particle velocities.

Human and structural response to different vibration levels is influenced by a number of factors, including ground type, distance between source and receptor, duration, and the number of perceived vibration events. Table 13, which was developed by Caltrans, shows the vibration levels which would normally be required to result in damage to structures. The vibration levels are presented in terms of peak particle velocity in inches per second.

Table 13 indicates that the threshold for architectural damage to structures is 0.20 in/sec p.p.v.  A threshold of 0.20 in/sec p.p.v. is considered to be a reasonable threshold for short‐term construction projects.

11.f
Packet Pg. 867 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx TABLE 13: EFFECTS OF VIBRATION ON PEOPLE AND BUILDINGS
Peak Particle Velocity Human Reaction Effect on Buildings mm/second in/second

0.15‐0.30 0.006‐0.019 Threshold of perception; possibility of intrusion
Vibrations unlikely to cause damage of
any type

2.0 0.08 Vibrations readily perceptible
Recommended upper level of the
vibration to which ruins and ancient
monuments should be subjected

2.5 0.10 Level at which continuous vibrations
begin to annoy people
Virtually no risk of “architectural”
damage to normal buildings

5.0 0.20
Vibrations annoying to people in
buildings (this agrees with the levels
established for people standing on
bridges and subjected to relative
short periods of vibrations)
Threshold at which there is a risk of
“architectural” damage to normal
dwelling ‐ houses with plastered walls
and ceilings. Special types of finish such
as lining of walls, flexible ceiling
treatment, etc., would minimize
“architectural” damage
10‐15 0.4‐0.6
Vibrations considered unpleasant by
people subjected to continuous
vibrations and unacceptable to some
people walking on bridges
Vibrations at a greater level than
normally expected from traffic, but
would cause “architectural” damage
and possibly minor structural damage
Source: Transportation Related Earthborne Vibrations. Caltrans. TAV-02-01-R9601. February 20, 2002.

11.f
Packet Pg. 868 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx

IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines states that a project would normally be considered to result in significant noise impacts if noise levels conflict with adopted environmental standards or plans or if noise generated by the project would substantially increase existing noise levels at sensitive receivers on a permanent or temporary basis. Significance criteria for noise impacts are drawn from CEQA Guidelines Appendix G (Items XI [a‐c]).

Would the project:
a.   Generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
b.   Generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c.   For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
The proposed project is not located within two miles of a public or private airport, therefore item “c” is not discussed any further in this study.

11.f
Packet Pg. 869 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx The City of Pacifica General Plan Noise Element does not establish any specific criteria for evaluating noise level increases.  Therefore, the following increase criteria are recommended.

Noise Level Increase Criteria for Long‐Term Project‐Related Noise Level Increases The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines define a significant impact of a project if it “increases substantially the ambient noise levels for adjoining areas.” Generally, a project may have a significant effect on the environment if it will substantially increase the ambient noise levels for adjoining areas or expose people to severe noise levels. In practice, more specific professional standards have been developed. These standards state that a noise impact may be considered significant if it would generate noise that would conflict with local project criteria or ordinances, or substantially increase noise levels at noise sensitive land uses. The potential increase in traffic noise from the project is a factor in determining significance. Research into the human perception of changes in sound level indicates the following:
 A 3‐dB change is barely perceptible,
 A 5‐dB change is clearly perceptible, and
 A 10‐dB change is perceived as being twice or half as loud.

A limitation of using a single noise level increase value to evaluate noise impacts is that it fails to account for pre‐project‐noise conditions. Table 14 is based upon recommendations made by the Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON) to provide guidance in the assessment of changes in ambient noise levels resulting from aircraft operations. The recommendations are based upon studies that relate aircraft noise levels to the percentage of persons highly annoyed by the noise.

Although the FICON recommendations were specifically developed to assess aircraft noise impacts, it has been accepted that they are applicable to all sources of noise described in terms of cumulative noise exposure metrics such as the Ldn.

TABLE 14: SIGNIFICANCE OF CHANGES IN NOISE EXPOSURE
Ambient Noise Level Without Project, Ldn Increase Required for Significant Impact <60 dB +5.0 dB or more
60‐65 dB +3.0 dB or more
>65 dB +1.5 dB or more
Source: Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON)

11.f
Packet Pg. 870 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx Based on the Table 14 data, an increase in the traffic noise level of 5 dB or more would be significant where the pre‐project noise levels are less than 60 dB Ldn, or 3 dB or more where existing noise levels are between 60 to 65 dB Ldn. Extending this concept to higher noise levels, an increase in the traffic noise level of 1.5 dB or more may be significant where the pre‐project traffic noise level exceeds 65 dB Ldn. The rationale for the Table 14 criteria is that, as ambient noise levels increase, a smaller increase in noise resulting from a project is sufficient to cause annoyance.

Noise Level Increase Criteria for Short‐Term Noise Level Increases For short‐term noise associated with project construction, Saxelby Acoustics recommends use of the Caltrans increase criteria of 12 dBA (Caltrans 2011).

PROJECT‐SPECIFIC IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
IMPACT 1: WOULD THE PROJECT GENERATE A SUBSTANTIAL TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT INCREASE IN

AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROJECT IN EXCESS OF STANDARDS ESTABLISHED IN

THE LOCAL GENERAL PLAN OR NOISE ORDINANCE, OR APPLICABLE STANDARDS OF OTHER AGENCIES?
Exterior noise at New Sensitive Receptors
Based upon ambient noise measurements conducted on the project site, exterior noise levels ranged between 52‐63 dBA Ldn.  This exceeds the City of Pacifica existing General Plan standard of 60 dBA Ldn but complies with the proposed General Plan update standard of 65 dBA Ldn.

The City of Pacifica general plan requires that where noise levels exceed 60 dBA, noise reduction measures must be incorporated into the design of the project to attenuate exterior noise levels listed in Table 9‐2. For residential land uses, the interior noise level must be 45 dBA or less. Standard construction methods typically yield a 25 dBA noise reduction. Where noise levels reach 63 dBA Ldn the interior noise level would be 38 dBA. This complies with City of Pacifica allowable traffic noise exposure limits. This is a less‐than‐significant impact and no mitigation is required.

Traffic Noise Increases
The CEQA guidelines specify criteria to determine the significance of traffic noise impacts. Where existing traffic noise levels are greater than 65 dB Ldn, at the outdoor activity areas of noise‐sensitive uses, a +1.5 dB Ldn increase in roadway noise levels will be considered significant. The maximum increase is traffic noise at the nearest sensitive receptor is predicted to be 0.1 dBA.

Therefore, impacts resulting from increased traffic noise would be considered less‐than‐significant.

11.f
Packet Pg. 871 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx Construction Noise
During the construction phases of the project, noise from construction activities would add to the noise environment in the immediate project vicinity. Based upon the Table 8 data, the proposed project is predicted to generate construction noise levels ranging between 38‐66 dBA Ldn at the nearest noise‐sensitive receptors (excluding use of pile drivers).  Measured ambient noise levels were found to be between 52‐58 dBA Ldn in the vicinity of these uses.  Therefore, the proposed project construction could result in periods of typical construction noise +0 to +8 dBA higher than ambient noise in the project area.  However, pile driving activities during foundation construction would result in substantially higher noise levels with increases in ambient noise of approximately 14‐19 dBA.

The City of Pacifica Noise Ordinance exempts construction activities from the noise standards, provided that they take place between the hours of 7:00 AM and 6:00 PM Monday through Saturday and 9:00 AM and 6:00 PM Sundays and holidays.

Construction activities (excluding pile driving) could result in periods of noise which exceed existing noise levels by up to 8 dBA. This complies with the 12 dBA increase criteria. However, pile driving is predicted to result in noise level increases of 14‐19 dBA, thereby exceeding the 12 dBA increase criteria.

Although construction activities are temporary in nature and would occur during normal daytime working hours, construction‐related noise, especially pile driving, could result in sleep interference at existing noise‐sensitive land uses in the vicinity of the construction if construction activities were to occur outside the normal daytime hours. Therefore, impacts resulting from noise levels temporarily exceeding the threshold of significance due to construction would be considered significant.

Mitigation Measure(s)
Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce the above impact to a less‐than‐ significant level.

MM1: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall prepare a construction noise management plan that identifies measures to be taken to minimize construction noise on surrounding sensitive land uses and include specific noise management measures to be included within the project plans and specifications, subject to review and approval by the City Planning Division. The project applicant shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the City that the project complies with the following:
 Construction activities shall only take place between the hours limited 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekdays, and 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday.  All heavy construction equipment used on the proposed project shall be maintained in good operating condition, with all internal combustion, engine‐driven equipment fitted with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition.

11.f
Packet Pg. 872 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx  All mobile or fixed noise producing equipment used on the proposed project that is regulated for noise output by a local, state, or federal agency shall comply with such regulations while in the source of project activity.
 Where feasible, electrically‐powered equipment shall be used instead of pneumatic or internal combustion powered equipment.
 All stationary noise‐generating equipment shall be located as far away as possible from neighboring property lines.
 Signs prohibiting unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines shall be posted.  A truck route haul plan shall be created to avoid residential areas.  The use of noise‐producing signals, including horns, whistles, alarms and bells shall be for safety warning purposes only.
 Notify neighbors within 500 feet of the construction site of the construction schedule and that there could be noticeable vibration levels resulting from pile driving.  Foundation pile holes shall be pre‐drilled to minimize the number of impacts required to seat the pile.
 Jet or partially jet piles into place to minimize the number of impacts required to seat the pile.
 For impact pile driving, multiple‐pile drivers shall be considered to expedite construction.

Although noise levels generated by multiple pile drivers would be higher than the noise generated by a single pile driver, the total duration of pile driving activities would be reduced.
 For impact pile driving, temporary noise control blanket barriers shall shroud pile drivers or be erected in a manner to shield the adjacent land uses.  A noise complaint coordinator shall be retained amongst the construction crew to be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. When a complaint isreceived, the coordinatorshall notify the City within 24 hours of the complaint and determine the cause of the noise complaint and shall implement reasonable measures to resolve the compliant, as deemed acceptable by the City.

11.f
Packet Pg. 873 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx IMPACT 2: WOULD THE PROJECT GENERATE EXCESSIVE GROUNDBORNE VIBRATION OR GROUNDBORNE NOISE LEVELS?
Construction vibration impacts include human annoyance and building structural damage. Human annoyance occurs when construction vibration rises significantly above the threshold of perception.

Building damage can take the form of cosmetic or structural.

The Table 9 data indicate that construction vibration levels anticipated for the project are less than the 0.2 in/sec threshold at distances of 26 feet (excluding pile driving). Sensitive receptors which could be impacted by construction related vibrations, especially vibratory compactors/rollers, are located approximately 26 feet, or further, from typical construction activities. At these distances construction vibrations are not predicted to exceed acceptable levels. Additionally, construction activities would be temporary in nature and would likely occur during normal daytime working hours.

For pile driving activities, uses located within approximately 50‐100 feet could experience levels of vibration exceeding 0.2 in/sec PPV.  Therefore, this impact is significant.

Mitigation Measure(s)
Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce the above impact to a less‐than‐ significant level.

MM2: A construction vibration monitoring plan shall be implemented to document conditions prior to, during, and after pile driving. The construction vibration monitoring plan should be implemented to include the following tasks:
 Identification of sensitivity to ground‐borne vibration of nearby structures. A vibration survey (generally described below) would need to be performed.  Performance of a photo survey, elevation survey, and crack monitoring survey for each of these structures. Surveys shall be performed prior to any pile driving activity, in regular interval during pile driving, and after completion and shall include internal and external crack monitoring in structures, settlement, and distress and shall document the condition of foundations, walls and other structural elements in the interior and exterior of said structures.
 Development of a vibration monitoring and construction contingency plan to identify structures where monitoring would be conducted, set up a vibration monitoring schedule, define structure‐specific vibration limits, and address the need to conduct photo, elevation, and crack surveys to document before and after pile driving. Alternative construction methods would be identified for when vibration levels approach safe limits.  If vibration levels approach limits, suspend construction and implement alternative construction methods to either lower vibration levels or secure the affected structures.

11.f
Packet Pg. 874 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx  Conduct post‐survey on structures where either monitoring has indicated high levels or complaints of damage has been made. Make appropriate repairs or compensation where damage has occurred as a result of construction activities.

IMPACT  3: FOR A PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN THE VICINITY OF A PRIVATE AIRSTRIP OR AN AIRPORT LAND USE

PLAN OR, WHERE SUCH A PLAN HAS NOT BEEN ADOPTED, WITHIN TWO MILES OF A PUBLIC AIRPORT

OR PUBLIC USE AIRPORT, WOULD THE PROJECT EXPOSE PEOPLE RESIDING OR WORKING IN THE PROJECT AREA TO EXCESSIVE NOISE LEVELS?
There are no airports in the project vicinity.  Therefore, this impact is not applicable to the proposed project.

11.f
Packet Pg. 875 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 570 Crespi Drive – City of Pacifica, CA
Job #200204
October 1, 2021 www.SaxNoise.com

\\SAXDESKTOPNEW\Job Folders\200204 570 Crespi Drive IS\Word\200204 570 Crespi Drive Noise 10‐1‐21.docx

REFERENCES
American National Standards Institute. (1998). [Standard] ANSI S1.43‐1997 (R2007):

Specifications for integrating‐averaging sound level meters. New York: Acoustical Society of America.

American Standard Testing Methods, Standard Guide for Measurement of Outdoor A‐Weighted Sound Levels, American Standard Testing Methods (ASTM) E1014‐08, 2008.

ASTM E1014‐12. Standard Guide for Measurement of Outdoor A‐Weighted Sound Levels. ASTM International. West Conshohocken, PA. 2012.

ASTM E1780‐12. Standard Guide for Measuring Outdoor Sound Received from a Nearby Fixed Source. ASTM International. West Conshohocken, PA. 2012.

Barry, T M. (1978). FHWA highway traffic noise prediction model (FHWA‐RD‐77‐108).

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of transportation, Federal highway administration, Office of research, Office of environmental policy.

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Technical Noise Supplement, Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, September 2013.

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, May 2011.

Egan, M. D. (1988). Architectural acoustics. United States of America: McGraw‐Hill Book Company.

Federal Highway Administration. FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide. FHWA‐ HEP‐05‐054 DOT‐VNTSC‐FHWA‐05‐01. January 2006.

Hanson, Carl E. (Carl Elmer). (2006). Transit noise and vibration impact assessment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Office of Planning and Environment.

International Electrotechnical Commission. Technical committee 29:  Electroacoustics.

International Organization of Legal Metrology. (2013). Electroacoustics: Sound level meters.

International Organization for Standardization. (1996). Acoustic ‐ ISO 9613‐2: Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors. Part 2: General methods of calculation. Ginevra:

I.S.O.

Miller, L. N., Bolt, Beranek, & and Newman, Inc. (1981). Noise control for buildings and manufacturing plants. Cambridge, MA: Bolt, Beranek and Newman, Inc.

SoundPLAN.  SoundPLAN GmbH. Backnang, Germany.  http://www.soundplan.eu/english/

11.f
Packet Pg. 876 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Appendix A: Acoustical Terminology
Acoustics   The science of sound.

Ambient Noise  The distinctive acoustical characteristics of a given space consisting of all noise sources audible at that location. In many cases, the term ambient is used to describe an existing or pre‐project condition such as the setting in an environmental noise study.

ASTC  Apparent  Sound  Transmission  Class.    Similar  to  STC  but  includes  sound  from  flanking  paths  and  correct  for  room reverberation. A larger number means more attenuation. The scale, like the decibel scale for sound, is logarithmic.

Attenuation   The reduction of an acoustic signal.

A‐Weighting   A  frequency‐response  adjustment  of  a  sound  level meter  that  conditions  the  output  signal  to  approximate  human response.

Decibel or dB   Fundamental  unit  of  sound, A Bell is  defined as  the logarithm  of  the  ratio  of  the  sound  pressure  squared  over  the reference pressure squared. A Decibel is one‐tenth of a Bell.

CNEL   Community Noise Equivalent Level. Defined as  the 24‐hour average noise level with noise occurring during evening hours (7 ‐ 10 p.m.) weighted by +5 dBA and nighttime hours weighted by +10 dBA.

DNL  See definition of Ldn.

IIC  Impact  Insulation  Class.  An  integer‐number  rating  of  how  well  a  building  floor  attenuates  impact  sounds,  such  as footsteps. A larger number means more attenuation. The scale, like the decibel scale for sound, is logarithmic.

Frequency   The measure of the rapidity of alterations of a periodic signal, expressed in cycles per second or hertz (Hz).

Ldn     Day/Night Average Sound Level. Similar to CNEL but with no evening weighting.

Leq     Equivalent or energy‐averaged sound level.

Lmax     The highest root‐mean‐square (RMS) sound level measured over a given period of time.

L(n)   The sound level exceeded a described percentile over a measurement period. For instance, an hourly L50 is the sound level exceeded 50% of the time during the one‐hour period.

Loudness   A subjective term for the sensation of the magnitude of sound.

NIC  Noise Isolation Class.  A rating of the noise reduction between two spaces.  Similar to STC but includes sound  from flanking paths and no correction for room reverberation.

NNIC  Normalized Noise Isolation Class.  Similar to NIC but includes a correction for room reverberation.

Noise     Unwanted sound.

NRC   Noise Reduction Coefficient. NRC is a single‐number rating of the sound‐absorption of a material equal to the arithmetic mean of the sound‐absorption coefficients in the 250, 500, 1000, and 2,000 Hz octave frequency bands rounded to the nearest multiple  of  0.05. It  is  a  representation  of  the  amount of  sound energy  absorbed  upon  striking  a  particular surface. An NRC of 0 indicates perfect reflection; an NRC of 1 indicates perfect absorption.

RT60     The time it takes reverberant sound to decay by 60 dB once the source has been removed.

Sabin   The unit of sound absorption. One square foot of material absorbing 100% of incident sound has an absorption of 1 Sabin.

SEL   Sound Exposure Level. SEL is a rating, in decibels, of a discrete event, such as an aircraft flyover or train pass by, that compresses the total sound energy into a one‐second event.

SPC  Speech Privacy Class. SPC is a method of rating speech privacy in buildings. It is designed  to measure the degree of speech  privacy  provided  by  a  closed  room,  indicating  the  degree  to  which  conversations  occurring  within  are  kept private from listeners outside the room.

STC   Sound Transmission Class. STC is an integer rating of how well a building partition attenuates airborne sound. It is widely used  to  rate  interior  partitions,  ceilings/floors,  doors,  windows  and  exterior  wall  configurations.    The  STC  rating  is typically used to rate the sound transmission of a specific building element when tested in laboratory conditions where flanking paths around the assembly don’t exist.   A larger number means more attenuation. The scale, like the decibel scale for sound, is logarithmic.

Threshold  The lowest sound that can be perceived by the human auditory system, generally considered of Hearing   to be 0 dB for persons with perfect hearing.

Threshold   Approximately 120 dB above the threshold of hearing. of Pain
Impulsive   Sound of short duration, usually less than one second, with an abrupt onset and rapid decay.

Simple Tone         Any sound which can be judged as audible as a single pitch or set of single pitches.

11.f
Packet Pg. 877 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Appendix B: Continuous and Short‐Term
Ambient Noise Measurement Results

11.f
Packet Pg. 878 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Site: LT-1
Project: Meter:

Leq Lmax L50 L90 Location: Calibrator:

Thursday, April 9, 2020 12:00 55 70 53 49 Coordinates: 37.5984580°, Thursday, April 9, 2020 13:00 55 77 51 47
Thursday, April 9, 2020 14:00 54 66 52 48
Thursday, April 9, 2020 15:00 53 70 51 48
Thursday, April 9, 2020 16:00 56 81 52 49
Thursday, April 9, 2020 17:00 55 76 51 48
Thursday, April 9, 2020 18:00 53 68 51 47
Thursday, April 9, 2020 19:00 54 84 48 44
Thursday, April 9, 2020 20:00 49 66 46 43
Thursday, April 9, 2020 21:00 48 71 45 42
Thursday, April 9, 2020 22:00 47 66 43 41
Thursday, April 9, 2020 23:00 47 68 42 39
Friday, April 10, 2020 0:00 46 70 42 40
Friday, April 10, 2020 1:00 44 57 43 40
Friday, April 10, 2020 2:00 45 60 43 42
Friday, April 10, 2020 3:00 54 77 45 42
Friday, April 10, 2020 4:00 51 70 45 42
Friday, April 10, 2020 5:00 53 70 50 45
Friday, April 10, 2020 6:00 54 69 52 49
Friday, April 10, 2020 7:00 54 72 52 49
Friday, April 10, 2020 8:00 55 71 53 49
Friday, April 10, 2020 9:00 55 72 52 48
Friday, April 10, 2020 10:00 55 76 52 47
Friday, April 10, 2020 11:00 52 70 50 47
Leq Lmax L50 L90
54 73 51 47
51 67 45 42
48 66 45 42
56 84 53 49
44 57 42 39
54 77 52 49
58 78
CNEL 58 Night % 22
Day Low
Day High
Night Low
Night High
Ldn Day %
Night Average
CAL200
-122.4989071°
Thursday, April 9, 2020 Friday, April 10, 2020
Statistics
Day Average
Appendix B1: Continuous Noise Monitoring Results
Date Time
Measured Level, dBA 570 Crespi Drive IS
Northern Project Boundary
LDL 820-1
70 77
66 70
81 76
68 84
66 71
66 68
70 57
60 77
70 70
69 72 71
72 76
70 49
47 48 48 49 48 47
44 43
42 41
39 40 40
42 42 42
45 49 49 49 48 47 47
55 55
54 53
56 55
53 54
49 48
47 47 46
44 45
54 51
53 54 54 55 55 55
52 25
35 45
55 65
75 85
Measured Hourly Noise Levels, dBA
Time of Day
Measured Ambient Noise Levels vs. Time of Day
Lmax L90 Leq
Noise Measurement Site
LT-1

11.f
Packet Pg. 879 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Site: ST-1
Project: 570 Crespi Drive Meter:

Location: South of Project Site Calibrator:

Coordinates: 37.5970769°,
Start:

Stop:

SLM: Model 831
Serial: 2893
Duration: 0:10
Leq: 55
Lmax: 93
Lmin: 40
L50: 44
L90: 42
Appendix B2: Short Term Noise Monitoring Results
-122.4999696°
2020-04-09 13:05:52
2020-04-09 13:15:52
Measurement Results, dBA
Highway 1 audible. Lmax caused by passing cars on Anza Drive.

