Memorandum
Date: December 1, 2022
To: Mr. Andrew Easterling, City of Salinas
From: Gary Black
Ling Jin
Subject: VMT Analysis for the Proposed John-Abbott Master Plan in Salinas, CA.
Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. has completed a VMT Analysis for the proposed John- Abbott Master Plan in Salinas, CA. The project site is located at the southeast corner of the John Street (State Route 68, i.e., SR 68) / Abbott Street intersection in Salinas, California. The Project site covers approximately 21 acres and will be composed of residential, commercial, office, and a hotel on multiple parcels. The project proposes approximately 17,460 square feet (s.f.) of general office space, 13,440 s.f. of medical office space, 118,400 s.f. of retail space in 15 different buildings, a 111-room hotel, and 242 apartments. The project site is currently occupied by a variety of agricultural industrial developments. A preliminary VMT analysis1 was completed for this project.
Based on comments from a peer review completed by Kimley‐Horn 2, a VMT analysis focused on the office and hotel components of the project is needed in order to satisfy the City of Salinas and CEQA requirements.
Office VMT Analysis
The proposed project includes approximately 17,460 s.f. of general office space. Based on ITE rates, the proposed office space would generate 189 daily trips (see Table 1), which is higher than the City’s screening criteria for office development of 110 daily trips. Therefore, the proposed office component does not meet the screening criterion; a detailed VMT analysis is required to address potential significant VMT impacts. The City’s VMT analysis tool was used to evaluate the office VMT.
Table 1
Trip Generation Estimates for the Proposed Office Space
1 John/Abbott Master Plan Analysis, May 7, 2021. Keith Higgins Traffic Engineer 2 DRAFT Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Peer Review, March 22, 2022. Kimley‐Horn Land Use Size Unit
Daily
Rate
Daily
Trips
Peak
Rate Trips In
Trips
Out
Total
Trips
Peak
Rate
Trips
In
Trips
Out
Total
Trips
Proposed Project 1
Office 1 17.5 ksf 10.84 189 1.52 24 3 27 1.44 4 21 25
Notes:
All rates are from: Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation, 11th Edition (September 2021)
1. Land Use Code 710: General Office Building (average rates, expressed in trips per 1,000 s.f. gross floor area).
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
John-Abbott Master Plan VMT Analysis December 1, 2022
P a g e | 2
Office Development VMT
The City’s VMT Evaluation Tool estimates the existing area VMT for office uses. The proposed John-Abbott Master Plan includes multi-uses developments. Therefore, a 11% mixed-use adjustment was assumed when the VMT per employee for the proposed office uses was estimated.
Table 2 shows existing county-wide average work VMT per employee, the VMT threshold (15 percent below the existing county-wide average), and existing work VMT for TAZ 1263, the TAZ in which the project site is located. The existing daily VMT per employee for office uses within the Project site’s TAZ is estimated to be 7.57, which exceeds the threshold of 6.6 VMT per employee (15% below the county-wide average) (see Figure 1).
Table 2
Project VMT and VMT Impact Threshold
Project Impact
Since the VMT generated by the proposed office development would exceed the threshold of significance for office uses in the area, the proposed office development would result in a significant transportation impact on VMT, and mitigation measures are required to reduce the VMT impact to a less-than-significant level. The City’s VMT Tool estimates VMT reduction relative to a project’s design features and applicable TDM measures. Figure 2 shows the estimated reduction in VMT based on the potential mitigation measures that are described below. With implementation of this mitigation program, the project’s VMT could be reduced to 6.55, which is below the significant impact threshold at 6.6.
1. Transit Stop near the Project Site: There is a bus stop along the project frontage on John Street.
2. Reduce Transit Headways: The project will install queue jump lanes for northbound Abbott MST buses at the Maple Street signal.
3. Safe and Well-Lit Access to Transit: The project should enhance pedestrian facilities including street lighting along its frontages. The project will install a traffic signal at the intersection of Abbott Street and Maple Street. The new signal will be an enhancement to facilitate pedestrians crossing Abbott Street to access the transit stop on the Project side of Abbott Street. The project should provide internal connections within the site and to the surrounding streets.
4. Preferential Carpool / Vanpool Parking Spaces: The project will provide reserved carpool / vanpool spaces close to the building entrance based on the City’s parking requirements.
5. Designated Parking Spaces for Car Sharing Vehicles: The project will provide designated parking spaces for car sharing vehicles.
6. Implement/Improve On-Street Bike Facilities: Bike lanes will be added along the Project’s John Street and Abbott Street frontages.
Land Use Significance Criteria Threshold1 Project TAZ VMT2 Office Project exceeds existing county-wide average Work VMT per employee minus 15% 6.6 7.57
Notes:
1 15% below existing county-wide average Work VMT per employee (7.7) 2 Home-based-work VMT per employee assumed within the TAZ (1263) where the project is located. A 11% mixed-use adjustment was assumed to acccount for the proposed multi-use developments on the project site.
John-Abbott Master Plan VMT Analysis December 1, 2022
P a g e | 3
7. Bike Charging Facility: The project will provide a secure bike charging facility on site.
8. Bike Parking: The project will provide the required number of bicycle parking spaces per City code.
9. Pedestrian Network Improvements: The project will implement pedestrian network improvements throughout and around the project site that encourages people to walk.
10. Multimodal Wayfinding Signage: The project will provide Multimodal Wayfinding Signage to orient users to locations of sustainable transportation.
11. Bicycle Repair Station / Services: The project should provide on-site bicycle repair tools and space to use them supports on-going use of bicycles for transportation.
As shown in the VMT summary report generated by the City’s VMT Evaluation Tool, implementing the above listed mitigation measures would lower the project VMT to 6.55 per worker, which would reduce the project impact to a less-than-significant level (below the threshold of 6.6 VMT per worker) (see Figure 2).
Figure 1
Salinas VMT Calculator Summary Report - Proposed Office without Mitigations John Abbot VMT Analysis
VVMTT CALCULATOR
Version 1.1 Build Date 11_17_20
HBW VMT/Emp 7.57 0.00 7.57
Daily Trips 172 0 172
TAZ# 1263
440.85 0.00 440.85
Scroll down for all TDM Strategies
#T D M M e a s u r e Selected
Max Value Input
0 0
2 Unbundle Parking 5% 0
3 Parking Cash-out 4% 0%
4 Residential Area Parking Permits 0.25% No
5 Price Workplace Parking 4% 0%
6 Parking Management Strategies 1% No
# TDM Measure Input
7 Reduce Transit Headways 2% No
8 Transit Rerouting 2% No
9 Transit Stops near Project Site 2% No
0%
# TDM Measure Input
13 Promotions & Marketing 2% 0%
14 Multimodal Wayfinding Signage 1% No
# TDM Measure Input
0%
17 On-site Carts or Shuttles 1% No
18 On-site Childcare 2% No
# TDM Measure Input
19 Ride-Share Program 5% 0%
22 School Carpool Program 15% None
# TDM Measure Input
23 Bike Charging Facility 1.0% No
27 Bicycle Repair Station / Services 0.50% No
# TDM Measure Input
# TDM Measure Input
# TDM Measure Input
Voluntary Travel Behavior Change
Program 2%
TRANSIT STRATEGIES
Description
Yes/No
10 amount ($) of transit subsidy per passenger (daily equivalent) ($0.75, $1.49, $2.98 or $5.96. Select highest value if unlimited ride passes are provided.)
percent of employees and residents participating
11 Transit Subsidies
percent of employees and residents eligible
0%
$0.00
PROJECT LOCATIONPROJECT INFORMATION
1263
Low Density Suburb
Project Name
VMT OUTPUT
John-Abbott Master Plan
PROJECT REDUCTIONS
1263
PROJ. WITH
MITIGATION
Trip Gen Land Use Type
TAZ
Address
Project Context/Setting
VMT Land Use Type
LAND USE INFORMATION
Map shows TAZ centroid locationPRESUMPTIONS OF LESS THAN
SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
11%
710 | General Office Building
Size (KSF) 17.46
Yes
Mixed-Use Adjustment
64.6Mobile CO2 Emissions (metric
tons/day) 64.6 0.0
Local Retail (<50,000 Sq Ft)
AIR QUALITY OUTPUT
Project Daily VMT
TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM) STRATEGIES
PARKING STRATEGIES
1 Reduce Parking Supply
Less than 110 Trips per Day
Description
City code parking provision for project site (parking spaces) Actual parking provision for project site (parking spaces) monthly parking cost ($) for project site
percent of employees eligible
Yes/No
Yes/No
No
35 Transit Service Expansion 2.5% No
percent of employees eligible
Average (HBW VMT/Emp)
Threshold (15% below Average)
Significant Impact?