Notes
LDL 831-4
CAL200
Noise Measurement Site
33 36
38 42
29 30 31 33
35 36 37
44 47
44 47 47 46
42 40 38 38 38 37 36 36
61 65
68 72 72
75 78 78 78 80 81 83 82 84 83 82 81 81 79 79 78 78
76 76
71 15.0

25.0 35.0

45.0 55.0

65.0 75.0

85.0 95.0
Measured Noise Level, dBA
1/3 Octave Band Center Frequency
Measured Ambient Noise Frequency Spectrum
Overall 1/3 Spectra Max 1/3 Spectra
ST-1

11.f
Packet Pg. 880 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of Site: ST-2
Project: 570 Crespi Drive Meter:

Location: Center of Project Site Calibrator:

Coordinates: 37.5979586°,
Start:

Stop:

SLM: Model 831
Serial: 2893
Duration: 0:10
Leq: 48
Lmax: 58
Lmin: 43
L50: 47
L90: 45
Measurement Results, dBA
Highway 1 is primary noise source. Lmax caused by passing vehicle on Crespi Drive.

Notes
LDL 831-4
CAL200
-122.4992836°
2020-04-10 13:21:54
2020-04-10 13:31:54
Appendix B3: Short Term Noise Monitoring Results
Noise Measurement Site
15 21
26 31 32
36 31
28 28
30 32
34 37
39 40 40 39 38
36 35 34 35 35 35 36
22 34
38 50
47 57
45 41 41
43 50 49
51 51 52
50 48
45 46 45
41 41
44 40 39

10.0 20.0

30.0 40.0

50.0 60.0
Measured Noise Level, dBA
1/3 Octave Band Center Frequency
Measured Ambient Noise Frequency Spectrum
Overall 1/3 Spectra Max 1/3 Spectra
ST-2

11.f
Packet Pg. 881 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of Appendix C: Traffic Noise Calculation
Inputs and Results

11.f
Packet Pg. 882 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Project #:

Description:Ldn/CNEL: Ldn
Hard/Soft: Soft
60 dBA
65 dBA
70 dBA
Level,
dBA
1 Highway 1 Hwy 1 North to Reina Del Mar Ave 42,230 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 100 0 451 209 97 69.8 2 Highway 1 Reina Del Mar Ave to Fassler Ave 40,210 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 65 0 437 203 94 72.4 3 Highway 1 Fassler Ave to Crespi Dr 29,740 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 75 0 357 166 77 70.2 4 Highway 1 Crespi Dr to Linda Mar Blvd 24,620 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 120 0 315 146 68 66.3 5 Highway 1 Linda Mar Blvd to Hwy 1 South 14,250 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 80 0 219 102 47 66.6 6 Reina Del Mar Ave Hwy 1 to Reina Del Mar Ave East 5,260 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 25 35 0 50 23 11 62.3 7 Fassler Ave Hwy 1 to Fassler Ave East 11,500 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 25 70 0 84 39 18 61.2 8 Crespi Dr East of Hwy 1 7,080 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 25 40 0 61 28 13 62.7 9 Linda Mar Blvd Hwy 1 to Peralta Rd 15,440 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 30 45 0 130 60 28 66.9 Appendix C‐1
200204
FHWA‐RD‐77‐108 Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model
570 Crespi Drive IS ‐ Existing
Contours (ft.) ‐ No
Offset
Offset
Speed Distance (dB)
% Hvy.

Trucks
% Med.

Trucks
Night
%
Eve
%
Day
Segment Roadway Segment ADT %

11.f
Packet Pg. 883
Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of Project #:

Description:Ldn/CNEL: Ldn
Hard/Soft: Soft
60 dBA
65 dBA
70 dBA
Level,
dBA
1 Highway 1 Hwy 1 North to Reina Del Mar Ave 42,520 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 100 0 453 210 98 69.8 2 Highway 1 Reina Del Mar Ave to Fassler Ave 40,500 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 65 0 439 204 95 72.4 3 Highway 1 Fassler Ave to Crespi Dr 29,980 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 75 0 359 167 77 70.2 4 Highway 1 Crespi Dr to Linda Mar Blvd 24,740 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 120 0 316 147 68 66.3 5 Highway 1 Linda Mar Blvd to Hwy 1 South 14,270 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 80 0 219 102 47 66.6 6 Reina Del Mar Ave Hwy 1 to Reina Del Mar Ave East 5,260 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 25 35 0 50 23 11 62.3 7 Fassler Ave Hwy 1 to Fassler Ave East 11,650 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 25 70 0 84 39 18 61.2 8 Crespi Dr East of Hwy 1 7,260 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 25 40 0 62 29 13 62.8 9 Linda Mar Blvd Hwy 1 to Peralta Rd 15,530 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 30 45 0 131 61 28 66.9 Offset
(dB)
Contours (ft.) ‐ No
Offset
Eve
%
Night
%
% Med.

Trucks
% Hvy.

Trucks Speed Distance
Appendix C‐2FHWA‐RD‐77‐108 Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model 200204570 Crespi Drive IS ‐ Existing Plus Project
Segment Roadway Segment ADT
Day
%

11.f
Packet Pg. 884
Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of Project #:

Description:Ldn/CNEL: Ldn
Hard/Soft: Soft
60 dBA
65 dBA
70 dBA
Level,
dBA
1 Highway 1 Hwy 1 North to Reina Del Mar Ave 42,520 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 100 0 453 210 98 69.8 2 Highway 1 Reina Del Mar Ave to Fassler Ave 40,500 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 65 0 439 204 95 72.4 3 Highway 1 Fassler Ave to Crespi Dr 29,980 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 75 0 359 167 77 70.2 4 Highway 1 Crespi Dr to Linda Mar Blvd 24,740 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 120 0 316 147 68 66.3 5 Highway 1 Linda Mar Blvd to Hwy 1 South 14,270 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 80 0 219 102 47 66.6 6 Reina Del Mar Ave Hwy 1 to Reina Del Mar Ave East 5,260 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 25 35 0 50 23 11 62.3 7 Fassler Ave Hwy 1 to Fassler Ave East 11,650 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 25 70 0 84 39 18 61.2 8 Crespi Dr East of Hwy 1 7,260 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 25 40 0 62 29 13 62.8 9 Linda Mar Blvd Hwy 1 to Peralta Rd 15,530 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 30 45 0 131 61 28 66.9 Offset
(dB)
Contours (ft.) ‐ No
Offset
Eve
%
Night
%
% Med.

Trucks
% Hvy.

Trucks Speed Distance
Appendix C‐3FHWA‐RD‐77‐108 Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model 200204570 Crespi Drive IS ‐ Background
Segment Roadway Segment ADT
Day
%

11.f
Packet Pg. 885
Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of Project #:

Description:Ldn/CNEL: Ldn
Hard/Soft: Soft
60 dBA
65 dBA
70 dBA
Level,
dBA
1 Highway 1 Hwy 1 North to Reina Del Mar Ave 42,810 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 100 0 455 211 98 69.9 2 Highway 1 Reina Del Mar Ave to Fassler Ave 40,790 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 65 0 441 205 95 72.5 3 Highway 1 Fassler Ave to Crespi Dr 30,220 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 75 0 361 168 78 70.2 4 Highway 1 Crespi Dr to Linda Mar Blvd 24,860 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 120 0 317 147 68 66.3 5 Highway 1 Linda Mar Blvd to Hwy 1 South 14,290 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 80 0 219 102 47 66.6 6 Reina Del Mar Ave Hwy 1 to Reina Del Mar Ave East 5,260 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 25 35 0 50 23 11 62.3 7 Fassler Ave Hwy 1 to Fassler Ave East 11,800 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 25 70 0 85 39 18 61.3 8 Crespi Dr East of Hwy 1 7,440 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 25 40 0 63 29 13 62.9 9 Linda Mar Blvd Hwy 1 to Peralta Rd 15,620 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 30 45 0 131 61 28 67.0 Offset
(dB)
Contours (ft.) ‐ No
Offset
Eve
%
Night
%
% Med.

Trucks
% Hvy.

Trucks Speed Distance
Appendix C‐4FHWA‐RD‐77‐108 Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model 200204570 Crespi Drive IS ‐ Background Plus Project
Segment Roadway Segment ADT
Day
%

11.f
Packet Pg. 886
Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of Project #:

Description:Ldn/CNEL: Ldn
Hard/Soft: Soft
60 dBA
65 dBA
70 dBA
Level,
dBA
1 Highway 1 Hwy 1 North to Reina Del Mar Ave 42,860 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 100 0 456 212 98 69.9 2 Highway 1 Reina Del Mar Ave to Fassler Ave 40,840 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 65 0 441 205 95 72.5 3 Highway 1 Fassler Ave to Crespi Dr 30,210 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 75 0 361 168 78 70.2 4 Highway 1 Crespi Dr to Linda Mar Blvd 25,140 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 120 0 319 148 69 66.4 5 Highway 1 Linda Mar Blvd to Hwy 1 South 14,300 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 80 0 219 102 47 66.6 6 Reina Del Mar Ave Hwy 1 to Reina Del Mar Ave East 5,260 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 25 35 0 50 23 11 62.3 7 Fassler Ave Hwy 1 to Fassler Ave East 11,760 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 25 70 0 85 39 18 61.3 8 Crespi Dr East of Hwy 1 7,130 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 25 40 0 61 28 13 62.7 9 Linda Mar Blvd Hwy 1 to Peralta Rd 15,990 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 30 45 0 133 62 29 67.1 Offset
(dB)
Contours (ft.) ‐ No
Offset
Eve
%
Night
%
% Med.

Trucks
% Hvy.

Trucks Speed Distance
Appendix C‐5FHWA‐RD‐77‐108 Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model 200204570 Crespi Drive IS ‐ Cumulative
Segment Roadway Segment ADT
Day
%

11.f
Packet Pg. 887
Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of Project #:

Description:Ldn/CNEL: Ldn
Hard/Soft: Soft
60 dBA
65 dBA
70 dBA
Level,
dBA
1 Highway 1 Hwy 1 North to Reina Del Mar Ave 43,010 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 100 0 457 212 98 69.9 2 Highway 1 Reina Del Mar Ave to Fassler Ave 40,990 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 65 0 442 205 95 72.5 3 Highway 1 Fassler Ave to Crespi Dr 30,360 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 75 0 362 168 78 70.3 4 Highway 1 Crespi Dr to Linda Mar Blvd 25,170 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 120 0 320 148 69 66.4 5 Highway 1 Linda Mar Blvd to Hwy 1 South 14,310 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 45 80 0 219 102 47 66.6 6 Reina Del Mar Ave Hwy 1 to Reina Del Mar Ave East 5,260 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 25 35 0 50 23 11 62.3 7 Fassler Ave Hwy 1 to Fassler Ave East 11,760 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 25 70 0 85 39 18 61.3 8 Crespi Dr East of Hwy 1 7,310 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 25 40 0 62 29 13 62.8 9 Linda Mar Blvd Hwy 1 to Peralta Rd 16,010 78 0 22 1.0% 1.0% 30 45 0 133 62 29 67.1 Offset
(dB)
Contours (ft.) ‐ No
Offset
Eve
%
Night
%
% Med.

Trucks
% Hvy.

Trucks Speed Distance
Appendix C‐6FHWA‐RD‐77‐108 Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model 200204570 Crespi Drive IS ‐ Cumulative Plus Project
Segment Roadway Segment ADT
Day
%

11.f
Packet Pg. 888
Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of Appendix E
Transportation Impact Analysis

11.f
Packet Pg. 889 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Civil and Transportation Engineering

TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
570 CRESPI DRIVE

PACIFICA, CALIFORNIA
August 13, 2019
Rev. November 8, 2021
Prepared for -
Brendan Murphy
P.O. Box 301
San Mateo, CA 94401
837 Columba Lane • Foster City, CA 94404 • (650)212-0837 • FAX(650)212-3150

11.f
Packet Pg. 890 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Table of Contents
Section Page

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

2. Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

3. Background Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

4. Project Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

5. Cumulative Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

6. Site Access and Circulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

7. Conclusions and Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Appendices
A. Traffic Count Data
B. Levels of Service Calculation Worksheets
C. Traffic Analysis Worksheets
ii

11.f
Packet Pg. 891 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) List of Figures
Figure Page

1. Location Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

2. Existing Intersection Lane Configurations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

3. Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

4. Background Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

5. Project Vehicle Trip Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

6. Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

7. Cumulative Peak Hour Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

8. Cumulative + Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

9. Site Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 iii

11.f
Packet Pg. 892 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) List of Tables
Table Page
A. Levels of Service Definitions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 B. Levels of Service - Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 C. Levels of Service - Background Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 D. Project Vehicle Trip Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 E. Levels of Service - Project Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 F. Levels of Service - Existing + Project Conditions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 G. Levels of Service - Cumulative Conditions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 H. Parking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 iv

11.f
Packet Pg. 893 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

INTRODUCTION
SECTION 1.

STUDY PURPOSE
The purpose of this study is to quantify and analyze the traffic impacts of a proposed mixed use development consisting of 19 multifamily dwelling units and 3,165 square feet of commercial floor space on Crespi Drive in the City of Pacifica. See Figure 1, Location Map, page 2.

ANALYSIS METHODOLOGIES
Four intersections have been designated for analysis in this study. They are – 1) Route 1 & Linda Mar Boulevard/San Pedro Avenue
2) Route 1 & Crespi Drive
3) Route 1 & Fassler Avenue/Rockaway Beach Avenue
4) Route 1 & Reina Del Mar Avenue
The four designated study area intersections have been analyzed according to the methodologies contained in the 2010 edition of the Highway Capacity Manual. Using the PTV VISTRO 7.00- 06 1 network modeling program a traffic network model was created to analyze the streets and intersections within the project study area.

ANALYSIS SCENARIOS
Six scenarios have been developed and analyzed in this study.

1. Existing Conditions. Current (2019) traffic volumes within the study area.

2. Background Conditions (Existing + Approved Projects). Background traffic is that traffic expected to be present at the time the project is ready for occupancy. It consists of existing traffic plus traffic to be generated by those developments that are anticipated to be built and occupied by the time the project is ready for occupancy.

3. Project Conditions. (Existing + Approved + Project) Project trips are estimated based on the proposed land use and are then added to Background Conditions traffic in order to obtain the Project Conditions traffic scenario.
1 1 PTV America, VISTRO 7.00-06 © 2019

11.f
Packet Pg. 894 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

FASSLER AV

CRESPIDR

LINDA MAR BL

ADOBE DR

PERALTA RD

REINA DEL MAR AV

P A C I F I C A
P a c i f i c O c e a n
Point San Pedro
SHARP
PARK
1 1

LOCATION MAP
FIGURE 1
0 500 1000 2000
Scale in feet (meters)
Study Area Intersection
2 Project Location

11.f
Packet Pg. 895 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

4. Existing + Project Conditions. Because of a California Supreme Court decision, traffic impact analyses must now include an existing + project conditions scenario.

5. Cumulative Conditions. (Existing + Approved + Future Development) Cumulative traffic is that traffic expected to be present within five years of completion of this development. It consists of existing traffic plus trips from Approved Projects plus trips from future development projects within the study area.

6. Cumulative + Project Conditions. Scenario #5 with the addition of the project itself. 3 11.f
Packet Pg. 896 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

EXISTING CONDITIONS
SECTION 2.

ROADWAY NETWORK
State Route 1. Route 1 through the project study area is a 4-lane, divided highway running generally north-south through the project study area.

Crespi Drive. Crespi Drive is classified as a collector street in the Pacifica General Plan.

Between Route 1 and Roberts Road it is a four-lane street running east-west. East of Roberts Road it is a two-lane street with parking generally allowed on both sides of the street.

INTERSECTION LANE CONFIGURATIONS
The lane configurations and controls of the four study area intersections are shown on Figure 2, Existing Intersection Lane Configurations, page 5.

EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Existing 2019 peak hour traffic volumes through the study area intersections are shown on Figure 3, Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes, page 6. Peak hours for purposes of this study are those that occur between 7 and 9 a.m. and between 4 and 6 p.m. on an average weekday. See Appendix A for traffic count data. Also, see Appendix C for a comparison of traffic count data from 2013 and 2019 for the four intersections on Route 1 included in this analysis.

LEVELS OF SERVICE DEFINED
LOS (Levels of Service) methodologies are described in Section 1. Levels of Service define how well or how poorly a traffic facility ( a street or an intersection) is operating. There are by definition six Levels of Service. These definitions are presented in Table A on page 7.

LEVELS OF SERVICE STANDARDS
The San Mateo County Congestion Management Program has set Levels of Service standards for major roadways and intersections within the County. Route 1 through Pacifica is a designated CMP roadway. The CMP designated LOS standard for Route 1 in Pacifica is E. While none of the four study area intersections along Route 1 is a designated CMP intersection, the CMP 4 11.f
Packet Pg. 897 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

FASSLER AV
CRESPI

ROBERTS
ROAD
DR

LINDA MAR BL

REINA DEL MAR AV
P a c i f i c P A C I F I C A
O c e a n
Point San Pedro
SHARP
PALME
O BL
1 1

REFERENCE

ADOBE DR

PERALTA RD

EXISTING INTERSECTION

LANE CONFIGURATIONS
5 FIGURE 2
3 4
2 1
NOTE: Intersections are oriented according
to their placement in the VISTRO traffic
network model. North orientation in VISTRO
model is Reference North on this diagram.
6 PHASE, SPLIT
6 PHASE, SPLIT
4 3
2 3 PHASE
1 6 PHASE, SPLIT
N
N
N
N

11.f
Packet Pg. 898 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

FASSLER AV
CRESPI

ROBERTS
ROAD
DR

LINDA MAR BL

REINA DEL MAR AV
P a c i f i c P A C I F I C A
O c e a n
Point San Pedro
SHARP
PALME
O BL
1 1

REFERENCE

ADOBE DR

PERALTA RD

EXISTING PEAK HOUR

TRAFFIC VOLUMES
6 FIGURE 3
3 4
2 1
1 112(164)
300(659)
368(710)
565(367)
59(78)
78(156)
130(132)
57(117)
11(33)
17(31)
524(430)
105(116)
N
3 2
N
N
N
KEY:
000(000) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
AM Peak Hour Between 7 and 9 AM
PM Peak Hour Between 4 and 6 PM
40(88)
857(1736)
320(724)
675(1504)
161(379)
766(330)
22(27)
7(19)
347(214)
60(59)
87(131)
13(42)
27(91)
34(83)
1502(1012)
3(8)
1202(877)
78(56)
4 72(4)
1117(2474)
122(220)
308(125)
0(3)
123(94)
4(14)
53(2)
0(5) 5(2)
2204(1386)
177(82)

11.f
Packet Pg. 899 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) standards for intersections on designated CMP roadways is appropriate:
“ . . .the (intersection) standard is set to be LOS E to correspond to the standard established for the adjacent roadway segment.”2
For the City of Pacifica the LOS Standard is “D” for all public streets. See Appendix C for additional information regarding the definition of significant impact.

TABLE A: Levels of Service Definitions for Signalized Intersections Level of
Service Traffic Flow Conditions
Control
Delay per
Vehicle
(sec./veh)
A
Conditions of free flow; speed is controlled by driver’s desires, stipulated speed limits, or physical roadway conditions.
<10
B
Conditions of stable flow; operating speeds beginning to be restricted; little or no restrictions on maneuverability from other vehicles. >10-20 C
Conditions of stable flow; speeds and maneuverability more closely restricted; occasional backups behind left-turning vehicles at intersections. >20-35
D
Conditions approach unstable flow; tolerable speeds can be maintained but temporary restrictions may cause extensive delays; little freedom to maneuver; comfort and convenience low; at intersections some motorists, especially those making left turns, may wait through one or more signal changes. >35-55
E
Conditions approach capacity; unstable flow with stoppages of momentary duration; maneuverability severely limited.
>55-80
F
Forced flow conditions; stoppages for long periods; low operating speeds.

Delays at intersections average 60 seconds or more.
>80
Source: Exhibit 18-4, Highway Capacity Manual 2010.

EXISTING CONDITIONS LEVELS OF SERVICE
Levels of Service have been calculated for the existing conditions scenario using the analysis methods contained in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual. The results of the LOS calculations are summarized in Table B on page 8. The calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix B.

The LOS calculations do not necessarily reflect the extensive queuing that occurs on westbound Fassler Avenue and northbound Route 1 during the morning peak traffic period. The LOS calculations are based on the actual volumes entering the intersections and not on the volumes that could enter the intersections if adequate capacity was in place. The City of Pacifica and the 7 2
San Mateo County Congestion Management Program LOS Standard for Intersections, 5.e.

11.f
Packet Pg. 900 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) San Mateo County Transportation Authority are planning on widening Route 1 between Fassler Avenue/Rockaway Beach Avenue and Reina Del Mar Avenue from four lanes to six lanes. The project is still in the planning stages of development. Once completed, that project will significantly reduce the queuing that presently occurs on Route 1in the northbound direction during the morning peak traffic period.

TABLE B: Intersection Levels of Service
Existing Conditions
Signal Controlled
Intersections
Peak
Hour V/C Delay LOS
1- Route 1 &
Linda Mar Blvd.

AM 0.660 29.0 C
PM 0.667 28.3 C
2- Route 1 &
Crespi Drive
AM 0.440 16.1 B
PM 0.639 11.9 B
3 - Route 1 &
Fassler Ave./
Rockaway Bch.

AM 0.935 66.8 E
PM 0.889 48.1 D
4 - Route 1 &
Reina Del Mar
Avenue
AM 0.912 39.2 D
PM 0.835 23.2 C
Delay is Average Control Delay in seconds per vehicle.

V/C is the volume-to-capacity ratio.

LOS is Level of Service. See Table A for definitions.
8 11.f
Packet Pg. 901 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

BACKGROUND CONDITIONS
SECTION 3.