7.7 6.6
Accepted: Common Land Use
Service
Within a 1/2 mile of Major Transit Stop
Affordable Housing
Yes/No
Yes/No
Safe and Well-Lit Access to Transit 1% No Yes/No
COMMUNICATION & INFORMATION STRATEGIES
Description
12 COMMUTING STRATEGIES
Description
15 Employer Sponsored Vanpool or
Shuttle
None
degree of implementation
- High (>30 vans)
- Medium (10-30 vans)
- Low (<10 vans)None
employer size
- Large (>500 employees)
- Medium (100-500 employees)
- Low (<100 employees)
percent of employees eligible
2% No Yes/No
percent of employees and residents participating
Yes/No
No Yes/No
Yes/No
SHARED MOBILITY STRATEGIES
Description
percent of employees eligible
20 Car Share 1% None
project setting
- urban + comprehensive transit
- suburban + commuter rail
- all other settings
Yes/No
4%
4%
2%
1%
26 Include Secure Bike Parking and
Showers 0.50%
21 Designated Parking Spaces for Car
Share Vehicles 1%
16 Preferential Carpool / Vanpool Parking
Spaces
NEIGHBORHOOD ENHANCEMENT STRATEGIES
Description
28 Traffic Calming Improvements
0% percent of streets within project with traffic calming improvements (25%, 50%, 75%, or 100%)
0%
32 On-site Affordable Housing Yes/No
Yes/No
Yes/No
Yes/No
MISCELLANEOUS STRATEGIES
Description
31 Virtual Care Strategies for Hospitals 6% No Yes/No
LAND USE STRATEGIES
Description
20% No
33 Transit Oriented Development 15% No
34 Destination Development
(Residential Close to work) 2.5%
30 Healthy Food Retail in Underserved
Area 2% None selection: within project and connecting off-site, within project only 29 Pedestrian Network Improvements 2% None selection: within project and connecting off-site, within project only Yes/No
percent of intersections within project with traffic calming improvements (25%, 50%, 75%, or 100%)
No Yes/No
25 Include Bike Parking Per City Code 0.50% No Yes/No
level of implementation
BICYCLE INFRASTRUCTURE STRATEGIES
Description
Yes/No
24 Implement/Improve On-street Bicycle
Facility 0.50% No Yes/No
38 Street grid 4% No Yes/No
Higher Density 4% No Yes/No
37 Open Space 1% No Yes/No
36 0
2 4
6 8
VMT per Capita
Project Project with Mitigation Threshold
A
W
L
Figure 2
Salinas VMT Calculator Summary Report - Proposed Office with Mitigations John Abbot VMT Analysis
VVMTT CALCULATOR
Version 1.1 Build Date 11_17_20
HBW VMT/Emp 7.57 1.02 6.55
Daily Trips 172 23 149
TAZ# 1263
440.85 59.52 381.34
Scroll down for all TDM Strategies
#T D M M e a s u r e Selected
Max Value Input
0 0
2 Unbundle Parking 5% 0
3 Parking Cash-out 4% 0%
4 Residential Area Parking Permits 0.25% No
5 Price Workplace Parking 4% 0%
6 Parking Management Strategies 1% No
# TDM Measure Input
7 Reduce Transit Headways 2% Yes
8 Transit Rerouting 2% No
9 Transit Stops near Project Site 2% Yes
0%
# TDM Measure Input
13 Promotions & Marketing 2% 0%
14 Multimodal Wayfinding Signage 1% Yes
# TDM Measure Input
0%
17 On-site Carts or Shuttles 1% No
18 On-site Childcare 2% No
# TDM Measure Input
19 Ride-Share Program 5% 0%
22 School Carpool Program 15% None
# TDM Measure Input
23 Bike Charging Facility 1.0% Yes
27 Bicycle Repair Station / Services 0.50% Yes
# TDM Measure Input
# TDM Measure Input
# TDM Measure Input
Voluntary Travel Behavior Change
Program 2%
TRANSIT STRATEGIES
Description
Yes/No
10 amount ($) of transit subsidy per passenger (daily equivalent) ($0.75, $1.49, $2.98 or $5.96. Select highest value if unlimited ride passes are provided.)
percent of employees and residents participating
11 Transit Subsidies
percent of employees and residents eligible
0%
$0.00
PROJECT LOCATIONPROJECT INFORMATION
1263
Low Density Suburb
Project Name
VMT OUTPUT
John-Abbott Master Plan
PROJECT REDUCTIONS
1263
PROJ. WITH
MITIGATION
Trip Gen Land Use Type
TAZ
Address
Project Context/Setting
VMT Land Use Type
LAND USE INFORMATION
Map shows TAZ centroid locationPRESUMPTIONS OF LESS THAN
SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
11%
710 | General Office Building
Size (KSF) 17.46
No
Mixed-Use Adjustment
55.9Mobile CO2 Emissions (metric
tons/day) 64.6 8.7
Local Retail (<50,000 Sq Ft)
AIR QUALITY OUTPUT
Project Daily VMT
TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM) STRATEGIES
PARKING STRATEGIES
1 Reduce Parking Supply
Less than 110 Trips per Day
Description
City code parking provision for project site (parking spaces) Actual parking provision for project site (parking spaces) monthly parking cost ($) for project site
percent of employees eligible
Yes/No
Yes/No
No
35 Transit Service Expansion 2.5% No
percent of employees eligible
Average (HBW VMT/Emp)
Threshold (15% below Average)
Significant Impact?
7.7 6.6
Accepted: Common Land Use
Service
Within a 1/2 mile of Major Transit Stop
Affordable Housing
Yes/No
Yes/No
Safe and Well-Lit Access to Transit 1% Yes Yes/No
COMMUNICATION & INFORMATION STRATEGIES
Description
12 COMMUTING STRATEGIES
Description
15 Employer Sponsored Vanpool or
Shuttle
None
degree of implementation
- High (>30 vans)
- Medium (10-30 vans)
- Low (<10 vans)None
employer size
- Large (>500 employees)
- Medium (100-500 employees)
- Low (<100 employees)
percent of employees eligible
2% Yes Yes/No
percent of employees and residents participating
Yes/No
Yes Yes/No
Yes/No
SHARED MOBILITY STRATEGIES
Description
percent of employees eligible
20 Car Share 1% None
project setting
- urban + comprehensive transit
- suburban + commuter rail
- all other settings
Yes/No
4%
4%
2%
1%
26 Include Secure Bike Parking and
Showers 0.50%
21 Designated Parking Spaces for Car
Share Vehicles 1%
16 Preferential Carpool / Vanpool Parking
Spaces
NEIGHBORHOOD ENHANCEMENT STRATEGIES
Description
28 Traffic Calming Improvements
0% percent of streets within project with traffic calming improvements (25%, 50%, 75%, or 100%)
0%
32 On-site Affordable Housing Yes/No
Yes/No
Yes/No
Yes/No
MISCELLANEOUS STRATEGIES
Description
31 Virtual Care Strategies for Hospitals 6% No Yes/No
LAND USE STRATEGIES
Description
20% No
33 Transit Oriented Development 15% No
34 Destination Development
(Residential Close to work) 2.5%
30 Healthy Food Retail in Underserved
Area 2% None selection: within project and connecting off-site, within project only 29 Pedestrian Network Improvements 2% ect and Connec selection: within project and connecting off-site, within project only Yes/No
percent of intersections within project with traffic calming improvements (25%, 50%, 75%, or 100%)
No Yes/No
25 Include Bike Parking Per City Code 0.50% Yes Yes/No
level of implementation
BICYCLE INFRASTRUCTURE STRATEGIES
Description
Yes/No
24 Implement/Improve On-street Bicycle
Facility 0.50% Yes Yes/No
38 Street grid 4% No Yes/No
Higher Density 4% No Yes/No
37 Open Space 1% No Yes/No
36 0
2 4
6 8
VMT per Capita
Project Project with Mitigation Threshold
A
W
L
John-Abbott Master Plan VMT Analysis December 1, 2022
P a g e | 6
Hotel VMT Analysis
The proposed project also includes a 111-room hotel. The proposed hotel would not have conference facilities other than small meeting rooms and would only provide meals to guests. Thus, the hotel would not be a regional draw. Hotels are not explicitly included in the City of Salinas’ VMT policy nor in the OPR VMT guidelines.