Background Conditions are those traffic conditions which are expected to occur immediately prior to the completion and occupancy of the proposed subdivision. Traffic from developments that are approved and/or ones that are expected to be completed and occupied prior to the proposed project is added to existing traffic volumes to create this traffic analysis scenario.

APPROVED PROJECTS
For purposes of this study there are two projects that could be completed prior to occupancy of this project. They are:
1) A seven unit residential condominium development at 1335 Adobe Drive. 2) A 24 unit residential condominium development at 801 Fassler Avenue.

Projections of vehicle trip generation for these developments are provided in Appendix C.

BACKGROUND CONDITIONS PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Morning and afternoon street peak hour traffic volumes at the four designated intersections are shown on Figure 4 page 10, for the Background Conditions scenario.

BACKGROUND CONDITIONS LEVELS OF SERVICE
Levels of Service have been calculated for the background conditions scenario using the analysis methods contained in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual. The results of the LOS calculations are summarized in Table C on page 11. The calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix B. 9 11.f
Packet Pg. 902 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

FASSLER AV
CRESPI

ROBERTS
ROAD
DR

LINDA MAR BL

REINA DEL MAR AV
P a c i f i c P A C I F I C A
O c e a n
Point San Pedro
SHARP
PALME
O BL
1 1

REFERENCE

ADOBE DR

PERALTA RD

BACKGROUND CONDITIONS PEAK HOUR

TRAFFIC VOLUMES
10 FIGURE 4
3 4
2 1
1 112(164)
300(659)
370(713)
568(371)
59(78)
78(156)
130(133)
57(117)
11(33)
17(31)
524(431)
105(116)
N
3 2
N
N
N
KEY:
000(000) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
AM Peak Hour Between 7 and 9 AM
PM Peak Hour Between 4 and 6 PM
40(88)
858(1738)
322(730)
677(1507)
161(379)
772(334)
22(27)
7(20)
347(214)
60(59)
87(131)
13(42)
27(91)
34(83)
1505(1014)
3(12)
1205(883)
78(56)
4 72(4)
1120(2482)
122(220)
308(125)
0(3)
123(94)
4(14)
53(2)
0(5) 5(2)
2213(1392)
177(82)

11.f
Packet Pg. 903 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) TABLE C: Intersection Levels of Service
Background Conditions
Signal Controlled Intersections
Peak
Hour
Existing Conditions Background Conditions
V/C Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS
1- Route 1 & Linda Mar Blvd./San Pedro Rd.

AM 0.660 29.0 C 0.662 29.1 C
PM 0.667 28.3 C 0.670 28.4 C
2 - Route 1 & Crespi Drive
AM 0.440 16.1 B 0.441 16.1 B
PM 0.639 11.9 B 0.640 11.9 B
3 - Route 1 & Fassler Ave./ Rockaway Beach Ave.

AM 0.935 66.8 E 0.939 68.4 E
PM 0.889 48.1 D 0.890 48.7 D
4 - Route 1 & Reina Del Mar Avenue
AM 0.912 39.2 D 0.914 39.7 D
PM 0.835 23.2 C 0.836
5 23.4 C
Delay is Average Control Delay in seconds per vehicle.

V/C is the volume-to-capacity ratio.

LOS is Level of Service. See Table A definitions.

Only a slight change in delay or V/C ratio results when approved project trips are added to the roadway network.
11 11.f
Packet Pg. 904 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

PROJECT CONDITIONS
SECTION 4.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project will construct 19 multifamily dwelling units and 3,165 square feet of commercial floor space on a 1.68 acre lot at 570 Crespi Drive.

PROJECT VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION
The estimate of vehicle trips to be generated by the project is shown in Table D below. The estimate is based on data contained in Trip Generation.3 The AM Street Peak Hour is generally between 7 a.m. and 9 a.m. and the PM Street Peak Hour is generally between 4 p.m. and 6 p.m.

A detailed trip generation table can be found in Appendix C.

Table D: Project Vehicle Trip Generation
Land Use Size Units
AM Street Peak Hour PM Street Peak Hour
In Out Total In Out Total
Multifamily Housing 19 DU 2 8 10 8 5 13
Medical/Dental Office* 3.165 KSF 8 2 10 4 9 13
* Highest probable use given size and location.

PROJECT VEHICLE TRIP DISTRIBUTION
Project vehicle trips have been distributed on the basis of current travel patterns and traffic volumes. The assumed vehicle trip distribution is shown on Figure 5, Project Vehicle Trip Distribution, page 13.

PROJECT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES
The Project Conditions (Existing + Approved + Project) peak hour traffic volumes at the four study area intersections are shown on Figure 6, Project Conditions Peak Hour Traffic Volumes, page 14.
12 3
Institute of Transportation Engineers, 10
th
Edition, © 2019.

11.f
Packet Pg. 905 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

FASSLER AV

CRESPIDR

LINDA MAR BL

REINA DEL MAR AV

P A C I F I C A
P a c i f i c O c e a n
Point San Pedro
SHARP
PARK
ROAD
PAL
CO BL
BL
1 1

PROJECT VEHICLE

TRIP DISTRIBUTION
13 FIGURE 5
Project Location

LINDA MAR AREA
6%
5%
4%
6%
3%
5% 14%
16%
9%
16%
64%
52%
20%
18% 20%
15%
55%
5%
15%
10%
AM Street Peak Hour
PM Street Peak Hour
KEY:

RESIDENTIAL

COMMERCIAL

11.f
Packet Pg. 906 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

FASSLER AV
CRESPI

ROBERTS
ROAD
DR

LINDA MAR BL

REINA DEL MAR AV
P a c i f i c P A C I F I C A
O c e a n
Point San Pedro
SHARP
PALME
O BL
1 1

REFERENCE

ADOBE DR

PERALTA RD

PROJECT CONDITIONS PEAK HOUR

TRAFFIC VOLUMES
14 FIGURE 6
3 4
2 1
1 112(164)
300(660)
371(714)
568(372)
59(78)
78(156)
130(133)
57(117)
11(33)
17(31)
525(431)
105(116)
N
3 2
N
N
N
KEY:
000(000) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
AM Peak Hour Between 7 and 9 AM
PM Peak Hour Between 4 and 6 PM
40(88)
863(1744)
322(730)
677(1507)
166(385)
772(334)
22(27)
8(20)
355(223)
61(61)
87(131)
13(42)
27(91)
34(83)
1513(1023)
3(12)
1205(883)
79(57)
4 72(4)
1125(2488)
122(220)
308(125)
0(3)
123(94)
4(14)
53(2)
0(5) 5(2)
2221(1401)
177(82)

11.f
Packet Pg. 907 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

PROJECT CONDITIONS LEVELS OF SERVICE
Levels of Service have been calculated for the project conditions scenario using the analysis methods contained in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual. The results of the LOS calculations are summarized in Table E below. The calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix B.

TABLE E: Intersection Levels of Service
Project Conditions
Signal Controlled Intersections
Peak
Hour
Background Conditions Project Conditions
V/C Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS
1- Route 1 & Linda Mar Blvd./San Pedro Rd.

AM 0.662 29.1 C 0.663 29.1 C
PM 0.670 28.4 C 0.671 28.4 C
2 - Route 1 & Crespi Drive
AM 0.441 16.1 B 0.442 16.5 B
PM 0.640 11.9 B 0.645 12.0 B
3 - Route 1 & Fassler Ave./ Rockaway Beach Ave.

AM 0.939 68.4 E 0.941 69.5 E
PM 0.890 48.7 D 0.890 49.2 D
4 - Route 1 & Reina Del Mar Avenue
AM 0.914 39.7 D 0.917 40.1 D
PM 0.836
5 23.4 C 0.837 23.6 C
Delay is Average Control Delay in seconds per vehicle.

V/C is the volume-to-capacity ratio.

LOS is Level of Service. See Table A definitions.

Project generated traffic adds minimally to the delay at some intersections. The increase in delay does not significantly worsen the LOS over that of the Background Conditions scenario and project added traffic does not precipitate a significant impact at any of the four study area intersections.
15 11.f
Packet Pg. 908 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) EXISTING + PROJECT CONDITIONS LEVELS OF SERVICE
Levels of Service have been calculated for the existing + project conditions scenario using the analysis methods contained in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual. The results of the LOS calculations are summarized in Table F below. The calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix B.

TABLE F: Intersection Levels of Service
Project Conditions
Signal Controlled Intersections Peak
Hour
Existing + Project
Conditions Project Conditions
V/C Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS
1- Route 1 & Linda Mar Blvd./San Pedro Rd.

AM 0.661 29.0 C 0.663 29.1 C
PM 0.668 28.3 C 0.671 28.4 C
2 - Route 1 & Crespi Drive
AM 0.441 16.5 B 0.442 16.5 B
PM 0.644 12.0 B 0.645 12.0 B
3 - Route 1 & Fassler Ave./ Rockaway Beach Ave.

AM 0.938 67.8 E 0.941 69.5 E
PM 0.890 48.5 D 0.890 49.2 D
4 - Route 1 & Reina Del Mar Avenue
AM 0.914 39.6 D 0.917 40.1 D
PM 0.836 23.4 C 0.837 23.6 C
Delay is Average Control Delay in seconds per vehicle.

V/C is the volume-to-capacity ratio.

LOS is Level of Service. See Table A definitions.

The Existing + Project Conditions scenario results in delays the same or slightly less than for the Project Conditions scenario.
16 11.f
Packet Pg. 909 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS
SECTION 5.

CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS SCENARIO
The Cumulative Conditions scenario for purposes of this study are those that are expected to within five years of completion of this development. Eight developments have been identified that could occur subsequent to the development of this project within this near-term cumulative scenario. They are -
1) Hillside Meadows, an 18 unit multifamily housing development on a new street off of Higgins Way in the Linda Mar area + 18 Accessory Dwelling Units 2) Harmony @ One, a four unit single family detached development. 3) Three single family detached dwelling units on Oddstad Way. 4) A 125 unit residential development at the end of Higgins Way 5) 1300 Danmann Ave. six residential units plus3,050 SF of commercial space. 6) Pacifica Highlands, a 54 unit single family detached development off of Cabrillo Hwy.
7) Cabrillo Hiway, a mixed use development with 89 multifamily dwelling units and 1,760 SF of commercial space.
8) 930 Oddstad Blvd., a 70 unit workforce housing development Projections of vehicle trip generation are provided in Appendix C.

BACKGROUND GROWTH
In a comparison of peak hour traffic counts at the four intersections on Route 1 from 2013 to 2019 it was found that for the morning peak hour the counts reduced by 0.56% and for the afternoon peak hour the counts reduced by 1.49%. This is well within the 10% variance of traffic volumes on a day to day basis for weekday traffic4. It indicates that traffic volumes through the study area have not changed significantly in the past six years. For this analysis it is assumed that the background growth in traffic for the next five years will remain stagnant. See Appendix C for details.

CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES
The cumulative traffic volumes are shown on Figure 7, Cumulative Conditions Peak Hour Traffic Volumes, page 18.
17 4
Federal Highway Administration, Traffic Monitoring Guide, Table 3-4, Day of Week for Urban, Rural and Recreational Sites, © 2016

11.f
Packet Pg. 910 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

FASSLER AV
CRESPI

ROBERTS
ROAD
DR

LINDA MAR BL

REINA DEL MAR AV
P a c i f i c P A C I F I C A
O c e a n
Point San Pedro
SHARP
PALME
O BL
1 1

REFERENCE

ADOBE DR

PERALTA RD

CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS PEAK HOUR

TRAFFIC VOLUMES
18 FIGURE 7
3 4
2 1
1 117(179)
302(661)
393(765)
617(408)
66(90)
83(161)
132(150)
59(130)
11(34)
17(32)
524(435)
106(123)
N
3 2
N
N
N
KEY:
000(000) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
AM Peak Hour Between 7 and 9 AM
PM Peak Hour Between 4 and 6 PM
40(88)
896(1807)
328(742)
707(1574)
170(385)
782(345)
22(27)
9(24)
349(225)
60(61)
87(131)
13(42)
27(91)
34(83)
1558(1077)
3(16)
1256(939)
78(58)
4 72(4)
1153(2578)
122(220)
308(125)
0(3)
123(94)
4(14)
53(2)
0(5) 5(2)
2309(1456)
177(82)

11.f
Packet Pg. 911 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

FASSLER AV
CRESPI

ROBERTS
ROAD
DR

LINDA MAR BL

REINA DEL MAR AV
P a c i f i c P A C I F I C A
O c e a n
Point San Pedro
SHARP
PALME
O BL
1 1

REFERENCE

ADOBE DR

PERALTA RD
CUMULATIVE + PROJECT CONDITIONS

PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES
19 FIGURE 8
3 4
2 1
KEY:
000(000) = AM(PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
AM Peak Hour Between 7 and 9 AM
PM Peak Hour Between 4 and 6 PM
1 117(179)
302(662)
394(766)
618(410)
66(90)
83(161)
132(150)
59(130)
11(34)
17(32)
525(435)
106(123)
N
3 2
N
N
N
40(88)
900(1814)
328(742)
707(1574)
174(392)
782(345)
22(27)
9(24)
354(235)
60(63)
87(131)
13(42)
27(91)
34(83)
1563(1087)
3(16)
1256(939)
80(60)
4 72(4)
1157(2585)
122(220)
308(125)
0(3)
123(94)
4(14)
53(2)
0(5) 5(2)
2314(1466)
177(82)

11.f
Packet Pg. 912 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS LEVELS OF SERVICE
Levels of Service have been calculated for the cumulative conditions scenario using the analysis methods contained in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual. The results of the LOS calculations Are summarized in Table G below.

CUMULATIVE + PROJECT CONDITIONS
Cumulative + Project scenario traffic volumes are shown on Figure 8, Cumulative + Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes, page 19, and the Cumulative + Project LOS are shown in Table G below.

LOS calculation sheets are provided in Appendix B.

TABLE G: Intersection Levels of Service
Cumulative Conditions
Signal Controlled Intersections Peak
Hour
Cumulative Conditions Cumulative + Project
Conditions
V/C Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS
1- Route 1 & Linda Mar Blvd./San Pedro Rd.

AM 0.686 30.5 C 0.687 30.6 C
PM 0.710 30.3 C 0.711 30.4 C
2 - Route 1 & Crespi Drive
AM 0.649 17.0 B 0.651 17.3 B
PM 0.667 12.2 B 0.673 12.2 B
3 - Route 1 & Fassler Ave./ Rockaway Beach Ave.

AM 0.960 78.0 E 0.962 78.7 E
PM 0.906 55.3 E 0.907 55.9 E
4 - Route 1 & Reina Del Mar Avenue
AM 0.943 46.4 D 0.945 46.8 D
PM 0.855 26.2 C 0.856 26.4 C
Delay is Average Control Delay in seconds per vehicle.

V/C is the critical movement volume-to-capacity ratio.

LOS is Level of Service. See Table A definitions.

Project added traffic will not create a significant impact at any of the four study area intersections under cumulative traffic conditions.
20 11.f
Packet Pg. 913 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

SITE ACCESS, CIRCULATION AND PARKING
SECTION 6.

SITE PLAN
The development plan is shown on Figure 9, Site Plan, page 22.

SITE ACCESS
Access into the site will be via a driveway off of Crespi Drive. Egress from the site will be by way of a connection to the existing driveway for the City of Pacifica Community Center and then back onto Crespi Drive. Driveway corner sight distance is good in both directions.

PARKING
Sixteen of the residential units will each have a 2-car tandem garage. There will be 15 open parking spaces on the site. The three apartment units and the commercial space will share the open spaces along with the guest parking for the townhouse units. The amount of parking provided is less than Zoning Code required parking. See Table H below.

TABLE H: Parking
Land Use Quantity Zoning Code
Requirement
Required
Spaces
ITE Parking
Generation 5th Ed.

Unshared
Parking
Demand
One Bedroom
Apartment
3 1.75 spaces per
DU*
6 Multi-family Low
Rise
4 2-Bedroom Townhouse 16 2.25 spaces per
DU*
36 Multi-family Low
Rise
18 Commercial Space
(Medical Office)
3,165 SF One space per
200 SF
16 Medical-Dental
Office
5 Total 58 27
* Including guest parking
21 11.f
Packet Pg. 914 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

PROPERTY ENTRANCE SIGN - LIT FROM

WITHIN LINEAR LOW LEVEL LED ON APHOTOCELL FOR NIGHT TIME LIGHTING

ADDRESS, ORIENTATION SIGN

NW S NON-JDBOUNDARY LINE
12'-0"
15'-0"
16'-0"
R28'-0"
5 3
°
0 1
'
0 0
"
8 0
.
1 6
'
S
E
5 3
°
0 1
'
0 0
"
5 5
.
0 9
'
S
E
C
05 11009080706
1 12
17 16
O DR
OF - P
18 19 20
21 22
03 04 02 01
13 14
15 24
23 25
VI DR
I PSER
C
E

PLANTER

PLANTER PLANTER

PLANTER

PLANTER

PLANTER

PLANTER

PLANTERPLANTER

PLANTER PLANTER PLANTER

PLANTER

PLANTER

PLANTERPLANTER PLANTER

SIDEWALK

SIDEWALK

SIDEWALK SIDEWALK

AY WALKW DECK SIDEWALK

DECK WALKWAY
S
5 3
°
0 1
'
0 0
"
E
8 0.1
6 '
S40°16'00"W
525.40'
5 0.0
0 NEW ENTRY DRIVE

EXISTING EXIT/ENTRY DRIVE
EV

BIKE RACKS BIKE RACKS
HC VAN
29° S
7:20 1
SUNSET
29° South West
19:31 6/ 21
31°
North West
16:52 12/ 21
WEST
29 .5°
75 .5°
GM
CO
CO
CO
CO
SD
E
L
E
T
W
W
W
U
E
L
E
T
W
W
HC
VAN
MP AR
PU
3/128" 11'-2
87 SF
Utility Room
103

BUILDING A -
UNIT AC-2
101

BUILDING A -
UNIT AC-2
100
57 SF
Utility Closet
103
106 SF
All Gender
Restroom
103
144 SF
Common
Area Lobby
104
2,123.65SF
789.63 SF
Elevator
TOS - 15.15'
1 2 3 4
AB
CD
E
F
UP

BUILDING A - RETAIL / OFFICE
7654321
EFGH
8 S OL PE
%1
SLOPE 1%
12345678
ABC

BLDG CBLDG B
(E) ONE STORY BUILDING(COMMERCIAL)
pp

PROPERTY ENTRANCESIGN - LIT FROM WITHIN LINEAR LOW LEVEL LED ON A PHOTOCELL FOR NIGHT TIME LIGHTING EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT LOCATION, RE: CIVIL DWGS
10' - 1 5/8" 50' - 0"
5' - 1 5/8"
5' - 0"
5' - 0"
9' - 1"
14' - 1"
2 WAND EVCHARGING STATION
4' - 7"
7' - 11 1/4"
16 UNIT AC-1UNIT AC-2

PROPOSED NEW PARKING SPACE

PROPOSED NEW PARK NG I SPACE

PROPOSED NEW LOOPDRIVE AND DROP-OFF
15' - 0"
4' - 7"
10' - 0"
BLDG A

ADDRESS,ORIENTATION SIGN
NOTE:RE: CIVIL& LANDSCAPEDRAWINGS FOR PERMEABLE PAVINGAND MATERIALS 2ND FLOOR ABOVEUTILITY ACCESS ROCKTO POST SUPPORTING 2ND FL. DECK

DELINEATION LINE BETWEEN UNDEVELOPED AREA

PROPERTYLINE

UTILITY VAULT BELOW G
NEW FIRE HYDRANT. RECIVIL DWGS.
0' 40' 10' 80' 20'
Graphic Scale: 1inch = 20 feet

SITE PLAN
FIGURE 9 22

11.f
Packet Pg. 915 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) The townhouses have two enclosed parking spaces per unit. If you conservatively consider that the 32 enclosed spaces will be for residents only, the four guest parking spaces required for the townhouse units will have to be shared with the apartments and the commercial space. The ITE publication, Parking Generation, 5th Edition © 2019 provides time of day parking demand for the various land uses included in that document. Typically residential land uses have their highest parking demand in the evening and overnight hours while office uses, including medical-dental offices, have their highest parking demand during the middle of the day. The chart below shows the time of day parking demand for the three apartments, the medical office, and the four guest parking spaces for the townhouse units.

As the chart shows, the peak parking demand of eight spaces is seven spaces less than the total of 15 open parking spaces. From this analysis it appears that the 15 open parking spaces will accommodate the parking demands of the site. The shared parking analysis is included in Appendix C.

The draft Development Agreement allows the proposed development to lease parking spaces from the adjacent community center. Up to 17 spaces could be included in the lease. These additional parking spaces would allow activities in the development to use the community center parking spaces should the on-site spaces become fully occupied. 23 11.f
Packet Pg. 916 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
SECTION 7.

CONCLUSIONS
The 570 Crespi Drive mixed use development is estimated to generate 20 new vehicle trip ends during the morning peak hour and 26 new vehicle trip ends during the afternoon peak traffic hour. The project will not create a significant impact at any of the four study area intersections nor will it change the Levels of Service at these intersections.

RECOMMENDATIONS
Off-site:
1) None.

On-site:
2) None.

Richard K. Hopper, P.E.
24 11.f
Packet Pg. 917 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project)

APPENDICES
A. Traffic Count Data
B. Levels of Service Calculation Worksheets
C. Traffic Analysis Worksheets

11.f
Packet Pg. 918 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) A. Traffic Count Worksheets

11.f
Packet Pg. 919 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) File Name : sr1-linda mar-a
Site Code : 4
Start Date : 6/5/2019
Page No : 1

CITY OF PACIFICA
Latitude: 37.595948
Longitude: -122.503820
Groups Printed- Vehicles Only
SR 1
Southbound

LINDA MAR BLVD
Westbound
SR 1
Northbound

SAN PEDRO AV
Eastbound
Start Time RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total Int. Total 07:00 15 39 37 91 147 4 14 165 16 127 1 144 2 7 21 30 430 07:15 12 62 49 123 145 7 15 167 14 163 3 180 0 4 21 25 495 07:30 10 63 47 120 141 4 22 167 19 168 7 194 4 6 19 29 510 07:45 26 70 62 158 130 9 10 149 18 147 2 167 1 12 28 41 515 Total 63 234 195 492 563 24 61 648 67 605 13 685 7 29 89 125 1950 08:00 19 57 73 149 172 11 20 203 21 122 1 144 2 15 37 54 550 08:15 25 68 87 180 108 20 22 150 38 167 7 212 4 14 29 47 589 08:30 40 -68 101 73 167 15 19 201 22 119 4 145 1 12 26 39 458 08:45 28 243 107 378 118 13 17 148 24 116 5 145 4 16 38 58 729 Total 112 300 368 780 565 59 78 702 105 524 17 646 11 57 130 198 2326 Grand Total 175 534 563 1272 1128 83 139 1350 172 1129 30 1331 18 86 219 323 4276 Apprch % 13.8 42 44.3 83.6 6.1 10.3 12.9 84.8 2.3 5.6 26.6 67.8 Total % 4.1 12.5 13.2 29.7 26.4 1.9 3.3 31.6 4 26.4 0.7 31.1 0.4 2 5.1 7.6 SR 1
Southbound

LINDA MAR BLVD
Westbound
SR 1
Northbound

SAN PEDRO AV
Eastbound
Start Time RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 to 08:45 - Peak 1 of 1
Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:00
08:00 19 57 73 149 172 11 20 203 21 122 1 144 2 15 37 54 550 08:15 25 68 87 180 108 20 22 150 38 167 7 212 4 14 29 47 589 08:30 40 68 101 73 167 15 19 201 22 119 4 145 1 12 26 39 458 08:45 28 243 107 378 118 13 17 148 24 116 5 145 4 16 38 58 729 Total Volume 112 300 368 780 565 59 78 702 105 524 17 646 11 57 130 198 2326 % App. Total 14.4 38.5 47.2 80.5 8.4 11.1 16.3 81.1 2.6 5.6 28.8 65.7 PHF .700 .309 .860 .516 .821 .738 .886 .865 .691 .784 .607 .762 .688 .891 .855 .853 .798 SR 1

SAN PEDRO AV

LINDA MAR BLVD
SR 1
RT
112
TH
300
LT
368
Out In Total
1219 780 1999
RT
565
TH
59 LT
78 Out Total In
530 702 1232
LT
17 TH
524
RT
105
Out In Total
389 646 1035
130
LT TH
57 RT
11 Total Out In
188 198 386
Peak Hour Begins at 08:00
Vehicles Only
Peak Hour Data
North

TRAFFIC COUNTS PLUS
[email protected]
925.305.4358

11.f
Packet Pg. 920 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) File Name : sr1-linda mar-p
Site Code : 4
Start Date : 6/5/2019
Page No : 1

CITY OF PACIFICA
Latitude: 37.595948
Longitude: -122.503820
Groups Printed- Vehicles Only
SR 1
Southbound

LINDA MAR BLVD
Westbound
SR 1
Northbound

SAN PEDRO AV
Eastbound
Start Time RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total Int. Total 16:00 42 138 143 323 110 22 36 168 29 85 10 124 10 38 28 76 691 16:15 39 171 196 406 109 21 52 182 30 86 6 122 3 22 27 52 762 16:30 38 167 200 405 106 12 35 153 21 107 7 135 12 31 36 79 772 16:45 55 162 154 371 81 20 42 143 29 107 6 142 4 30 33 67 723 Total 174 638 693 1505 406 75 165 646 109 385 29 523 29 121 124 274 2948 17:00 32 153 177 362 80 23 38 141 39 108 6 153 13 26 33 72 728 17:15 39 177 179 395 100 23 41 164 27 108 12 147 4 30 30 64 770 17:30 36 161 146 343 74 24 30 128 43 129 7 179 14 27 24 65 715 17:45 39 169 193 401 84 19 37 140 22 91 9 122 6 25 24 55 718 Total 146 660 695 1501 338 89 146 573 131 436 34 601 37 108 111 256 2931 Grand Total 320 1298 1388 3006 744 164 311 1219 240 821 63 1124 66 229 235 530 5879 Apprch % 10.6 43.2 46.2 61 13.5 25.5 21.4 73 5.6 12.5 43.2 44.3 Total % 5.4 22.1 23.6 51.1 12.7 2.8 5.3 20.7 4.1 14 1.1 19.1 1.1 3.9 4 9 SR 1
Southbound

LINDA MAR BLVD
Westbound
SR 1
Northbound

SAN PEDRO AV
Eastbound
Start Time RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 16:00 to 17:45 - Peak 1 of 1
Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 16:30
16:30 38 167 200 405 106 12 35 153 21 107 7 135 12 31 36 79 772 16:45 55 162 154 371 81 20 42 143 29 107 6 142 4 30 33 67 723 17:00 32 153 177 362 80 23 38 141 39 108 6 153 13 26 33 72 728 17:15 39 177 179 395 100 23 41 164 27 108 12 147 4 30 30 64 770 Total Volume 164 659 710 1533 367 78 156 601 116 430 31 577 33 117 132 282 2993 % App. Total 10.7 43 46.3 61.1 13 26 20.1 74.5 5.4 11.7 41.5 46.8 PHF .745 .931 .888 .946 .866 .848 .929 .916 .744 .995 .646 .943 .635 .944 .917 .892 .969 SR 1

SAN PEDRO AV

LINDA MAR BLVD
SR 1
RT
164
TH
659
LT
710
Out In Total
929 1533 2462
RT
367
TH
78 LT
156
Out Total In
943 601 1544
LT
31 TH
430
RT
116
Out In Total
848 577 1425
132
LT TH
117
RT
33 Total Out In
273 282 555
Peak Hour Begins at 16:30
Vehicles Only
Peak Hour Data
North

TRAFFIC COUNTS PLUS
[email protected]
925.305.4358

11.f
Packet Pg. 921 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) File Name : sr1-crespi-a
Site Code : 3
Start Date : 6/5/2019
Page No : 1

CITY OF PACIFICA
Latitude: 37.599509
Longitude: -122.500055
Groups Printed- Vehicles Only
SR 1
Southbound

CRESPI DR
Westbound
SR 1
Northbound
0 Eastbound
Start Time RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total Int. Total 07:00 0 94 19 113 84 0 5 89 9 292 0 301 0 0 0 0 503
07:15 0 124 21 145 104 0 4 108 9 318 0 327 0 0 0 0 580
07:30 0 137 28 165 102 0 3 105 7 340 0 347 0 0 0 0 617
07:45 0 143 40 183 91 0 9 100 12 315 0 327 0 0 0 0 610
Total 0 498 108 606 381 0 21 402 37 1265 0 1302 0 0 0 0 2310 08:00 0 137 60 197 97 0 18 115 29 295 0 324 0 0 0 0 636 08:15 0 169 30 199 81 0 23 104 20 291 0 311 0 0 0 0 614 08:30 0 226 31 257 78 0 10 88 17 301 0 318 0 0 0 0 663
08:45 0 202 30 232 70 0 9 79 20 262 0 282 0 0 0 0 593
Total 0 734 151 885 326 0 60 386 86 1149 0 1235 0 0 0 0 2506 Grand Total 0 1232 259 1491 707 0 81 788 123 2414 0 2537 0 0 0 0 4816 Apprch % 0 82.6 17.4 89.7 0 10.3 4.8 95.2 0 0 0 0
Total % 0 25.6 5.4 31 14.7 0 1.7 16.4 2.6 50.1 0 52.7 0 0 0 0 SR 1
Southbound

CRESPI DR
Westbound
SR 1
Northbound
0 Eastbound
Start Time RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 to 08:45 - Peak 1 of 1
Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:45
07:45 0 143 40 183 91 0 9 100 12 315 0 327 0 0 0 0 610
08:00 0 137 60 197 97 0 18 115 29 295 0 324 0 0 0 0 636 08:15 0 169 30 199 81 0 23 104 20 291 0 311 0 0 0 0 614 08:30 0 226 31 257 78 0 10 88 17 301 0 318 0 0 0 0 663
Total Volume 0 675 161 836 347 0 60 407 78 1202 0 1280 0 0 0 0 2523 % App. Total 0 80.7 19.3 85.3 0 14.7 6.1 93.9 0 0 0 0
PHF .000 .747 .671 .813 .894 .000 .652 .885 .672 .954 .000 .979 .000 .000 .000 .000 .951 SR 1
0 CRESPI DR
SR 1
RT
0 TH
675
LT
161
Out In Total
1549 836 2385
RT
347
TH
0 LT
60 Out Total In
239 407 646
LT
0 TH
1202
RT
78 Out In Total
735 1280 2015
LT
0 TH
0 RT
0 Total Out In
0 0 0
Peak Hour Begins at 07:45
Vehicles Only
Peak Hour Data
North

TRAFFIC COUNTS PLUS
[email protected]
925.305.4358

11.f
Packet Pg. 922 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) File Name : sr1-crespi-p
Site Code : 3
Start Date : 6/5/2019
Page No : 1

CITY OF PACIFICA
Latitude: 37.599509
Longitude: -122.500055
Groups Printed- Vehicles Only
SR 1
Southbound

CRESPI DR
Westbound
SR 1
Northbound
0 Eastbound
Start Time RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total Int. Total 16:00 0 307 65 372 65 0 12 77 13 238 0 251 0 0 0 0 700
16:15 0 387 101 488 54 0 19 73 11 218 0 229 0 0 0 0 790 16:30 0 383 96 479 48 0 12 60 16 233 0 249 0 0 0 0 788
16:45 0 350 88 438 54 0 16 70 14 211 0 225 0 0 0 0 733
Total 0 1427 350 1777 221 0 59 280 54 900 0 954 0 0 0 0 3011 17:00 0 384 94 478 58 0 12 70 15 215 0 230 0 0 0 0 778
17:15 0 356 75 431 55 0 16 71 22 226 0 248 0 0 0 0 750
17:30 0 353 78 431 56 0 16 72 15 223 0 238 0 0 0 0 741
17:45 0 368 88 456 42 0 12 54 20 192 0 212 0 0 0 0 722
Total 0 1461 335 1796 211 0 56 267 72 856 0 928 0 0 0 0 2991 Grand Total 0 2888 685 3573 432 0 115 547 126 1756 0 1882 0 0 0 0 6002 Apprch % 0 80.8 19.2 79 0 21 6.7 93.3 0 0 0 0
Total % 0 48.1 11.4 59.5 7.2 0 1.9 9.1 2.1 29.3 0 31.4 0 0 0 0 SR 1
Southbound

CRESPI DR
Westbound
SR 1
Northbound
0 Eastbound
Start Time RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 16:00 to 17:45 - Peak 1 of 1
Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 16:15
16:15 0 387 101 488 54 0 19 73 11 218 0 229 0 0 0 0 790 16:30 0 383 96 479 48 0 12 60 16 233 0 249 0 0 0 0 788
16:45 0 350 88 438 54 0 16 70 14 211 0 225 0 0 0 0 733
17:00 0 384 94 478 58 0 12 70 15 215 0 230 0 0 0 0 778
Total Volume 0 1504 379 1883 214 0 59 273 56 877 0 933 0 0 0 0 3089 % App. Total 0 79.9 20.1 78.4 0 21.6 6 94 0 0 0 0
PHF .000 .972 .938 .965 .922 .000 .776 .935 .875 .941 .000 .937 .000 .000 .000 .000 .978 SR 1
0 CRESPI DR
SR 1
RT
0 TH
1504
LT
379
Out In Total
1091 1883 2974
RT
214
TH
0 LT
59 Out Total In
435 273 708
LT
0 TH
877
RT
56 Out In Total
1563 933 2496
LT
0 TH
0 RT
0 Total Out In
0 0 0
Peak Hour Begins at 16:15
Vehicles Only
Peak Hour Data
North

TRAFFIC COUNTS PLUS
[email protected]
925.305.4358

11.f
Packet Pg. 923 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) File Name : sr1-fassler-a
Site Code : 2
Start Date : 6/5/2019
Page No : 1

CITY OF PACIFICA
Latitude: 37.608714
Longitude: -122.495255
Groups Printed- Vehicles Only
SR 1
Southbound

FASSLER AV
Westbound
SR 1
Northbound

ROCKAWAY BEACH AV
Eastbound
Start Time RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total Int. Total 07:00 6 113 24 143 199 2 0 201 2 379 3 384 3 2 14 19 747 07:15 11 139 63 213 185 5 1 191 0 399 2 401 2 2 9 13 818 07:30 10 154 40 204 197 6 3 206 1 427 8 436 9 1 13 23 869 07:45 9 168 70 247 158 4 4 166 1 411 8 420 6 2 12 20 853 Total 36 574 197 807 739 17 8 764 4 1616 21 1641 20 7 48 75 3287 08:00 21 191 61 273 193 4 1 198 1 436 4 441 5 1 30 36 948 08:15 5 209 84 298 201 5 0 206 0 364 14 378 6 4 22 32 914 08:30 7 237 78 322 186 3 4 193 1 389 6 396 11 2 14 27 938 08:45 7 220 97 324 186 10 2 198 1 313 10 324 5 6 21 32 878 Total 40 857 320 1217 766 22 7 795 3 1502 34 1539 27 13 87 127 3678 Grand Total 76 1431 517 2024 1505 39 15 1559 7 3118 55 3180 47 20 135 202 6965 Apprch % 3.8 70.7 25.5 96.5 2.5 1 0.2 98.1 1.7 23.3 9.9 66.8 Total % 1.1 20.5 7.4 29.1 21.6 0.6 0.2 22.4 0.1 44.8 0.8 45.7 0.7 0.3 1.9 2.9 SR 1
Southbound

FASSLER AV
Westbound
SR 1
Northbound

ROCKAWAY BEACH AV
Eastbound
Start Time RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 to 08:45 - Peak 1 of 1
Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:00
08:00 21 191 61 273 193 4 1 198 1 436 4 441 5 1 30 36 948 08:15 5 209 84 298 201 5 0 206 0 364 14 378 6 4 22 32 914 08:30 7 237 78 322 186 3 4 193 1 389 6 396 11 2 14 27 938 08:45 7 220 97 324 186 10 2 198 1 313 10 324 5 6 21 32 878 Total Volume 40 857 320 1217 766 22 7 795 3 1502 34 1539 27 13 87 127 3678 % App. Total 3.3 70.4 26.3 96.4 2.8 0.9 0.2 97.6 2.2 21.3 10.2 68.5 PHF .476 .904 .825 .939 .953 .550 .438 .965 .750 .861 .607 .872 .614 .542 .725 .882 .970 SR 1

ROCKAWAY BEACH AV

FASSLER AV
SR 1
RT
40 TH
857
LT
320
Out In Total
2355 1217 3572
RT
766
TH
22 LT
7 Out Total In
336 795 1131
LT
34 TH
1502
RT
3 Out In Total
891 1539 2430
LT
87 TH
13 RT
27 Total Out In
96 127 223
Peak Hour Begins at 08:00
Vehicles Only
Peak Hour Data
North

TRAFFIC COUNTS PLUS
[email protected]
925.305.4358

11.f
Packet Pg. 924 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) File Name : sr1-fassler-p
Site Code : 2
Start Date : 6/5/2019
Page No : 1

CITY OF PACIFICA
Latitude: 37.608714
Longitude: -122.495255
Groups Printed- Vehicles Only
SR 1
Southbound

FASSLER AV
Westbound
SR 1
Northbound

ROCKAWAY BEACH AV
Eastbound
Start Time RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total Int. Total 16:00 33 364 154 551 97 10 6 113 1 281 28 310 29 17 29 75 1049 16:15 27 442 161 630 104 14 3 121 2 242 20 264 29 10 36 75 1090 16:30 18 419 189 626 75 6 6 87 3 252 26 281 23 8 36 67 1061 16:45 23 443 194 660 67 1 5 73 1 267 11 279 22 8 27 57 1069 Total 101 1668 698 2467 343 31 20 394 7 1042 85 1134 103 43 128 274 4269 17:00 20 432 180 632 84 6 5 95 2 251 26 279 17 16 32 65 1071 17:15 22 399 197 618 85 10 6 101 1 263 11 275 26 22 35 83 1077 17:30 26 402 171 599 92 9 6 107 4 234 20 258 14 20 30 64 1028 17:45 24 411 226 661 58 6 9 73 6 216 24 246 29 13 44 86 1066 Total 92 1644 774 2510 319 31 26 376 13 964 81 1058 86 71 141 298 4242 Grand Total 193 3312 1472 4977 662 62 46 770 20 2006 166 2192 189 114 269 572 8511 Apprch % 3.9 66.5 29.6 86 8.1 6 0.9 91.5 7.6 33 19.9 47 Total % 2.3 38.9 17.3 58.5 7.8 0.7 0.5 9 0.2 23.6 2 25.8 2.2 1.3 3.2 6.7 SR 1
Southbound

FASSLER AV
Westbound
SR 1
Northbound

ROCKAWAY BEACH AV
Eastbound
Start Time RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 16:00 to 17:45 - Peak 1 of 1
Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 16:15
16:15 27 442 161 630 104 14 3 121 2 242 20 264 29 10 36 75 1090 16:30 18 419 189 626 75 6 6 87 3 252 26 281 23 8 36 67 1061 16:45 23 443 194 660 67 1 5 73 1 267 11 279 22 8 27 57 1069 17:00 20 432 180 632 84 6 5 95 2 251 26 279 17 16 32 65 1071 Total Volume 88 1736 724 2548 330 27 19 376 8 1012 83 1103 91 42 131 264 4291 % App. Total 3.5 68.1 28.4 87.8 7.2 5.1 0.7 91.7 7.5 34.5 15.9 49.6 PHF .815 .980 .933 .965 .793 .482 .792 .777 .667 .948 .798 .981 .784 .656 .910 .880 .984 SR 1

ROCKAWAY BEACH AV

FASSLER AV
SR 1
RT
88 TH
1736
LT
724
Out In Total
1473 2548 4021
RT
330
TH
27 LT
19 Out Total In
774 376 1150
LT
83 TH
1012
RT
8 Out In Total
1846 1103 2949
131
LT TH
42 RT
91 Total Out In
198 264 462
Peak Hour Begins at 16:15
Vehicles Only
Peak Hour Data
North

TRAFFIC COUNTS PLUS
[email protected]
925.305.4358

11.f
Packet Pg. 925 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) File Name : sr1-reina del mar-a
Site Code : 1
Start Date : 6/5/2019
Page No : 1

CITY OF PACIFICA
Latitude: 37.613842
Longitude: -122.487123
Groups Printed- Vehicles Only
SR 1
Southbound

REINA DEL MAR AV
Westbound
SR 1
Northbound
Trail access road
Eastbound
Start Time RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total Int. Total 07:00 1 163 14 178 41 0 5 46 8 584 0 592 0 0 0 0 816
07:15 1 175 15 191 47 0 7 54 9 600 1 610 0 1 4 5 860
07:30 7 207 17 231 45 1 4 50 22 662 1 685 0 4 0 4 970
07:45 23 241 44 308 58 0 18 76 33 476 0 509 0 17 1 18 911 Total 32 786 90 908 191 1 34 226 72 2322 2 2396 0 22 5 27 3557 08:00 36 249 26 311 79 0 25 104 89 562 0 651 0 23 1 24 1090 08:15 21 285 37 343 76 0 27 103 47 585 1 633 0 24 0 24 1103 08:30 8 296 33 337 89 0 34 123 16 554 1 571 0 6 0 6 1037 08:45 7 287 26 320 64 0 37 101 25 503 3 531 0 0 3 3 955 Total 72 1117 122 1311 308 0 123 431 177 2204 5 2386 0 53 4 57 4185 Grand Total 104 1903 212 2219 499 1 157 657 249 4526 7 4782 0 75 9 84 7742 Apprch % 4.7 85.8 9.6 76 0.2 23.9 5.2 94.6 0.1 0 89.3 10.7 Total % 1.3 24.6 2.7 28.7 6.4 0 2 8.5 3.2 58.5 0.1 61.8 0 1 0.1 1.1 SR 1
Southbound

REINA DEL MAR AV
Westbound
SR 1
Northbound
Trail access road
Eastbound
Start Time RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 to 08:45 - Peak 1 of 1
Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:00
08:00 36 249 26 311 79 0 25 104 89 562 0 651 0 23 1 24 1090 08:15 21 285 37 343 76 0 27 103 47 585 1 633 0 24 0 24 1103 08:30 8 296 33 337 89 0 34 123 16 554 1 571 0 6 0 6 1037 08:45 7 287 26 320 64 0 37 101 25 503 3 531 0 0 3 3 955 Total Volume 72 1117 122 1311 308 0 123 431 177 2204 5 2386 0 53 4 57 4185 % App. Total 5.5 85.2 9.3 71.5 0 28.5 7.4 92.4 0.2 0 93 7 PHF .500 .943 .824 .956 .865 .000 .831 .876 .497 .942 .417 .916 .000 .552 .333 .594 .949 SR 1
Trail access road

REINA DEL MAR AV
SR 1
RT
72 TH
1117
LT
122
Out In Total
2516 1311 3827
RT
308
TH
0 LT
123
Out Total In
352 431 783
LT
5 TH
2204
RT
177
Out In Total
1240 2386 3626
LT
4 TH
53 RT
0 Total Out In
77 57 134
Peak Hour Begins at 08:00
Vehicles Only
Peak Hour Data
North

TRAFFIC COUNTS PLUS
[email protected]
925.305.4358

11.f
Packet Pg. 926 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) File Name : sr1-reina del mar-p
Site Code : 1
Start Date : 6/5/2019
Page No : 1

CITY OF PACIFICA
Latitude: 37.613842
Longitude: -122.487123
Groups Printed- Vehicles Only
SR 1
Southbound

REINA DEL MAR AV
Westbound
SR 1
Northbound
Trail access road
Eastbound
Start Time RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total Int. Total 16:00 3 586 62 651 28 1 22 51 20 340 0 360 2 1 1 4 1066 16:15 1 592 47 640 30 1 40 71 31 371 2 404 1 0 3 4 1119 16:30 0 615 49 664 35 0 27 62 17 364 0 381 1 1 0 2 1109 16:45 0 594 51 645 40 0 35 75 25 323 1 349 0 1 1 2 1071 Total 4 2387 209 2600 133 2 124 259 93 1398 3 1494 4 3 5 12 4365 17:00 1 637 42 680 27 0 17 44 26 344 0 370 2 0 9 11 1105 17:15 0 599 62 661 26 0 24 50 18 343 0 361 0 0 2 2 1074 17:30 3 644 65 712 32 3 18 53 13 376 1 390 3 1 2 6 1161 17:45 1 611 62 674 26 1 27 54 20 299 1 320 2 1 2 5 1053 Total 5 2491 231 2727 111 4 86 201 77 1362 2 1441 7 2 15 24 4393 Grand Total 9 4878 440 5327 244 6 210 460 170 2760 5 2935 11 5 20 36 8758 Apprch % 0.2 91.6 8.3 53 1.3 45.7 5.8 94 0.2 30.6 13.9 55.6 Total % 0.1 55.7 5 60.8 2.8 0.1 2.4 5.3 1.9 31.5 0.1 33.5 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 SR 1
Southbound

REINA DEL MAR AV
Westbound
SR 1
Northbound
Trail access road
Eastbound
Start Time RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total RT TH LT App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 16:00 to 17:45 - Peak 1 of 1
Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 16:45
16:45 0 594 51 645 40 0 35 75 25 323 1 349 0 1 1 2 1071 17:00 1 637 42 680 27 0 17 44 26 344 0 370 2 0 9 11 1105 17:15 0 599 62 661 26 0 24 50 18 343 0 361 0 0 2 2 1074 17:30 3 644 65 712 32 3 18 53 13 376 1 390 3 1 2 6 1161 Total Volume 4 2474 220 2698 125 3 94 222 82 1386 2 1470 5 2 14 21 4411 % App. Total 0.1 91.7 8.2 56.3 1.4 42.3 5.6 94.3 0.1 23.8 9.5 66.7 PHF .333 .960 .846 .947 .781 .250 .671 .740 .788 .922 .500 .942 .417 .500 .389 .477 .950 SR 1
Trail access road

REINA DEL MAR AV
SR 1
RT
4 TH
2474
LT
220
Out In Total
1525 2698 4223
RT
125
TH
3 LT
94 Out Total In
304 222 526
LT
2 TH
1386
RT
82 Out In Total
2573 1470 4043
LT
14 TH
2 RT
5 Total Out In
9 21 30
Peak Hour Begins at 16:45
Vehicles Only
Peak Hour Data
North

TRAFFIC COUNTS PLUS
[email protected]
925.305.4358

11.f
Packet Pg. 927 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) B. Levels of Service Calculation Worksheets

11.f
Packet Pg. 928 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.660
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 29.0
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 3: Route 1 & Linda Mar Blvd./San Pedro Ave.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 45.00 45.00 30.00 30.00
Pocket Length [ft] 60.00 100.00 100.00 290.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 205.00 210.00 100.00 170.00 No. of Lanes in Pocket 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 1 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Route 1 Route 1 Linda Mar Blvd. San Pedro Ave.

Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 17 524 105 368 300 112 78 59 565 130 57 11 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 4 131 26 92 75 28 20 15 141 33 14 3 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 17 524 105 368 300 112 78 59 565 130 57 11 Right-Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 17 524 105 368 300 112 78 59 565 130 57 11 Name Route 1 Route 1 Linda Mar Blvd. San Pedro Ave.

Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
1 Scenario 2: 2 Existing AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 929 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No Yes No Yes No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 3.5 0.0 3.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 24 0 0 25 0 0 10 0 0 28 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 4.5 0.0 4.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 30 40 0 40 40 0 0 40 40 0 40 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 10 0 5 10 0 0 10 5 0 10 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups 1,8
Signal Group 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 8 1 0 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 12.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference LeadGreen
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
2 Scenario 2: 2 Existing AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 930 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 17.49 235.02 226.93 141.42 75.73 56.36 89.19 211.91 103.89 42.42 7.98 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.70 9.40 9.08 5.66 3.03 2.25 3.57 8.48 4.16 1.70 0.32 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 9.72 138.51 132.53 78.57 42.07 31.31 49.55 121.52 57.72 23.57 4.44 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.39 5.54 5.30 3.14 1.68 1.25 1.98 4.86 2.31 0.94 0.18 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No No Lane Group LOS D C C C B B C C C C C
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 46.53 32.60 33.01 33.51 17.69 17.51 23.86 29.74 33.28 30.23 29.13 X, volume / capacity 0.48 0.81 0.82 0.75 0.24 0.20 0.31 0.82 0.57 0.24 0.05 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 9.65 4.09 4.47 2.26 0.10 0.18 0.39 2.56 2.18 0.50 0.11 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 36.88 28.51 28.55 31.25 17.59 17.33 23.47 27.17 31.10 29.73 29.02 c, Capacity [veh/h] 36 396 374 494 1239 553 443 686 230 241 205 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1774 1863 1756 3445 3547 1583 1811 2803 1774 1863 1583 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.01 0.17 0.17 0.11 0.08 0.07 0.08 0.20 0.07 0.03 0.01 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.02 0.21 0.21 0.14 0.35 0.35 0.24 0.24 0.13 0.13 0.13 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 2 16 16 11 26 26 19 19 10 10 10 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 5.50 5.50 5.00 5.50 5.50 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76
Lane Group L C C L C R C R L C R
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
3 Scenario 2: 2 Existing AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 931 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 46.53 32.76 33.01 33.51 17.69 17.51 23.86 23.86 29.74 33.28 30.23 29.13 Movement LOS D C C C B B C C C C C C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 33.16 25.13 28.59 32.17
Approach LOS C C C C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 29.00
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.660
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
4 Scenario 2: 2 Existing AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 932 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.440
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 16.1
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 4: Route 1 & Crespi Dr.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 45.00 45.00 30.00
Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 95.00 155.00 100.00 100.00 140.00 No. of Lanes in Pocket 0 1 2 0 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Thru Right Left Thru Left Right
Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound
Name Route 1 Route 1 Crespi Drive
Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 1202 78 161 675 60 347
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 301 20 40 169 15 87
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 1202 78 161 675 60 347
Right-Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 1202 78 161 675 60 347
Name Route 1 Route 1 Crespi Drive
Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
5 Scenario 2: 2 Existing AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 933 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.0
l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Rest In Walk No No No
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 12 18 0 10 18 0
Walk [s] 5 5 0 5 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Amber [s] 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.0 4.0
Maximum Green [s] 60 60 60 60 60 60
Minimum Green [s] 10 10 10 10 10 10
Lead / Lag - - Lead - Lead -
Auxiliary Signal Groups 2,8 1,8
Signal Group 2 8 1 6 8 1
Control Type Permissive Overlap Protected Permissive Permissive Overlap Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 9.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference LeadGreen
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
6 Scenario 2: 2 Existing AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 934 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 325.06 12.13 50.53 65.41 39.17 170.44 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 13.00 0.49 2.02 2.62 1.57 6.82 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 207.06 6.74 28.07 36.34 21.76 94.69 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 8.28 0.27 1.12 1.45 0.87 3.79 Critical Lane Group Yes No No No No Yes
Lane Group LOS C A C A C B
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 21.65 4.21 25.62 5.35 24.98 14.49 X, volume / capacity 0.85 0.07 0.24 0.29 0.17 0.48
Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.46 0.03 0.19 0.07 0.23 0.49 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11
d1, Uniform Delay [s] 20.18 4.18 25.43 5.28 24.75 14.00 c, Capacity [veh/h] 1422 1066 663 2344 351 725
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 3547 1583 3445 3547 1774 1583 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.34 0.05 0.05 0.19 0.03 0.22 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.40 0.67 0.19 0.66 0.20 0.46
g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 30 50 14 49 15 34
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.50 0.00 3.00 3.50 3.00 0.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.50 5.00 5.00 5.50 5.00 5.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 74 74 74 74 74 74
Lane Group C R L C L R
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
7 Scenario 2: 2 Existing AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 935 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 21.65 4.21 25.62 5.35 24.98 14.49 Movement LOS C A C A C B
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 20.58 9.25 16.03
Approach LOS C A B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 16.10
Intersection LOS B
Intersection V/C 0.440
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 - 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 8 - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
8 Scenario 2: 2 Existing AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 936 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.935
Level Of Service: E
Delay (sec / veh): 66.8
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 8: Route 1 & Fassler Ave/Rockaway Beach Ave.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No Yes No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Pocket Length [ft] 155.00 100.00 55.00 400.00 100.00 50.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Route 1 Route 1 Fassler Ave. Rockaway Beach Ave.

Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 34 1502 3 320 857 40 7 22 766 87 13 27 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 9 376 1 80 214 10 2 6 192 22 3 7 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 34 1502 3 320 857 40 7 22 766 87 13 27 Right-Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 34 1502 3 320 857 40 7 22 766 87 13 27 Name Route 1 Route 1 Fassler Ave. Rockaway Beach Ave.

Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
9 Scenario 2: 2 Existing AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 937 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 20 60 0 60 60 0 0 60 0 0 40 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 10 0 10 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 8 0 0 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 12.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference LeadGreen
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
10 Scenario 2: 2 Existing AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 938 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 73.93 1182.83 3.18 266.70 416.61 36.63 36.56 534.21 232.73 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 2.96 47.31 0.13 10.67 16.66 1.47 1.46 21.37 9.31 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 41.07 869.40 1.77 162.25 279.51 20.35 20.31 375.35 136.82 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.64 34.78 0.07 6.49 11.18 0.81 0.81 15.01 5.47 Critical Lane Group No Yes No Yes No No No Yes Yes
Lane Group LOS F F C E C C D E F
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 98.75 91.78 29.00 72.45 28.47 21.99 39.06 57.98 81.47 X, volume / capacity 0.77 1.09 0.00 0.84 0.51 0.05 0.05 0.93 0.84 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 23.82 44.48 0.00 5.03 0.24 0.03 0.04 5.12 11.91 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 74.93 47.29 28.99 67.42 28.23 21.97 39.02 52.86 69.57 c, Capacity [veh/h] 44 1377 615 381 1680 750 543 827 151 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1774 3547 1583 3445 3547 1583 1841 2803 1738 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.02 0.42 0.00 0.09 0.24 0.03 0.02 0.27 0.07 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.02 0.39 0.39 0.11 0.47 0.47 0.29 0.29 0.09 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 4 60 60 17 73 73 46 46 13 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.50 5.50 5.00 5.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 154 154 154 154 154 154 154 154 154 Lane Group L C R L C R C R C
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
11 Scenario 2: 2 Existing AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 939 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 98.75 91.78 29.00 72.45 28.47 21.99 39.06 39.06 57.98 81.47 81.47 81.47 Movement LOS F F C E C C D D E F F F
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 91.81 39.82 57.29 81.47
Approach LOS F D E F
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 66.79
Intersection LOS E
Intersection V/C 0.935
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
12 Scenario 2: 2 Existing AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 940 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.912
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 39.2
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 9: Route 1 & Reina del Mar Ave.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 25.00 45.00 45.00 25.00
Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 50.00 175.00 100.00 55.00 425.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Pocket 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 0.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 0.00 12.00 0.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Westbound Northeastbound Southwestbound Southeastbound Name Reina del Mar Ave. Route 1 Route 1 Calera WRP
Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 123 0 308 5 2204 177 122 1117 72 4 53 0 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 31 0 77 1 551 44 31 279 18 1 13 0 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 123 0 308 5 2204 177 122 1117 72 4 53 0 Right-Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 123 0 308 5 2204 177 122 1117 72 4 53 0 Name Reina del Mar Ave. Route 1 Route 1 Calera WRP
Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
13 Scenario 2: 2 Existing AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 941 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 60 0 20 120 0 60 120 0 0 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 10 0 5 10 0 5 10 0 0 10 0
Lead / Lag - - - Lead - - Lead - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 8 0 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 4 0
Control Type Split Split Split Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 12.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference LeadGreen
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
14 Scenario 2: 2 Existing AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 942 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 429.78 409.82 14.66 1491.06 143.84 264.83 402.68 396.89 134.11 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 17.19 16.39 0.59 59.64 5.75 10.59 16.11 15.88 5.36 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 290.11 274.07 8.14 1206.26 79.91 160.84 268.35 263.72 74.51 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 11.60 10.96 0.33 48.25 3.20 6.43 10.73 10.55 2.98 Critical Lane Group No Yes No Yes No Yes No No Yes
Lane Group LOS F F F D B F B B F
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 90.75 91.39 120.39 40.42 14.71 99.94 12.50 12.52 96.04 X, volume / capacity 0.90 0.90 0.45 0.99 0.18 0.86 0.46 0.46 0.64 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 11.01 11.65 26.16 6.11 0.08 13.51 0.25 0.26 7.35 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 79.74 79.74 94.24 34.31 14.62 86.44 12.25 12.27 88.69 c, Capacity [veh/h] 248 233 11 2236 998 142 1312 1285 89 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1684 1583 1774 3547 1583 1774 1863 1823 1782 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.62 0.11 0.07 0.32 0.32 0.03 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.15 0.15 0.01 0.63 0.63 0.08 0.70 0.70 0.05 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 28 28 1 120 120 15 134 134 10 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 Lane Group C R L C R L C C C
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
15 Scenario 2: 2 Existing AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 943 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 90.75 90.75 91.19 120.39 40.42 14.71 99.94 12.51 12.52 96.04 96.04 96.04 Movement LOS F F F F D B F B B F F F
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 91.06 38.68 20.65 96.04
Approach LOS F D C F
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 39.20
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.912
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
16 Scenario 2: 2 Existing AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 944 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.667
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 28.3
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 3: Route 1 & Linda Mar Blvd./San Pedro Ave.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 45.00 45.00 30.00 30.00
Pocket Length [ft] 60.00 100.00 100.00 290.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 205.00 210.00 100.00 170.00 No. of Lanes in Pocket 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 1 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Route 1 Route 1 Linda Mar Blvd. San Pedro Ave.

Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 31 430 116 710 659 164 156 78 367 132 117 33 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 8 108 29 178 165 41 39 20 92 33 29 8 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 31 430 116 710 659 164 156 78 367 132 117 33 Right-Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 31 430 116 710 659 164 156 78 367 132 117 33 Name Route 1 Route 1 Linda Mar Blvd. San Pedro Ave.

Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
1 Scenario 3: 3 3 Existing PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 945 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No Yes No Yes No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 3.5 0.0 3.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 24 0 0 25 0 0 10 0 0 28 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 4.5 0.0 4.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 30 40 0 40 40 0 0 40 40 0 40 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 10 0 5 10 0 0 10 5 0 10 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups 1,8
Signal Group 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 8 1 0 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 12.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference LeadGreen
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
2 Scenario 3: 3 3 Existing PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 946 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 30.49 218.40 209.85 247.86 165.90 75.72 195.07 150.69 109.18 94.39 25.17 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.22 8.74 8.39 9.91 6.64 3.03 7.80 6.03 4.37 3.78 1.01 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 16.94 126.26 120.02 148.08 92.17 42.07 109.33 83.71 60.65 52.44 13.98 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.68 5.05 4.80 5.92 3.69 1.68 4.37 3.35 2.43 2.10 0.56 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No No Lane Group LOS D C D C B B C C C C C
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 45.52 34.44 35.08 29.81 16.36 14.86 34.60 33.40 34.38 33.20 30.65 X, volume / capacity 0.55 0.80 0.81 0.83 0.44 0.25 0.76 0.76 0.58 0.49 0.16 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 8.30 4.22 4.80 2.12 0.21 0.19 3.82 2.58 2.35 1.56 0.37 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 37.22 30.22 30.28 27.70 16.15 14.67 30.78 30.82 32.03 31.64 30.28 c, Capacity [veh/h] 56 352 327 858 1487 664 309 480 227 238 203 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1774 1863 1729 3445 3547 1583 1803 2803 1774 1863 1583 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.02 0.15 0.15 0.21 0.19 0.10 0.13 0.13 0.07 0.06 0.02 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.03 0.19 0.19 0.25 0.42 0.42 0.17 0.17 0.13 0.13 0.13 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 2 15 15 19 33 33 13 13 10 10 10 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 5.50 5.50 5.00 5.50 5.50 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 78 78 78 78 78 78 78 78 78 78 78
Lane Group L C C L C R C R L C R
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
3 Scenario 3: 3 3 Existing PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 947 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 45.52 34.66 35.08 29.81 16.36 14.86 34.60 34.60 33.40 34.38 33.20 30.65 Movement LOS D C D C B B C C C C C C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 35.33 22.43 33.86 33.46
Approach LOS D C C C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 28.25
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.667
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
4 Scenario 3: 3 3 Existing PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 948 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.639
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 11.9
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 4: Route 1 & Crespi Dr.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 45.00 45.00 30.00
Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 95.00 155.00 100.00 100.00 140.00 No. of Lanes in Pocket 0 1 2 0 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Thru Right Left Thru Left Right
Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound
Name Route 1 Route 1 Crespi Drive
Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 877 56 379 1504 59 214
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 219 14 95 376 15 54
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 877 56 379 1504 59 214
Right-Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 877 56 379 1504 59 214
Name Route 1 Route 1 Crespi Drive
Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
5 Scenario 3: 3 3 Existing PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 949 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.0
l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Rest In Walk No No No
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 12 18 0 10 18 0
Walk [s] 5 5 0 5 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Amber [s] 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.0 4.0
Maximum Green [s] 60 60 60 60 60 60
Minimum Green [s] 10 10 10 10 10 10
Lead / Lag - - Lead - Lead -
Auxiliary Signal Groups 2,8 1,8
Signal Group 2 8 1 6 8 1
Control Type Permissive Overlap Protected Permissive Permissive Overlap Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 9.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference LeadGreen
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
6 Scenario 3: 3 3 Existing PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 950 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 172.89 5.48 80.17 129.53 24.99 52.75 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 6.92 0.22 3.21 5.18 1.00 2.11 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 96.05 3.04 44.54 71.96 13.88 29.30 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 3.84 0.12 1.78 2.88 0.56 1.17 Critical Lane Group No No No Yes No Yes
Lane Group LOS B A B A B A
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 17.31 4.02 19.75 7.42 17.76 8.27 X, volume / capacity 0.78 0.06 0.57 0.70 0.17 0.28
Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.22 0.02 0.78 0.42 0.24 0.20 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11
d1, Uniform Delay [s] 16.09 4.00 18.98 6.99 17.52 8.07
c, Capacity [veh/h] 1123 973 664 2148 340 761
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 3547 1583 3445 3547 1774 1583 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.25 0.04 0.11 0.42 0.03 0.14 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.32 0.61 0.19 0.61 0.19 0.48
g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 16 32 10 31 10 25
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.50 0.00 3.00 3.50 3.00 0.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.50 5.00 5.00 5.50 5.00 5.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 52 52 52 52 52 52
Lane Group C R L C L R
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
7 Scenario 3: 3 3 Existing PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 951 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 17.31 4.02 19.75 7.42 17.76 8.27 Movement LOS B A B A B A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 16.51 9.90 10.32
Approach LOS B A B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 11.93
Intersection LOS B
Intersection V/C 0.639
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 - 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 8 - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
8 Scenario 3: 3 3 Existing PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 952 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.889
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 48.1
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 8: Route 1 & Fassler Ave/Rockaway Beach Ave.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No Yes No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Pocket Length [ft] 155.00 100.00 55.00 400.00 100.00 50.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Route 1 Route 1 Fassler Ave. Rockaway Beach Ave.

Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 83 1012 8 724 1736 88 19 27 330 131 42 91 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 21 253 2 181 434 22 5 7 83 33 11 23 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 83 1012 8 724 1736 88 19 27 330 131 42 91 Right-Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 83 1012 8 724 1736 88 19 27 330 131 42 91 Name Route 1 Route 1 Fassler Ave. Rockaway Beach Ave.

Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
9 Scenario 3: 3 3 Existing PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 953 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 20 60 0 60 60 0 0 60 0 0 40 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 10 0 10 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 8 0 0 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 12.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference LeadGreen
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
10 Scenario 3: 3 3 Existing PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 954 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 139.59 570.51 8.11 438.26 946.44 66.54 61.90 238.55 359.49 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 5.58 22.82 0.32 17.53 37.86 2.66 2.48 9.54 14.38 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 77.55 405.40 4.51 296.96 725.56 36.97 34.39 141.14 234.05 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 3.10 16.22 0.18 11.88 29.02 1.48 1.38 5.65 9.36 Critical Lane Group Yes No No No Yes No No Yes Yes
Lane Group LOS E D C D D B D E E
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 73.42 46.60 31.18 52.20 42.87 18.12 50.58 60.88 63.38 X, volume / capacity 0.79 0.91 0.02 0.89 1.00 0.11 0.18 0.85 0.90 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 12.22 3.21 0.01 3.55 9.47 0.06 0.34 5.38 9.82 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 61.19 43.39 31.17 48.65 33.41 18.06 50.24 55.51 53.55 c, Capacity [veh/h] 105 1114 497 815 1743 778 252 387 293 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1774 3547 1583 3445 3547 1583 1825 2803 1716 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.05 0.29 0.01 0.21 0.49 0.06 0.03 0.12 0.15 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.06 0.31 0.31 0.24 0.49 0.49 0.14 0.14 0.17 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 8 41 41 31 65 65 18 18 22 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.50 5.50 5.00 5.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 132 132 132 132 132 132 132 132 132 Lane Group L C R L C R C R C
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
11 Scenario 3: 3 3 Existing PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 955 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 73.42 46.60 31.18 52.20 42.87 18.12 50.58 50.58 60.88 63.38 63.38 63.38 Movement LOS E D C D D B D D E E E E
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 48.50 44.67 59.62 63.38
Approach LOS D D E E
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 48.12
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.889
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
12 Scenario 3: 3 3 Existing PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 956 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.835
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 23.2
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 9: Route 1 & Reina del Mar Ave.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 25.00 45.00 45.00 25.00
Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 50.00 175.00 100.00 55.00 425.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Pocket 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 0.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 0.00 12.00 0.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Westbound Northeastbound Southwestbound Southeastbound Name Reina del Mar Ave. Route 1 Route 1 Calera WRP
Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 94 3 125 2 1386 82 220 2474 4 14 2 5 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 24 1 31 1 347 21 55 619 1 4 1 1 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 94 3 125 2 1386 82 220 2474 4 14 2 5 Right-Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 94 3 125 2 1386 82 220 2474 4 14 2 5 Name Reina del Mar Ave. Route 1 Route 1 Calera WRP
Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
13 Scenario 3: 3 3 Existing PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 957 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 60 0 20 120 0 60 120 0 0 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 10 0 5 10 0 5 10 0 0 10 0
Lead / Lag - - - Lead - - Lead - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 8 0 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 4 0
Control Type Split Split Split Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 12.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference LeadGreen
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
14 Scenario 3: 3 3 Existing PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 958 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 158.49 150.15 5.46 426.58 39.43 268.11 766.59 767.76 28.54 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 6.34 6.01 0.22 17.06 1.58 10.72 30.66 30.71 1.14 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 88.05 83.41 3.03 287.53 21.91 163.32 570.70 571.70 15.86 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 3.52 3.34 0.12 11.50 0.88 6.53 22.83 22.87 0.63 Critical Lane Group No Yes Yes No No No No Yes Yes
Lane Group LOS E E F B B E C C E
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 57.65 59.14 105.83 17.59 11.08 56.42 20.32 20.38 55.32 X, volume / capacity 0.74 0.76 0.42 0.68 0.09 0.86 0.93 0.93 0.30 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 6.85 8.24 48.93 0.41 0.04 8.56 6.23 6.28 2.28 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.20 0.20 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 50.80 50.89 56.90 17.18 11.04 47.86 14.08 14.10 53.04 c, Capacity [veh/h] 155 141 5 2029 906 254 1328 1327 71 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1744 1583 1774 3547 1583 1774 1863 1862 1663 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.39 0.05 0.12 0.67 0.67 0.01 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.57 0.57 0.14 0.71 0.71 0.04 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 10 10 0 65 65 16 81 81 5
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 114 114 114 114 114 114 114 114 114 Lane Group C R L C R L C C C
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
15 Scenario 3: 3 3 Existing PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 959 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 57.65 57.65 58.96 105.83 17.59 11.08 56.42 20.35 20.38 55.32 55.32 55.32 Movement LOS E E E F B B E C C E E E
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 58.36 17.35 23.29 55.32
Approach LOS E B C E
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 23.23
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.835
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 EP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
8/7/2019
16 Scenario 3: 3 3 Existing PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 7.00-06
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 960 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.662
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 29.1
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 3: Route 1 & Linda Mar Blvd./San Pedro Ave.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 45.00 45.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 60.0 100. 100. 290. 100. 100. 100. 100. 205. 210. 100. 170.

No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 1 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Turning Movement Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestboun Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Route 1 Route 1 Linda Mar Blvd. San Pedro Ave.

Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 17 524 105 370 300 112 78 59 568 130 57 11 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 4 131 26 93 75 28 20 15 142 33 14 3 Other Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 17 524 105 370 300 112 78 59 568 130 57 11 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 17 524 105 368 300 112 78 59 565 130 57 11 Name Route 1 Route 1 Linda Mar Blvd. San Pedro Ave.

Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
1 Scenario 6: 6 Background AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 961 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No Yes No Yes No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 3.5 0.0 3.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 24 0 0 25 0 0 10 0 0 28 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 4.5 0.0 4.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 30 40 0 40 40 0 0 40 40 0 40 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 10 0 5 10 0 0 10 5 0 10 0
Lead / Lag Lea - - Lea - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups 1,8
Signal Group 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 8 1 0 4 0
Control Type Prot Per Per Prot Per Per Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 12.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
2 Scenario 6: 6 Background AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 962 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 17.5 235. 227. 142. 76.0 56.5 89.41 213.45 104. 42.6 8.02 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.70 9.43 9.11 5.71 3.04 2.26 3.58 8.54 4.18 1.70 0.32 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 9.75 139. 133. 79.3 42.2 31.4 49.67 122.64 58.0 23.6 4.46 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.39 5.57 5.33 3.17 1.69 1.26 1.99 4.91 2.32 0.95 0.18 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No No Lane Group LOS D C C C B B C C C C C
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 46.6 32.7 33.1 33.6 17.7 17.5 23.88 29.80 33.4 30.3 29.2 X, volume / capacity 0.48 0.81 0.82 0.75 0.24 0.20 0.31 0.82 0.57 0.24 0.05 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 9.67 4.11 4.48 2.27 0.10 0.18 0.39 2.57 2.20 0.50 0.11 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 37.0 28.6 28.6 31.3 17.6 17.3 23.49 27.23 31.2 29.8 29.1 c, Capacity [veh/h] 36 396 374 496 124 554 445 689 229 241 204 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 177 186 175 344 354 158 1811 2803 177 186 158 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.01 0.17 0.17 0.11 0.08 0.07 0.08 0.20 0.07 0.03 0.01 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.02 0.21 0.21 0.14 0.35 0.35 0.25 0.25 0.13 0.13 0.13 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 2 16 16 11 27 27 19 19 10 10 10 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 5.50 5.50 5.00 5.50 5.50 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76
Lane Group L C C L C R C R L C R
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
3 Scenario 6: 6 Background AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 963 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 46.6 32.8 33.1 33.6 17.7 17.5 23.8 23.8 29.8 33.4 30.3 29.2 Movement LOS D C C C B B C C C C C C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 33.29 25.22 28.65 32.32
Approach LOS C C C C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 29.10
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.662
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
4 Scenario 6: 6 Background AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 964 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.441
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 16.1
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 4: Route 1 & Crespi Dr.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 45.00 45.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.21
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 1
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 95.00 155.00 100.00 100.00 140.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 1 2 0 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Thru Right Left Thru Left Right
Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound
Name Route 1 Route 1 Crespi Drive
Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 1205 78 161 677 60 347
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 301 20 40 169 15 87
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 1205 78 161 677 60 347
Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 3 0 0 2 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 1202 78 161 675 60 347
Name Route 1 Route 1 Crespi Drive
Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
5 Scenario 6: 6 Background AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 965 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.0
l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Rest In Walk No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 12 18 0 10 18 0
Walk [s] 5 5 0 5 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Amber [s] 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.0 4.0
Maximum Green [s] 60 60 60 60 60 60
Minimum Green [s] 10 10 10 10 10 10
Lead / Lag - - Lead - Lead -
Auxiliary Signal Groups 2,8 1,8
Signal Group 2 8 1 6 8 1
Control Type Permissiv Overlap Protected Permissiv Permissiv Overlap Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 9.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
6 Scenario 6: 6 Background AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 966 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 326.85 12.18 50.75 65.89 39.34 171.36 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 13.07 0.49 2.03 2.64 1.57 6.85 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 208.46 6.77 28.19 36.61 21.85 95.20 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 8.34 0.27 1.13 1.46 0.87 3.81 Critical Lane Group Yes No No No No Yes
Lane Group LOS C A C A C B
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 21.69 4.21 25.71 5.36 25.07 14.55 X, volume / capacity 0.85 0.07 0.24 0.29 0.17 0.48
Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.46 0.03 0.19 0.07 0.23 0.49 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11
d1, Uniform Delay [s] 20.23 4.19 25.52 5.29 24.84 14.06 c, Capacity [veh/h] 1425 1066 663 2346 351 724
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 3547 1583 3445 3547 1774 1583 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.34 0.05 0.05 0.19 0.03 0.22 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.40 0.67 0.19 0.66 0.20 0.46
g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 30 50 14 49 15 34
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.50 0.00 3.00 3.50 3.00 0.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.50 5.00 5.00 5.50 5.00 5.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 75 75 75 75 75 75
Lane Group C R L C L R
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
7 Scenario 6: 6 Background AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 967 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 21.69 4.21 25.71 5.36 25.07 14.55 Movement LOS C A C A C B
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 20.63 9.27 16.10
Approach LOS C A B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 16.13
Intersection LOS B
Intersection V/C 0.441
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 - 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 8 - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
8 Scenario 6: 6 Background AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 968 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.939
Level Of Service: E
Delay (sec / veh): 68.4
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 8: Route 1 & Fassler Ave/Rockaway Beach Ave.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No Yes No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.2 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 155. 100. 55.0 400. 100. 50.0 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100.

No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Turning Movement Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestboun Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Route 1 Route 1 Fassler Ave. Ro Be
Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 34 150 3 322 858 40 8 22 772 87 13 27 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 9 376 1 81 215 10 2 6 193 22 3 7 Other Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 34 150 3 322 858 40 8 22 772 87 13 27 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 3 0 2 1 0 1 0 6 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 34 150 3 320 857 40 7 22 766 87 13 27 Name Route 1 Route 1 Fassler Ave. Ro Be
Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
9 Scenario 6: 6 Background AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 969 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 20 60 0 60 60 0 0 60 0 0 40 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 10 0 10 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Lead / Lag Lea - - Lea - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 8 0 0 4 0
Control Type Prot Per Per Prot Per Per Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 12.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
10 Scenario 6: 6 Background AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 970 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 74.3 120 3.21 269. 420. 36.9 37.93 540.12 233.69 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 2.97 48.2 0.13 10.7 16.8 1.48 1.52 21.60 9.35 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 41.3 884. 1.78 164. 282. 20.5 21.07 380.23 137.53 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.65 35.3 0.07 6.56 11.2 0.82 0.84 15.21 5.50 Critical Lane Group No Yes No Yes No No No Yes Yes
Lane Group LOS F F C E C C D E F
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 99.3 95.4 29.3 72.7 28.7 22.2 39.05 58.11 81.87 X, volume / capacity 0.77 1.10 0.00 0.84 0.51 0.05 0.05 0.93 0.84 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 24.0 47.7 0.00 5.06 0.24 0.03 0.04 5.14 11.95 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 75.3 47.6 29.3 67.7 28.5 22.1 39.01 52.97 69.92 c, Capacity [veh/h] 44 137 612 382 167 748 546 833 150
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 177 354 158 344 354 158 1838 2803 1738 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.02 0.42 0.00 0.09 0.24 0.03 0.02 0.28 0.07 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.02 0.39 0.39 0.11 0.47 0.47 0.30 0.30 0.09 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 4 60 60 17 73 73 46 46 13 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.50 5.50 5.00 5.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 155 155 155 155 155 155 155 155 155 Lane Group L C R L C R C R C
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
11 Scenario 6: 6 Background AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 971 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 99.3 95.4 29.3 72.7 28.7 22.2 39.0 39.0 58.1 81.8 81.8 81.8 Movement LOS F F C E C C D D E F F F
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 95.39 40.17 57.40 81.87
Approach LOS F D E F
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 68.42
Intersection LOS E
Intersection V/C 0.939
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
12 Scenario 6: 6 Background AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 972 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.914
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 39.7
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 9: Route 1 & Reina del Mar Ave.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 25.00 45.00 45.00 25.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100. 100. 50.0 175. 100. 55.0 425. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100.

No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 0.00 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 0.00 12.0 0.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Lane Configuration
Approach Westbound Northeastbound Southwestboun Southeastbound Name Re de Route 1 Route 1 Calera WRP
Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 123 0 308 5 221 177 122 112 72 4 53 0 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 31 0 77 1 553 44 31 280 18 1 13 0 Other Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 123 0 308 5 221 177 122 112 72 4 53 0 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 3 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 123 0 308 5 220 177 122 111 72 4 53 0 Name Re de Route 1 Route 1 Calera WRP
Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
13 Scenario 6: 6 Background AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 973 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 60 0 20 120 0 60 120 0 0 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 10 0 5 10 0 5 10 0 0 10 0
Lead / Lag - - - Lea - - Lea - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 8 0 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 4 0
Control Type Split Split Split Prot Per Per Prot Per Per Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 12.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
14 Scenario 6: 6 Background AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 974 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 429.78 409.82 14.6 151 143. 264. 403. 398. 134.11 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 17.19 16.39 0.59 60.4 5.75 10.5 16.1 15.9 5.36 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 290.11 274.07 8.14 122 79.9 160. 269. 264. 74.51 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 11.60 10.96 0.33 48.9 3.20 6.43 10.7 10.5 2.98 Critical Lane Group No Yes No Yes No Yes No No Yes
Lane Group LOS F F F D B F B B F
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 90.75 91.39 120. 41.2 14.7 99.9 12.5 12.5 96.04 X, volume / capacity 0.90 0.90 0.45 0.99 0.18 0.86 0.46 0.46 0.64 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 11.01 11.65 26.1 6.76 0.08 13.5 0.25 0.26 7.35 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 79.74 79.74 94.2 34.5 14.6 86.4 12.2 12.2 88.69 c, Capacity [veh/h] 248 233 11 223 998 142 131 128 89
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1684 1583 177 354 158 177 186 182 1782 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.62 0.11 0.07 0.32 0.32 0.03 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.15 0.15 0.01 0.63 0.63 0.08 0.70 0.70 0.05 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 28 28 1 120 120 15 134 134 10 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 Lane Group C R L C R L C C C
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
15 Scenario 6: 6 Background AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 975 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 90.7 90.7 91.1 120. 41.2 14.7 99.9 12.5 12.5 96.0 96.0 96.0 Movement LOS F F F F D B F B B F F F
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 91.06 39.49 20.64 96.04
Approach LOS F D C F
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 39.66
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.914
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
16 Scenario 6: 6 Background AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 976 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.670
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 28.4
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 3: Route 1 & Linda Mar Blvd./San Pedro Ave.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 45.00 45.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 60.0 100. 100. 290. 100. 100. 100. 100. 205. 210. 100. 170.

No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 1 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Turning Movement Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestboun Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Route 1 Route 1 Linda Mar Blvd. San Pedro Ave.

Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 31 431 116 713 659 164 156 78 371 133 117 33 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 8 108 29 178 165 41 39 20 93 33 29 8 Other Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 31 431 116 713 659 164 156 78 371 133 117 33 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 4 1 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 31 430 116 710 659 164 156 78 367 132 117 33 Name Route 1 Route 1 Linda Mar Blvd. San Pedro Ave.

Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
1 Scenario 7: 7 Background PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 977 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No Yes No Yes No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 3.5 0.0 3.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 24 0 0 25 0 0 10 0 0 28 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 4.5 0.0 4.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 30 40 0 40 40 0 0 40 40 0 40 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 10 0 5 10 0 0 10 5 0 10 0
Lead / Lag Lea - - Lea - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups 1,8
Signal Group 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 8 1 0 4 0
Control Type Prot Per Per Prot Per Per Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 12.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
2 Scenario 7: 7 Background PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 978 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 30.6 219. 211. 250. 166. 76.1 195.40 153.25 110. 95.1 25.3 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.23 8.80 8.45 10.0 6.67 3.05 7.82 6.13 4.44 3.80 1.01 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 17.0 127. 121. 149. 92.6 42.3 109.56 85.14 61.6 52.8 14.0 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.68 5.09 4.84 5.99 3.71 1.69 4.38 3.41 2.47 2.11 0.56 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No No Lane Group LOS D C D C B B C C C C C
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 45.7 34.6 35.2 29.9 16.4 14.9 34.53 33.53 34.7 33.4 30.8 X, volume / capacity 0.56 0.80 0.81 0.83 0.44 0.25 0.75 0.77 0.59 0.49 0.16 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 8.34 4.25 4.82 2.13 0.21 0.19 3.68 2.59 2.44 1.59 0.38 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 37.4 30.3 30.4 27.8 16.2 14.7 30.85 30.94 32.2 31.8 30.4 c, Capacity [veh/h] 56 352 327 860 149 665 311 483 226 237 202 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 177 186 172 344 354 158 1803 2803 177 186 158 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.02 0.15 0.15 0.21 0.19 0.10 0.13 0.13 0.07 0.06 0.02 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.03 0.19 0.19 0.25 0.42 0.42 0.17 0.17 0.13 0.13 0.13 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 2 15 15 20 33 33 13 13 10 10 10 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 5.50 5.50 5.00 5.50 5.50 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 78 78 78 78 78 78 78 78 78 78 78
Lane Group L C C L C R C R L C R
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
3 Scenario 7: 7 Background PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 979 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 45.7 34.8 35.2 29.9 16.4 14.9 34.5 34.5 33.5 34.7 33.4 30.8 Movement LOS D C D C B B C C C C C C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 35.52 22.53 33.92 33.74
Approach LOS D C C C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 28.39
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.670
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
4 Scenario 7: 7 Background PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 980 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.640
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 11.9
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 4: Route 1 & Crespi Dr.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 45.00 45.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.21
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 1
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 95.00 155.00 100.00 100.00 140.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 1 2 0 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Thru Right Left Thru Left Right
Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound
Name Route 1 Route 1 Crespi Drive
Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 883 56 379 1507 59 214
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 221 14 95 377 15 54
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 883 56 379 1507 59 214
Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 6 0 0 3 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 877 56 379 1504 59 214
Name Route 1 Route 1 Crespi Drive
Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
5 Scenario 7: 7 Background PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 981 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.0
l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Rest In Walk No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 12 18 0 10 18 0
Walk [s] 5 5 0 5 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Amber [s] 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.0 4.0
Maximum Green [s] 60 60 60 60 60 60
Minimum Green [s] 10 10 10 10 10 10
Lead / Lag - - Lead - Lead -
Auxiliary Signal Groups 2,8 1,8
Signal Group 2 8 1 6 8 1
Control Type Permissiv Overlap Protected Permissiv Permissiv Overlap Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 9.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
6 Scenario 7: 7 Background PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 982 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 174.45 5.48 80.56 129.98 25.09 53.18 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 6.98 0.22 3.22 5.20 1.00 2.13 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 96.91 3.04 44.75 72.21 13.94 29.54 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 3.88 0.12 1.79 2.89 0.56 1.18 Critical Lane Group No No No Yes No Yes
Lane Group LOS B A B A B A
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 17.30 4.01 19.83 7.41 17.83 8.34 X, volume / capacity 0.78 0.06 0.57 0.70 0.17 0.28
Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.22 0.02 0.78 0.42 0.24 0.20 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11
d1, Uniform Delay [s] 16.08 3.99 19.05 6.99 17.59 8.14
c, Capacity [veh/h] 1129 974 662 2152 339 759
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 3547 1583 3445 3547 1774 1583 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.25 0.04 0.11 0.42 0.03 0.14 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.32 0.61 0.19 0.61 0.19 0.48
g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 16 32 10 31 10 25
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.50 0.00 3.00 3.50 3.00 0.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.50 5.00 5.00 5.50 5.00 5.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 52 52 52 52 52 52
Lane Group C R L C L R
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
7 Scenario 7: 7 Background PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 983 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 17.30 4.01 19.83 7.41 17.83 8.34 Movement LOS B A B A B A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 16.51 9.90 10.39
Approach LOS B A B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 11.95
Intersection LOS B
Intersection V/C 0.640
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 - 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 8 - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
8 Scenario 7: 7 Background PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 984 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.890
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 48.7
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 8: Route 1 & Fassler Ave/Rockaway Beach Ave.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No Yes No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.2 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 155. 100. 55.0 400. 100. 50.0 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100.

No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Turning Movement Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestboun Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Route 1 Route 1 Fassler Ave. Ro Be
Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 83 101 12 730 173 88 20 27 334 131 42 91 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 21 254 3 183 435 22 5 7 84 33 11 23 Other Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 83 101 12 730 173 88 20 27 334 131 42 91 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 2 4 6 2 0 1 0 4 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 83 101 8 724 173 88 19 27 330 131 42 91 Name Route 1 Route 1 Fassler Ave. Ro Be
Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
9 Scenario 7: 7 Background PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 985 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 20 60 0 60 60 0 0 60 0 0 40 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 10 0 10 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Lead / Lag Lea - - Lea - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 8 0 0 4 0
Control Type Prot Per Per Prot Per Per Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 12.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
10 Scenario 7: 7 Background PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 986 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 142. 581. 12.4 448. 960. 67.6 64.35 244.38 365.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 5.68 23.2 0.50 17.9 38.4 2.70 2.57 9.78 14.60 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 78.8 414. 6.91 305. 737. 37.5 35.75 145.48 238.40 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 3.16 16.5 0.28 12.2 29.5 1.50 1.43 5.82 9.54 Critical Lane Group Yes No No No Yes No No Yes Yes
Lane Group LOS E D C D D B D E E
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 74.5 47.4 31.7 53.0 43.1 18.3 51.33 61.84 64.46 X, volume / capacity 0.79 0.91 0.02 0.89 0.99 0.11 0.19 0.86 0.90 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 12.3 3.26 0.02 3.60 9.34 0.06 0.35 5.46 9.96 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 62.2 44.1 31.7 49.4 33.8 18.2 50.98 56.39 54.50 c, Capacity [veh/h] 105 111 498 820 174 780 254 390 293 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 177 354 158 344 354 158 1824 2803 1716 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.05 0.29 0.01 0.21 0.49 0.06 0.03 0.12 0.15 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.06 0.31 0.31 0.24 0.49 0.49 0.14 0.14 0.17 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 8 42 42 32 66 66 19 19 23 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.50 5.50 5.00 5.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 134 134 134 134 134 134 134 134 134 Lane Group L C R L C R C R C
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
11 Scenario 7: 7 Background PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 987 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 74.5 47.4 31.7 53.0 43.1 18.3 51.3 51.3 61.8 64.4 64.4 64.4 Movement LOS E D C D D B D D E E E E
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 49.27 45.10 60.55 64.46
Approach LOS D D E E
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 48.73
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.890
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
12 Scenario 7: 7 Background PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 988 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.836
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 23.4
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 9: Route 1 & Reina del Mar Ave.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 25.00 45.00 45.00 25.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100. 100. 50.0 175. 100. 55.0 425. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100.