The VMT analysis for the proposed hotel can be considered equivalent to a retail use. This is a reasonable approach to VMT analysis since hotels exhibit similar vehicle mode share characteristics, travel patterns, and trip length characteristics to that of local retail uses (e.g., both uses typically serve nearby local businesses and residents). Note also that since there are over 10 existing hotels within a two-mile radius of the project site, it is expected that the hotel project would generate mostly localized traffic. Based on trip generation estimates, the proposed 111-room hotel would generate daily trips equivalent to 9,000 square feet of retail space (see Table 3). This small amount of equivalent retail space meets the screening criterion set forth in the City’s VMT Guidelines (Exhibit 2 – Screening Criteria), which is defined as local-serving retail of 50,000 s.f. or less. Therefore, the proposed hotel component would cause a less-than-significant VMT impact.
Table 3
Conversion of the Proposed Hotel to Equivalent Retail Space
VMT Analysis for Other Exempted Land Uses
The City of Salina’s VMT Guidelines include screening criteria for projects that are expected to result in a less-than-significant VMT impact based on the project description, characteristics and/or location. The screening criteria set forth in the City’s VMT Guidelines (Exhibit 2 – Screening Criteria) for retail, medical office, and residential uses are described below.
Screening Criterion for Local-Serving Retail
Presumed to cause a less-than-significant impact:
• No single store on-site exceeds 50,000 square feet; and • Project is local-serving as determined by the City of Salinas Unless
• The nature of the service is regionally focused as determined by the City of Salinas Land Use Trip Rate Trips
Hotel1 111 rooms 4.40 488
Retail2 9,000 s.f. 54.45 488
Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, 2021. s.f. = square feet
Notes:
1. Average daily trip rate (in trips per student) for "All Suites Hotel " (ITE Land Use 311) is used.
2. Average daily trip rate (in trips per 1,000 s.f.) for "Strip Retail Plaza" (ITE Land Use 822) is used.
Daily
Size
Proposed Land Use
Equivalent Land Use
John-Abbott Master Plan VMT Analysis December 1, 2022
P a g e | 7
The project is proposing to construct 118,400 s.f. of local-serving retail spaces in 15 different buildings with maximum 13,000 s.f. in one site. Therefore, the proposed retail component would meet the screening criterion and would cause a less-than-significant VMT impact.
Screening Criterion for Local Essential Service
Presumed to cause a less-than-significant impact:
• Building is less than 50,000 square feet: and
Land Use is:
• Day care center; or
• Public K-12 School; or
• Police or Fire facility; or
• Medical/Dental office building; or
• Government offices (in-person services such as post office, library, and utilities) Unless
• The nature of the service is regionally focused as determined by the City of Salinas The project is proposing to construct 13,440 s.f. of medical office space, which is categorized as a local essential service, and the size is less than the 50,000 square-foot threshold. Therefore, the proposed medical office component would meet the screening criterion and would cause a less- than-significant VMT impact.
Screening Criterion for Residential
Based on the City’s VMT Guidelines, the VMT impact threshold for residential development is 9.7, which is defined as 15% below existing county-wide average VMT per capita. As specified in the City’s VMT guidelines, residential developments should be screened for non-significant transportation impact based on the following criteria:
Map-Based Screening: This method eliminates the need for complex analyses, by allowing existing VMT data to serve as a basis for the screening smaller developments. Note that screening is limited to residential and office projects utilizing the maps.
Presumed to cause a less-than-significant impact:
• Area of development is under threshold as shown on screening map as allowed by City of Salinas
Unless
• Represent significant growth as to substantially change regional travel patterns as determined by the City of Salinas
The Project is located in TAZ 1263, which falls in an area indicated on the “Residential VMT per Capita Map” (see Figure 3) of the Salinas VMT Guidelines to have residential VMT per capita that is at or below the County Threshold. The Project’s Residential component would therefore have a less-than-significant VMT impact.
= Site Location
LEGEND
John Abbot VMT Analysis
Figure 3
Residential VMT per Capita Map
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Peer Review August 1, 2022 John Abbott Master Plan Page 1 of 2
Memorandum
To: Andrew Easterling, P.E., T.E., PTOE, RSP1
From: Chris Gregerson, P.E., T.E., PTOE, PTP
Frederik Venter, P.E.
Re: Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Peer Review
John Abbott Master Plan, City of Salinas
Date: August 1, 2022
This memorandum documents a peer review completed by Kimley-Horn of an SB 743 analysis completed for the proposed John Abbot Master Plan development in Salinas, CA. The proposed development is expected to consist of several land uses included general office, hotel, medical-office, residential, restaurants, and retail. With the passage of SB 743, Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) has become an important indicator for determining if a new development will result in a “significant transportation impact” under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This memorandum summarizes the peer review completed of the VMT analysis and resultant findings for the proposed development.
Peer Review Comments
A. Office VMT Analysis
§ The memo states that due to the office component of the project generating 189 daily trips, a VMT analysis is required as it exceeds the City’s 110 daily trip threshold. This statement is correct. § The memo concludes that the project is located in TAZ 1263 which has a VMT per employee of
7.57, which exceeds the City’s threshold of 6.6 resulting in a significant impact. This is correct.
B. Project Impact
§ The document lists nine TDM measures stating that the VMT can be reduced to 6.58, which is below the threshold of 6.6 to reduce the project’s impact to less than significant for the office land use. This is based on using the City’s VMT estimator tool to determine the overall VMT reductions to reduce the project’s VMT per employee for the office use. § The ‘Transit Stop near the Project Site’ mitigation is taken by stating that there is an existing bus stop along the project frontage. However, this would already be accounted for in the model and therefore cannot be used as a mitigation measure. This mitigation measure requires the construction of a new bus stop along the project frontage to reduce the number of vehicle trips included in the initial calculation for the project’s VMT per employee. § As noted by the City, the project could further reduce its VMT per employee by 2-percent by taking the ‘Reduce Transit Headways’ mitigation measure due to the MST transit queue jump. In addition, Figure 2 shows a 1-percent reduction for the ‘Designated Parking Spaces for Car Share Vehicles’ mitigation measure, but this is not listed in the memo as a reduction. This mitigation measure should be listed with the others in the body of the report if it is required for the project to meet the City’s VMT per employee threshold.
§ To successfully implement these mitigation measures, a Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program (MMRP) is required to prove that the project is achieving the VMT reductions used in this report. The MMRP will need to produce annual reports that are submitted to the City, though the reporting period can be shorter as specified by the City, proving implementation of the listed Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Peer Review August 1, 2022 John Abbott Master Plan Page 2 of 2
mitigation measures. The contents of this report shall be specified by the City and agreed to by the project applicant, but should address all mitigation measures taken credit for by the project.
C. Hotel VMT Analysis
§ The document states that the hotel component of the proposed project would not be a regional draw due to the design of the hotel. This is correct.
§ The document states that the proposed hotel can be considered equivalent to a retail use. While correct, this statement should be expanded to discuss that the equivalency is due to how it impacts existing trips on the roadway network rather than its function as a land use. Adding a hotel with basic functions as the project intends impacts existing trips on the network for visitors traveling to the area without a hotel preference rather than traveling to the hotel as their end destination. This is similar to a new retail or food establishment that patrons are traveling to because the new establishment allows their trip to be shorter as they would otherwise travel to a comparable establishment further away if the new establishment was not constructed. This explanation should be used an expanded upon in the document rather than attempting to use trip generation to explain the phenomenon as the document currently states. The overall conclusion that the hotel component of the project can be screened out would still remain.
D. VMT Analysis for Other Exempted Land Uses
§ The document correctly states that all retail land uses can be screened out and be presumed to result in a less than significant impact as each retail building has a maximum size of 13,000 square-feet, well below the 50,000 square-foot threshold. § The document correctly states that the 13,440 square-foot medical office space component of the project can be screened out and be presumed to result in a less than significant impact as it is included in the City’s screening criteria as a local essential service less than 50,000 square-feet in size.
§ The document correctly states that the project’s residential component can be screened out and be presumed to result in a less than significant impact due to map-based screening. As shown in Figure 3, the project is located in an area that is “At or Below County Threshold” and therefore if a quantitative analysis were to be performed, it would determine that the project would result in a less than significant impact.