No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 0.00 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 0.00 12.0 0.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Lane Configuration
Approach Westbound Northeastbound Southwestboun Southeastbound Name Re de Route 1 Route 1 Calera WRP
Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 94 3 125 2 139 82 220 248 4 14 2 5 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 24 1 31 1 348 21 55 621 1 4 1 1 Other Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 94 3 125 2 139 82 220 248 4 14 2 5 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 8 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 94 3 125 2 138 82 220 247 4 14 2 5 Name Re de Route 1 Route 1 Calera WRP
Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
13 Scenario 7: 7 Background PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 989 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 60 0 20 120 0 60 120 0 0 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 10 0 5 10 0 5 10 0 0 10 0
Lead / Lag - - - Lea - - Lea - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 8 0 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 4 0
Control Type Split Split Split Prot Per Per Prot Per Per Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 12.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
14 Scenario 7: 7 Background PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 990 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 160.12 151.69 5.49 431. 39.6 270. 778. 779. 28.82 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 6.40 6.07 0.22 17.2 1.59 10.8 31.1 31.1 1.15 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 88.96 84.27 3.05 291. 22.0 165. 580. 581. 16.01 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 3.56 3.37 0.12 11.6 0.88 6.60 23.2 23.2 0.64 Critical Lane Group No Yes Yes No No No No Yes Yes
Lane Group LOS E E F B B E C C E
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 58.21 59.72 106. 17.6 11.0 56.9 20.5 20.6 55.84 X, volume / capacity 0.74 0.76 0.42 0.68 0.09 0.87 0.93 0.93 0.30 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 6.91 8.33 48.9 0.41 0.04 8.63 6.44 6.49 2.30 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.20 0.20 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 51.29 51.39 57.4 17.2 11.0 48.3 14.1 14.1 53.55 c, Capacity [veh/h] 154 140 5 203 909 254 133 133 71
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1744 1583 177 354 158 177 186 186 1663 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.39 0.05 0.12 0.67 0.67 0.01 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.57 0.57 0.14 0.71 0.71 0.04 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 10 10 0 66 66 16 82 82 5
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 115 Lane Group C R L C R L C C C
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
15 Scenario 7: 7 Background PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 991 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 58.2 58.2 59.5 106. 17.6 11.0 56.9 20.6 20.6 55.8 55.8 55.8 Movement LOS E E E F B B E C C E E E
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 58.94 17.40 23.56 55.84
Approach LOS E B C E
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 23.43
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.836
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 BP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/20/2021
16 Scenario 7: 7 Background PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 992 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.663
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 29.1
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 3: Route 1 & Linda Mar Blvd./San Pedro Ave.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 45.00 45.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 60.0 100. 100. 290. 100. 100. 100. 100. 205. 210. 100. 170.

No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 1 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Turning Movement Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestboun Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Route 1 Route 1 Linda Mar Blvd. San Pedro Ave.

Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 17 525 105 371 300 112 78 59 568 130 57 11 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 4 131 26 93 75 28 20 15 142 33 14 3 Other Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 17 525 105 371 300 112 78 59 568 130 57 11 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 17 524 105 368 300 112 78 59 565 130 57 11 Name Route 1 Route 1 Linda Mar Blvd. San Pedro Ave.

Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
1 Scenario 8: 8 Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 993 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No Yes No Yes No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 3.5 0.0 3.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 24 0 0 25 0 0 10 0 0 28 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 4.5 0.0 4.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 30 40 0 40 40 0 0 40 40 0 40 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 10 0 5 10 0 0 10 5 0 10 0
Lead / Lag Lea - - Lea - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups 1,8
Signal Group 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 8 1 0 4 0
Control Type Prot Per Per Prot Per Per Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 12.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
2 Scenario 8: 8 Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 994 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 17.5 236. 228. 143. 76.0 56.6 89.54 213.71 104. 42.6 8.03 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.70 9.46 9.13 5.73 3.04 2.26 3.58 8.55 4.18 1.71 0.32 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 9.76 139. 133. 79.6 42.2 31.4 49.75 122.83 58.1 23.7 4.46 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.39 5.58 5.34 3.19 1.69 1.26 1.99 4.91 2.32 0.95 0.18 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No No Lane Group LOS D C C C B B C C C C C
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 46.7 32.7 33.1 33.6 17.7 17.5 23.91 29.84 33.5 30.4 29.3 X, volume / capacity 0.48 0.81 0.82 0.75 0.24 0.20 0.31 0.82 0.57 0.24 0.05 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 9.67 4.11 4.49 2.27 0.10 0.18 0.39 2.57 2.21 0.50 0.11 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 37.0 28.6 28.6 31.3 17.6 17.3 23.52 27.27 31.2 29.9 29.2 c, Capacity [veh/h] 35 397 374 497 124 554 445 689 229 240 204 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 177 186 175 344 354 158 1811 2803 177 186 158 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.01 0.17 0.17 0.11 0.08 0.07 0.08 0.20 0.07 0.03 0.01 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.02 0.21 0.21 0.14 0.35 0.35 0.25 0.25 0.13 0.13 0.13 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 2 16 16 11 27 27 19 19 10 10 10 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 5.50 5.50 5.00 5.50 5.50 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76
Lane Group L C C L C R C R L C R
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
3 Scenario 8: 8 Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 995 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 46.7 32.9 33.1 33.6 17.7 17.5 23.9 23.9 29.8 33.5 30.4 29.3 Movement LOS D C C C B B C C C C C C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 33.32 25.24 28.69 32.38
Approach LOS C C C C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 29.13
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.663
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
4 Scenario 8: 8 Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 996 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.442
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 16.5
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 4: Route 1 & Crespi Dr.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 45.00 45.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.21
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 1
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 95.00 155.00 100.00 100.00 140.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 1 2 0 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Thru Right Left Thru Left Right
Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound
Name Route 1 Route 1 Crespi Drive
Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 1205 79 166 677 61 355
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 301 20 42 169 15 89
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 1205 79 166 677 61 355
Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 3 1 5 2 1 8
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 1202 78 161 675 60 347
Name Route 1 Route 1 Crespi Drive
Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
5 Scenario 8: 8 Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 997 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.0
l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Rest In Walk No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 12 18 0 10 18 0
Walk [s] 5 5 0 5 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Amber [s] 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.0 4.0
Maximum Green [s] 60 60 60 60 60 60
Minimum Green [s] 10 10 10 10 10 10
Lead / Lag - - Lead - Lead -
Auxiliary Signal Groups 2,8 1,8
Signal Group 2 8 1 6 8 1
Control Type Permissiv Overlap Protected Permissiv Permissiv Overlap Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 9.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
6 Scenario 8: 8 Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 998 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 336.64 13.00 53.65 68.76 40.98 179.91 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 13.47 0.52 2.15 2.75 1.64 7.20 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 216.10 7.22 29.81 38.20 22.77 99.95 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 8.64 0.29 1.19 1.53 0.91 4.00 Critical Lane Group Yes No No No No Yes
Lane Group LOS C A C A C B
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 22.31 4.33 26.12 5.46 25.52 14.74 X, volume / capacity 0.85 0.07 0.25 0.29 0.17 0.49
Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.50 0.03 0.19 0.07 0.23 0.50 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11
d1, Uniform Delay [s] 20.81 4.31 25.93 5.39 25.29 14.24 c, Capacity [veh/h] 1420 1065 676 2348 356 732
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 3547 1583 3445 3547 1774 1583 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.34 0.05 0.05 0.19 0.03 0.22 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.40 0.67 0.20 0.66 0.20 0.46
g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 31 51 15 51 15 35
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.50 0.00 3.00 3.50 3.00 0.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.50 5.00 5.00 5.50 5.00 5.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 76 76 76 76 76 76
Lane Group C R L C L R
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
7 Scenario 8: 8 Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 999 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 22.31 4.33 26.12 5.46 25.52 14.74 Movement LOS C A C A C B
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 21.21 9.53 16.32
Approach LOS C A B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 16.54
Intersection LOS B
Intersection V/C 0.442
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 - 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 8 - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
8 Scenario 8: 8 Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1000 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.941
Level Of Service: E
Delay (sec / veh): 69.5
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 8: Route 1 & Fassler Ave/Rockaway Beach Ave.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No Yes No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.2 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 155. 100. 55.0 400. 100. 50.0 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100.

No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Turning Movement Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestboun Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Route 1 Route 1 Fassler Ave. Ro Be
Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 34 151 3 322 863 40 8 22 772 87 13 27 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 9 378 1 81 216 10 2 6 193 22 3 7 Other Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 34 151 3 322 863 40 8 22 772 87 13 27 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 11 0 2 6 0 1 0 6 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 34 150 3 320 857 40 7 22 766 87 13 27 Name Route 1 Route 1 Fassler Ave. Ro Be
Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
9 Scenario 8: 8 Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1001 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 20 60 0 60 60 0 0 60 0 0 40 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 10 0 10 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Lead / Lag Lea - - Lea - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 8 0 0 4 0
Control Type Prot Per Per Prot Per Per Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 12.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
10 Scenario 8: 8 Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1002 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 74.3 122 3.21 269. 422. 36.9 37.93 540.12 233.69 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 2.97 49.0 0.13 10.7 16.9 1.48 1.52 21.60 9.35 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 41.3 896. 1.78 164. 284. 20.5 21.07 380.23 137.53 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.65 35.8 0.07 6.56 11.3 0.82 0.84 15.21 5.50 Critical Lane Group No Yes No Yes No No No Yes Yes
Lane Group LOS F F C E C C D E F
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 99.3 97.9 29.3 72.7 28.8 22.2 39.05 58.11 81.87 X, volume / capacity 0.77 1.10 0.00 0.84 0.52 0.05 0.05 0.93 0.84 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 24.0 50.2 0.00 5.06 0.25 0.03 0.04 5.14 11.95 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.13 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 75.3 47.6 29.3 67.7 28.5 22.1 39.01 52.97 69.92 c, Capacity [veh/h] 44 137 612 382 167 748 546 833 150
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 177 354 158 344 354 158 1838 2803 1738 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.02 0.43 0.00 0.09 0.24 0.03 0.02 0.28 0.07 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.02 0.39 0.39 0.11 0.47 0.47 0.30 0.30 0.09 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 4 60 60 17 73 73 46 46 13 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.50 5.50 5.00 5.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 155 155 155 155 155 155 155 155 155 Lane Group L C R L C R C R C
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
11 Scenario 8: 8 Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1003 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 99.3 97.9 29.3 72.7 28.8 22.2 39.0 39.0 58.1 81.8 81.8 81.8 Movement LOS F F C E C C D D E F F F
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 97.86 40.16 57.40 81.87
Approach LOS F D E F
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 69.47
Intersection LOS E
Intersection V/C 0.941
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
12 Scenario 8: 8 Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1004 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.917
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 40.1
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 9: Route 1 & Reina del Mar Ave.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 25.00 45.00 45.00 25.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100. 100. 50.0 175. 100. 55.0 425. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100.

No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 0.00 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 0.00 12.0 0.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Lane Configuration
Approach Westbound Northeastbound Southwestboun Southeastbound Name Re de Route 1 Route 1 Calera WRP
Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 123 0 308 5 222 177 122 112 72 4 53 0 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 31 0 77 1 555 44 31 281 18 1 13 0 Other Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 123 0 308 5 222 177 122 112 72 4 53 0 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 8 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 123 0 308 5 220 177 122 111 72 4 53 0 Name Re de Route 1 Route 1 Calera WRP
Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
13 Scenario 8: 8 Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1005 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 60 0 20 120 0 60 120 0 0 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 10 0 5 10 0 5 10 0 0 10 0
Lead / Lag - - - Lea - - Lea - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 8 0 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 4 0
Control Type Split Split Split Prot Per Per Prot Per Per Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 12.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
14 Scenario 8: 8 Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1006 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 429.78 409.82 14.6 152 143. 264. 405. 400. 134.11 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 17.19 16.39 0.59 61.1 5.75 10.5 16.2 16.0 5.36 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 290.11 274.07 8.14 124 79.9 160. 270. 266. 74.51 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 11.60 10.96 0.33 49.6 3.20 6.43 10.8 10.6 2.98 Critical Lane Group No Yes No Yes No Yes No No Yes
Lane Group LOS F F F D B F B B F
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 90.75 91.39 120. 42.1 14.7 99.9 12.5 12.5 96.04 X, volume / capacity 0.90 0.90 0.45 0.99 0.18 0.86 0.46 0.46 0.64 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 11.01 11.65 26.1 7.40 0.08 13.5 0.25 0.26 7.35 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 79.74 79.74 94.2 34.7 14.6 86.4 12.2 12.3 88.69 c, Capacity [veh/h] 248 233 11 223 998 142 131 128 89
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1684 1583 177 354 158 177 186 182 1782 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.63 0.11 0.07 0.32 0.33 0.03 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.15 0.15 0.01 0.63 0.63 0.08 0.70 0.70 0.05 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 28 28 1 120 120 15 134 134 10 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 Lane Group C R L C R L C C C
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
15 Scenario 8: 8 Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1007 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 90.7 90.7 91.1 120. 42.1 14.7 99.9 12.5 12.5 96.0 96.0 96.0 Movement LOS F F F F D B F B B F F F
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 91.06 40.29 20.64 96.04
Approach LOS F D C F
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 40.09
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.917
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
16 Scenario 8: 8 Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1008 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.671
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 28.4
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 3: Route 1 & Linda Mar Blvd./San Pedro Ave.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 45.00 45.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 60.0 100. 100. 290. 100. 100. 100. 100. 205. 210. 100. 170.

No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 1 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Turning Movement Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestboun Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Route 1 Route 1 Linda Mar Blvd. San Pedro Ave.

Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 31 431 116 714 660 164 156 78 372 133 117 33 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 8 108 29 179 165 41 39 20 93 33 29 8 Other Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 31 431 116 714 660 164 156 78 372 133 117 33 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 1 0 4 1 0 0 0 5 1 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 31 430 116 710 659 164 156 78 367 132 117 33 Name Route 1 Route 1 Linda Mar Blvd. San Pedro Ave.

Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
1 Scenario 9: 9 9 Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1009 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No Yes No Yes No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 3.5 0.0 3.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 24 0 0 25 0 0 10 0 0 28 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 4.5 0.0 4.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 30 40 0 40 40 0 0 40 40 0 40 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 10 0 5 10 0 0 10 5 0 10 0
Lead / Lag Lea - - Lea - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups 1,8
Signal Group 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 8 1 0 4 0
Control Type Prot Per Per Prot Per Per Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 12.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
2 Scenario 9: 9 9 Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1010 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 30.7 220. 211. 250. 167. 76.2 195.48 153.90 111. 95.2 25.4 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.23 8.81 8.46 10.0 6.70 3.05 7.82 6.16 4.45 3.81 1.02 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 17.0 127. 121. 150. 92.9 42.3 109.63 85.50 61.7 52.9 14.1 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.68 5.10 4.85 6.01 3.72 1.69 4.39 3.42 2.47 2.12 0.56 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No No Lane Group LOS D C D C B B C C C C C
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 45.8 34.6 35.3 29.9 16.4 14.9 34.52 33.57 34.7 33.5 30.9 X, volume / capacity 0.56 0.80 0.81 0.83 0.44 0.25 0.75 0.77 0.59 0.49 0.16 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 8.35 4.25 4.83 2.13 0.21 0.19 3.65 2.59 2.45 1.59 0.38 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 37.4 30.4 30.5 27.8 16.2 14.7 30.87 30.97 32.3 31.9 30.5 c, Capacity [veh/h] 56 352 327 861 149 665 312 484 226 237 201 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 177 186 172 344 354 158 1803 2803 177 186 158 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.02 0.15 0.15 0.21 0.19 0.10 0.13 0.13 0.07 0.06 0.02 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.03 0.19 0.19 0.25 0.42 0.42 0.17 0.17 0.13 0.13 0.13 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 2 15 15 20 33 33 14 14 10 10 10 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 5.50 5.50 5.00 5.50 5.50 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 78 78 78 78 78 78 78 78 78 78 78
Lane Group L C C L C R C R L C R
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
3 Scenario 9: 9 9 Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1011 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 45.8 34.9 35.3 29.9 16.4 14.9 34.5 34.5 33.5 34.7 33.5 30.9 Movement LOS D C D C B B C C C C C C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 35.58 22.56 33.93 33.81
Approach LOS D C C C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 28.41
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.671
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
4 Scenario 9: 9 9 Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1012 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.645
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 12.0
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 4: Route 1 & Crespi Dr.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 45.00 45.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.21
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 1
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 95.00 155.00 100.00 100.00 140.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 1 2 0 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Thru Right Left Thru Left Right
Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound
Name Route 1 Route 1 Crespi Drive
Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 883 57 385 1507 61 223
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 221 14 96 377 15 56
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 883 57 385 1507 61 223
Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 6 1 6 3 2 9
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 877 56 379 1504 59 214
Name Route 1 Route 1 Crespi Drive
Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
5 Scenario 9: 9 9 Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1013 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.0
l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Rest In Walk No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 12 18 0 10 18 0
Walk [s] 5 5 0 5 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Amber [s] 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.0 4.0
Maximum Green [s] 60 60 60 60 60 60
Minimum Green [s] 10 10 10 10 10 10
Lead / Lag - - Lead - Lead -
Auxiliary Signal Groups 2,8 1,8
Signal Group 2 8 1 6 8 1
Control Type Permissiv Overlap Protected Permissiv Permissiv Overlap Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 9.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
6 Scenario 9: 9 9 Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1014 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 174.57 5.58 81.98 130.13 25.95 55.69 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 6.98 0.22 3.28 5.21 1.04 2.23 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 96.99 3.10 45.55 72.30 14.42 30.94 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 3.88 0.12 1.82 2.89 0.58 1.24 Critical Lane Group No No No Yes No Yes
Lane Group LOS B A B A B A
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 17.33 4.02 19.87 7.42 17.81 8.37 X, volume / capacity 0.78 0.06 0.58 0.70 0.18 0.29
Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.24 0.02 0.81 0.42 0.25 0.21 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11
d1, Uniform Delay [s] 16.10 3.99 19.06 7.00 17.56 8.16
c, Capacity [veh/h] 1126 974 663 2150 340 760
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 3547 1583 3445 3547 1774 1583 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.25 0.04 0.11 0.42 0.03 0.14 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.32 0.61 0.19 0.61 0.19 0.48
g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 16 32 10 31 10 25
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.50 0.00 3.00 3.50 3.00 0.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.50 5.00 5.00 5.50 5.00 5.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 52 52 52 52 52 52
Lane Group C R L C L R
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
7 Scenario 9: 9 9 Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1015 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 17.33 4.02 19.87 7.42 17.81 8.37 Movement LOS B A B A B A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 16.53 9.95 10.40
Approach LOS B A B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 11.98
Intersection LOS B
Intersection V/C 0.645
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 - 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 8 - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
8 Scenario 9: 9 9 Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1016 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.890
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 49.2
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 8: Route 1 & Fassler Ave/Rockaway Beach Ave.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No Yes No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.2 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 155. 100. 55.0 400. 100. 50.0 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100.

No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Turning Movement Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestboun Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Route 1 Route 1 Fassler Ave. Ro Be
Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 83 102 12 730 174 88 20 27 334 131 42 91 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 21 256 3 183 436 22 5 7 84 33 11 23 Other Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 83 102 12 730 174 88 20 27 334 131 42 91 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 11 4 6 8 0 1 0 4 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 83 101 8 724 173 88 19 27 330 131 42 91 Name Route 1 Route 1 Fassler Ave. Ro Be
Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
9 Scenario 9: 9 9 Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1017 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 20 60 0 60 60 0 0 60 0 0 40 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 10 0 10 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Lead / Lag Lea - - Lea - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 8 0 0 4 0
Control Type Prot Per Per Prot Per Per Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 12.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
10 Scenario 9: 9 9 Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1018 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 143. 591. 12.5 453. 973. 68.1 65.16 246.85 368.77 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 5.75 23.6 0.50 18.1 38.9 2.73 2.61 9.87 14.75 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 79.8 423. 6.97 309. 748. 37.8 36.20 147.32 241.37 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 3.19 16.9 0.28 12.3 29.9 1.52 1.45 5.89 9.65 Critical Lane Group Yes No No No Yes No No Yes Yes
Lane Group LOS E D C D D B D E E
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 75.3 47.7 31.9 53.6 43.4 18.3 51.94 62.58 65.21 X, volume / capacity 0.79 0.91 0.02 0.89 0.99 0.11 0.19 0.86 0.90 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 12.4 3.28 0.02 3.64 9.43 0.06 0.35 5.52 10.06 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.13 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 62.9 44.5 31.9 50.0 34.0 18.3 51.59 57.06 55.15 c, Capacity [veh/h] 105 112 501 819 175 784 254 390 292 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 177 354 158 344 354 158 1824 2803 1716 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.05 0.29 0.01 0.21 0.49 0.06 0.03 0.12 0.15 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.06 0.32 0.32 0.24 0.49 0.49 0.14 0.14 0.17 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 8 43 43 32 67 67 19 19 23 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.50 5.50 5.00 5.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 135 135 135 135 135 135 135 135 135 Lane Group L C R L C R C R C
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
11 Scenario 9: 9 9 Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1019 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 75.3 47.7 31.9 53.6 43.4 18.3 51.9 51.9 62.5 65.2 65.2 65.2 Movement LOS E D C D D B D D E E E E
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 49.67 45.49 61.27 65.21
Approach LOS D D E E
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 49.17
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.890
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
12 Scenario 9: 9 9 Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1020 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.837
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 23.6
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 9: Route 1 & Reina del Mar Ave.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 25.00 45.00 45.00 25.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100. 100. 50.0 175. 100. 55.0 425. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100.

No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 0.00 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 0.00 12.0 0.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Lane Configuration
Approach Westbound Northeastbound Southwestboun Southeastbound Name Re de Route 1 Route 1 Calera WRP
Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 94 3 125 2 140 82 220 248 4 14 2 5 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 24 1 31 1 350 21 55 622 1 4 1 1 Other Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 94 3 125 2 140 82 220 248 4 14 2 5 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 14 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 94 3 125 2 138 82 220 247 4 14 2 5 Name Re de Route 1 Route 1 Calera WRP
Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
13 Scenario 9: 9 9 Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1021 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 60 0 20 120 0 60 120 0 0 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 10 0 5 10 0 5 10 0 0 10 0
Lead / Lag - - - Lea - - Lea - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 8 0 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 4 0
Control Type Split Split Split Prot Per Per Prot Per Per Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 12.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
14 Scenario 9: 9 9 Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1022 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 161.35 152.86 5.51 437. 39.8 272. 786. 787. 29.04 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 6.45 6.11 0.22 17.4 1.60 10.8 31.4 31.5 1.16 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 89.64 84.92 3.06 296. 22.1 166. 587. 588. 16.13 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 3.59 3.40 0.12 11.8 0.89 6.65 23.5 23.5 0.65 Critical Lane Group No Yes Yes No No No No Yes Yes
Lane Group LOS E E F B B E C C E
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 58.63 60.16 106. 17.7 11.0 57.3 20.7 20.8 56.24 X, volume / capacity 0.75 0.77 0.42 0.69 0.09 0.87 0.93 0.94 0.30 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 6.96 8.39 49.0 0.42 0.04 8.68 6.59 6.64 2.31 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.21 0.21 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 51.67 51.77 57.8 17.3 11.0 48.6 14.1 14.1 53.93 c, Capacity [veh/h] 154 140 5 204 911 254 133 133 71
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1744 1583 177 354 158 177 186 186 1663 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.40 0.05 0.12 0.67 0.67 0.01 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.58 0.58 0.14 0.72 0.72 0.04 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 10 10 0 67 67 17 83 83 5
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 116 116 116 116 116 116 116 116 116 Lane Group C R L C R L C C C
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
15 Scenario 9: 9 9 Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1023 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 58.6 58.6 59.9 106. 17.7 11.0 57.3 20.8 20.8 56.2 56.2 56.2 Movement LOS E E E F B B E C C E E E
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 59.37 17.48 23.77 56.24
Approach LOS E B C E
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 23.60
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.837
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
16 Scenario 9: 9 9 Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1024 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.661
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 29.0
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 3: Route 1 & Linda Mar Blvd./San Pedro Ave.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 45.00 45.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 60.0 100. 100. 290. 100. 100. 100. 100. 205. 210. 100. 170.

No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 1 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Turning Movement Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestboun Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Route 1 Route 1 Linda Mar Blvd. San Pedro Ave.

Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 17 525 105 369 300 112 78 59 565 130 57 11 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 4 131 26 92 75 28 20 15 141 33 14 3 Other Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 17 525 105 369 300 112 78 59 565 130 57 11 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 17 524 105 368 300 112 78 59 565 130 57 11 Name Route 1 Route 1 Linda Mar Blvd. San Pedro Ave.

Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
1 Scenario 4: 4 Existing + Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1025 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No Yes No Yes No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 3.5 0.0 3.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 24 0 0 25 0 0 10 0 0 28 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 4.5 0.0 4.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 30 40 0 40 40 0 0 40 40 0 40 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 10 0 5 10 0 0 10 5 0 10 0
Lead / Lag Lea - - Lea - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups 1,8
Signal Group 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 8 1 0 4 0
Control Type Prot Per Per Prot Per Per Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 12.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
2 Scenario 4: 4 Existing + Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1026 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 17.5 235. 227. 141. 75.7 56.3 89.32 212.16 104. 42.4 8.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.70 9.42 9.10 5.68 3.03 2.26 3.57 8.49 4.16 1.70 0.32 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 9.73 138. 132. 78.8 42.0 31.3 49.62 121.70 57.8 23.6 4.44 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.39 5.56 5.32 3.16 1.68 1.25 1.98 4.87 2.31 0.94 0.18 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No No Lane Group LOS D C C C B B C C C C C
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 46.5 32.6 33.0 33.5 17.6 17.5 23.89 29.77 33.3 30.2 29.1 X, volume / capacity 0.48 0.81 0.82 0.75 0.24 0.20 0.31 0.82 0.57 0.24 0.05 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 9.66 4.10 4.47 2.26 0.10 0.18 0.39 2.57 2.19 0.50 0.11 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 36.9 28.5 28.5 31.2 17.5 17.3 23.50 27.21 31.1 29.7 29.0 c, Capacity [veh/h] 36 397 374 495 124 554 443 686 230 241 205 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 177 186 175 344 354 158 1811 2803 177 186 158 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.01 0.17 0.17 0.11 0.08 0.07 0.08 0.20 0.07 0.03 0.01 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.02 0.21 0.21 0.14 0.35 0.35 0.24 0.24 0.13 0.13 0.13 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 2 16 16 11 27 27 19 19 10 10 10 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 5.50 5.50 5.00 5.50 5.50 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76
Lane Group L C C L C R C R L C R
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
3 Scenario 4: 4 Existing + Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1027 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 46.5 32.7 33.0 33.5 17.6 17.5 23.8 23.8 29.7 33.3 30.2 29.1 Movement LOS D C C C B B C C C C C C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 33.19 25.15 28.63 32.22
Approach LOS C C C C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 29.04
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.661
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
4 Scenario 4: 4 Existing + Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1028 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.441
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 16.5
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 4: Route 1 & Crespi Dr.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 45.00 45.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.21
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 1
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 95.00 155.00 100.00 100.00 140.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 1 2 0 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Thru Right Left Thru Left Right
Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound
Name Route 1 Route 1 Crespi Drive
Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 1202 79 166 675 61 355
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 301 20 42 169 15 89
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 1202 79 166 675 61 355
Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 1 5 0 1 8
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 1202 78 161 675 60 347
Name Route 1 Route 1 Crespi Drive
Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
5 Scenario 4: 4 Existing + Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1029 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.0
l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Rest In Walk No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 12 18 0 10 18 0
Walk [s] 5 5 0 5 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Amber [s] 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.0 4.0
Maximum Green [s] 60 60 60 60 60 60
Minimum Green [s] 10 10 10 10 10 10
Lead / Lag - - Lead - Lead -
Auxiliary Signal Groups 2,8 1,8
Signal Group 2 8 1 6 8 1
Control Type Permissiv Overlap Protected Permissiv Permissiv Overlap Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 9.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
6 Scenario 4: 4 Existing + Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1030 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 334.77 12.95 53.42 68.25 40.81 178.94 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 13.39 0.52 2.14 2.73 1.63 7.16 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 214.64 7.19 29.68 37.92 22.67 99.41 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 8.59 0.29 1.19 1.52 0.91 3.98 Critical Lane Group Yes No No No No Yes
Lane Group LOS C A C A C B
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 22.27 4.33 26.02 5.45 25.42 14.67 X, volume / capacity 0.85 0.07 0.25 0.29 0.17 0.48
Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.50 0.03 0.19 0.07 0.23 0.50 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11
d1, Uniform Delay [s] 20.77 4.30 25.84 5.39 25.20 14.17 c, Capacity [veh/h] 1417 1065 676 2346 356 732
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 3547 1583 3445 3547 1774 1583 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.34 0.05 0.05 0.19 0.03 0.22 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.40 0.67 0.20 0.66 0.20 0.46
g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 30 51 15 50 15 35
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.50 0.00 3.00 3.50 3.00 0.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.50 5.00 5.00 5.50 5.00 5.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 76 76 76 76 76 76
Lane Group C R L C L R
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
7 Scenario 4: 4 Existing + Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1031 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 22.27 4.33 26.02 5.45 25.42 14.67 Movement LOS C A C A C B
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 21.16 9.51 16.25
Approach LOS C A B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 16.50
Intersection LOS B
Intersection V/C 0.441
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 - 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 8 - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
8 Scenario 4: 4 Existing + Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1032 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.938
Level Of Service: E
Delay (sec / veh): 67.8
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 8: Route 1 & Fassler Ave/Rockaway Beach Ave.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No Yes No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.2 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 155. 100. 55.0 400. 100. 50.0 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100.

No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Turning Movement Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestboun Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Route 1 Route 1 Fassler Ave. Ro Be
Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 34 151 3 320 862 40 7 22 766 87 13 27 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 9 378 1 80 216 10 2 6 192 22 3 7 Other Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 34 151 3 320 862 40 7 22 766 87 13 27 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 8 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 34 150 3 320 857 40 7 22 766 87 13 27 Name Route 1 Route 1 Fassler Ave. Ro Be
Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
9 Scenario 4: 4 Existing + Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1033 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 20 60 0 60 60 0 0 60 0 0 40 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 10 0 10 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Lead / Lag Lea - - Lea - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 8 0 0 4 0
Control Type Prot Per Per Prot Per Per Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 12.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
10 Scenario 4: 4 Existing + Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1034 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 73.9 120 3.18 266. 419. 36.6 36.56 534.21 232.73 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 2.96 48.0 0.13 10.6 16.7 1.47 1.46 21.37 9.31 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 41.0 881. 1.77 162. 281. 20.3 20.31 375.35 136.82 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.64 35.2 0.07 6.49 11.2 0.81 0.81 15.01 5.47 Critical Lane Group No Yes No Yes No No No Yes Yes
Lane Group LOS F F C E C C D E F
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 98.7 94.2 29.0 72.4 28.5 21.9 39.06 57.98 81.47 X, volume / capacity 0.77 1.10 0.00 0.84 0.51 0.05 0.05 0.93 0.84 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 23.8 46.9 0.00 5.03 0.24 0.03 0.04 5.12 11.91 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 74.9 47.2 28.9 67.4 28.2 21.9 39.02 52.86 69.57 c, Capacity [veh/h] 44 137 615 381 168 750 543 827 151
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 177 354 158 344 354 158 1841 2803 1738 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.02 0.43 0.00 0.09 0.24 0.03 0.02 0.27 0.07 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.02 0.39 0.39 0.11 0.47 0.47 0.29 0.29 0.09 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 4 60 60 17 73 73 46 46 13 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.50 5.50 5.00 5.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 154 154 154 154 154 154 154 154 154 Lane Group L C R L C R C R C
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
11 Scenario 4: 4 Existing + Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1035 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 98.7 94.2 29.0 72.4 28.5 21.9 39.0 39.0 57.9 81.4 81.4 81.4 Movement LOS F F C E C C D D E F F F
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 94.25 39.82 57.29 81.47
Approach LOS F D E F
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 67.83
Intersection LOS E
Intersection V/C 0.938
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
12 Scenario 4: 4 Existing + Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1036 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.914
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 39.6
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 9: Route 1 & Reina del Mar Ave.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 25.00 45.00 45.00 25.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100. 100. 50.0 175. 100. 55.0 425. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100.

No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 0.00 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 0.00 12.0 0.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Lane Configuration
Approach Westbound Northeastbound Southwestboun Southeastbound Name Re de Route 1 Route 1 Calera WRP
Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 123 0 308 5 221 177 122 112 72 4 53 0 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 31 0 77 1 553 44 31 281 18 1 13 0 Other Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 123 0 308 5 221 177 122 112 72 4 53 0 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 5 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 123 0 308 5 220 177 122 111 72 4 53 0 Name Re de Route 1 Route 1 Calera WRP
Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
13 Scenario 4: 4 Existing + Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1037 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 0 60 0 20 120 0 60 120 0 0 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 0 10 0 5 10 0 5 10 0 0 10 0
Lead / Lag - - - Lea - - Lea - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 0 8 0 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 4 0
Control Type Split Split Split Prot Per Per Prot Per Per Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 12.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
14 Scenario 4: 4 Existing + Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1038 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 429.78 409.82 14.6 150 143. 264. 404. 398. 134.11 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 17.19 16.39 0.59 60.3 5.75 10.5 16.1 15.9 5.36 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 290.11 274.07 8.14 122 79.9 160. 269. 265. 74.51 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 11.60 10.96 0.33 48.8 3.20 6.43 10.8 10.6 2.98 Critical Lane Group No Yes No Yes No Yes No No Yes
Lane Group LOS F F F D B F B B F
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 90.75 91.39 120. 41.1 14.7 99.9 12.5 12.5 96.04 X, volume / capacity 0.90 0.90 0.45 0.99 0.18 0.86 0.46 0.46 0.64 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 11.01 11.65 26.1 6.68 0.08 13.5 0.25 0.26 7.35 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 79.74 79.74 94.2 34.5 14.6 86.4 12.2 12.2 88.69 c, Capacity [veh/h] 248 233 11 223 998 142 131 128 89
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1684 1583 177 354 158 177 186 182 1782 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.62 0.11 0.07 0.32 0.32 0.03 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.15 0.15 0.01 0.63 0.63 0.08 0.70 0.70 0.05 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 28 28 1 120 120 15 134 134 10 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 Lane Group C R L C R L C C C
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
15 Scenario 4: 4 Existing + Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1039 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 90.7 90.7 91.1 120. 41.1 14.7 99.9 12.5 12.5 96.0 96.0 96.0 Movement LOS F F F F D B F B B F F F
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 91.06 39.40 20.64 96.04
Approach LOS F D C F
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 39.59
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.914
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PA.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
16 Scenario 4: 4 Existing + Project AMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1040 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.668
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 28.3
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 3: Route 1 & Linda Mar Blvd./San Pedro Ave.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 45.00 45.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 60.0 100. 100. 290. 100. 100. 100. 100. 205. 210. 100. 170.

No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 1 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Turning Movement Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestboun Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Route 1 Route 1 Linda Mar Blvd. San Pedro Ave.

Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 31 430 116 711 660 164 156 78 368 132 117 33 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 8 108 29 178 165 41 39 20 92 33 29 8 Other Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 31 430 116 711 660 164 156 78 368 132 117 33 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 31 430 116 710 659 164 156 78 367 132 117 33 Name Route 1 Route 1 Linda Mar Blvd. San Pedro Ave.

Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
1 Scenario 5: 5 Existing + Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1041 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No Yes No Yes No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 3.5 0.0 3.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 24 0 0 25 0 0 10 0 0 28 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 4.5 0.0 4.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 30 40 0 40 40 0 0 40 40 0 40 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 10 0 5 10 0 0 10 5 0 10 0
Lead / Lag Lea - - Lea - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups 1,8
Signal Group 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 8 1 0 4 0
Control Type Prot Per Per Prot Per Per Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 12.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
2 Scenario 5: 5 Existing + Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1042 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 30.5 218. 210. 248. 166. 75.8 195.15 151.33 109. 94.5 25.2 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 1.22 8.75 8.41 9.94 6.66 3.03 7.81 6.05 4.38 3.78 1.01 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 16.9 126. 120. 148. 92.4 42.1 109.39 84.07 60.7 52.5 14.0 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.68 5.06 4.81 5.94 3.70 1.68 4.38 3.36 2.43 2.10 0.56 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No No No Yes Yes No No Lane Group LOS D C D C B B C C C C C
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 45.5 34.4 35.1 29.8 16.3 14.8 34.58 33.43 34.4 33.2 30.7 X, volume / capacity 0.55 0.80 0.81 0.83 0.44 0.25 0.76 0.77 0.58 0.49 0.16 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 8.31 4.23 4.80 2.12 0.21 0.19 3.78 2.58 2.36 1.57 0.37 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 37.2 30.2 30.3 27.7 16.1 14.6 30.80 30.85 32.0 31.6 30.3 c, Capacity [veh/h] 56 352 327 859 148 664 309 481 227 238 202 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 177 186 172 344 354 158 1803 2803 177 186 158 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.02 0.15 0.15 0.21 0.19 0.10 0.13 0.13 0.07 0.06 0.02 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.03 0.19 0.19 0.25 0.42 0.42 0.17 0.17 0.13 0.13 0.13 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 2 15 15 19 33 33 13 13 10 10 10 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 5.50 5.50 5.00 5.50 5.50 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 78 78 78 78 78 78 78 78 78 78 78
Lane Group L C C L C R C R L C R
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
3 Scenario 5: 5 Existing + Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1043 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 45.5 34.7 35.1 29.8 16.3 14.8 34.5 34.5 33.4 34.4 33.2 30.7 Movement LOS D C D C B B C C C C C C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 35.38 22.45 33.88 33.52
Approach LOS D C C C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 28.28
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.668
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
4 Scenario 5: 5 Existing + Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1044 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.644
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 12.0
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 4: Route 1 & Crespi Dr.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 45.00 45.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.21
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 1
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 95.00 155.00 100.00 100.00 140.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 1 2 0 0 1
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Thru Right Left Thru Left Right
Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestbound Northwestbound
Name Route 1 Route 1 Crespi Drive
Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 877 57 385 1504 61 223
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 219 14 96 376 15 56
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 877 57 385 1504 61 223
Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 1 6 0 2 9
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 877 56 379 1504 59 214
Name Route 1 Route 1 Crespi Drive
Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
5 Scenario 5: 5 Existing + Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1045 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.0 3.0
l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Rest In Walk No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 12 18 0 10 18 0
Walk [s] 5 5 0 5 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Amber [s] 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.0 4.0
Maximum Green [s] 60 60 60 60 60 60
Minimum Green [s] 10 10 10 10 10 10
Lead / Lag - - Lead - Lead -
Auxiliary Signal Groups 2,8 1,8
Signal Group 2 8 1 6 8 1
Control Type Permissiv Overlap Protected Permissiv Permissiv Overlap Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 9.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
6 Scenario 5: 5 Existing + Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1046 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 173.02 5.58 81.59 129.68 25.84 55.24 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 6.92 0.22 3.26 5.19 1.03 2.21 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 96.12 3.10 45.33 72.05 14.35 30.69 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 3.84 0.12 1.81 2.88 0.57 1.23 Critical Lane Group No No No Yes No Yes
Lane Group LOS B A B A B A
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 17.34 4.03 19.79 7.43 17.75 8.31 X, volume / capacity 0.78 0.06 0.58 0.70 0.18 0.29
Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 1.24 0.02 0.80 0.42 0.25 0.21 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11
d1, Uniform Delay [s] 16.10 4.00 18.98 7.01 17.50 8.10
c, Capacity [veh/h] 1120 972 664 2146 341 762
s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 3547 1583 3445 3547 1774 1583 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.25 0.04 0.11 0.42 0.03 0.14 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.32 0.61 0.19 0.60 0.19 0.48
g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 16 32 10 31 10 25
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 3.50 0.00 3.00 3.50 3.00 0.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 5.50 5.00 5.00 5.50 5.00 5.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 52 52 52 52 52 52
Lane Group C R L C L R
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
7 Scenario 5: 5 Existing + Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1047 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 17.34 4.03 19.79 7.43 17.75 8.31 Movement LOS B A B A B A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 16.53 9.95 10.34
Approach LOS B A B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 11.96
Intersection LOS B
Intersection V/C 0.644
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 - 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 8 - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
8 Scenario 5: 5 Existing + Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1048 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.890
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 48.5
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 8: Route 1 & Fassler Ave/Rockaway Beach Ave.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No Yes No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.2 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 155. 100. 55.0 400. 100. 50.0 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100.

No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Turning Movement Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Lane Configuration
Approach Northeastbound Southwestboun Northwestbound Southeastbound Name Route 1 Route 1 Fassler Ave. Ro Be
Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 83 102 8 724 174 88 19 27 330 131 42 91 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 21 255 2 181 436 22 5 7 83 33 11 23 Other Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 83 102 8 724 174 88 19 27 330 131 42 91 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 9 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 83 101 8 724 173 88 19 27 330 131 42 91 Name Route 1 Route 1 Fassler Ave. Ro Be
Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
9 Scenario 5: 5 Existing + Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1049 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 3.5 0.0 2.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 4.5 0.0 3.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 20 60 0 60 60 0 0 60 0 0 40 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 10 0 10 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0
Lead / Lag Lea - - Lea - - - - - - - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 5 2 0 1 6 0 0 8 0 0 4 0
Control Type Prot Per Per Prot Per Per Split Split Split Split Split Split Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 12.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Free Running
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
10 Scenario 5: 5 Existing + Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1050 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) 95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 141. 580. 8.18 443. 959. 67.1 62.68 240.94 363.18 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 5.65 23.2 0.33 17.7 38.3 2.68 2.51 9.64 14.53 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 78.4 414. 4.55 300. 736. 37.2 34.82 142.92 236.95 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 3.14 16.5 0.18 12.0 29.4 1.49 1.39 5.72 9.48 Critical Lane Group Yes No No No Yes No No Yes Yes
Lane Group LOS E D C D D B D E E
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 74.1 46.9 31.3 52.8 43.1 18.1 51.18 61.60 64.10 X, volume / capacity 0.79 0.91 0.02 0.89 1.00 0.11 0.18 0.85 0.90 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 12.2 3.23 0.01 3.59 9.55 0.06 0.35 5.44 9.92 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 61.8 43.7 31.3 49.2 33.6 18.1 50.83 56.16 54.18 c, Capacity [veh/h] 105 112 501 814 175 781 252 386 293 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 177 354 158 344 354 158 1825 2803 1716 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.05 0.29 0.01 0.21 0.49 0.06 0.03 0.12 0.15 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.06 0.32 0.32 0.24 0.49 0.49 0.14 0.14 0.17 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 8 42 42 31 66 66 18 18 23 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 3.50 3.50 2.00 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 5.50 5.50 4.00 5.50 5.50 5.00 5.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 133 133 133 133 133 133 133 133 133 Lane Group L C R L C R C R C
Lane Group Calculations
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
11 Scenario 5: 5 Existing + Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1051 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 74.1 46.9 31.3 52.8 43.1 18.1 51.1 51.1 61.6 64.1 64.1 64.1 Movement LOS E D C D D B D D E E E E
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 48.89 45.04 60.33 64.10
Approach LOS D D E E
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 48.54
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.890
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 4 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
12 Scenario 5: 5 Existing + Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

11.f
Packet Pg. 1052 Attachment: Attachment F - IS/MND with Appendices (4980 : Appeal of Planning Commission approval of 570 Crespi Mixed-use Project) Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.836
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 23.4
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 2010
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 9: Route 1 & Reina del Mar Ave.

Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 25.00 45.00 45.00 25.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100. 100. 50.0 175. 100. 55.0 425. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100.

No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 0.00 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 0.00 12.0 0.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Left Thru Righ Lane Configuration
Approach Westbound Northeastbound Southwestboun Southeastbound Name Re de Route 1 Route 1 Calera WRP
Intersection Setup
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 94 3 125 2 139 82 220 248 4 14 2 5 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 24 1 31 1 349 21 55 620 1 4 1 1 Other Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak Hour Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 94 3 125 2 139 82 220 248 4 14 2 5 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 6 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 94 3 125 2 138 82 220 247 4 14 2 5 Name Re de Route 1 Route 1 Calera WRP
Volumes
RKH Report File: \...\20190901 E+PP.pdf
RKH Civil and Transportation Engineering
Vistro File: \...\20190901.vistro
1/19/2021
13 Scenario 5: 5 Existing + Project PMPH
570 Crespi Drive
Version 2021 (SP 0-2)
Generated with