Santa Clarita City Council
October 22, 2024

Agenda Item: 3

CITY OF SANTA CLARITA

PLANNING COMMISSION

AGENDA REPORT

CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING MANAGER APPROVAL:

DATE: September 17, 2024
SUBJECT: RIVERVIEW (MASTER CASE 21-205)
APPLICANT: Peter Vanek
LOCATION: 22500 Soledad Canyon Road
CASE PLANNER: Justin Sauder

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Planning Commission:

1. Receive presentation from staff and the applicant;

2. Continue the public hearing to receive testimony from the public;

3. Provide direction to staff on project-related issues;

4. Continue the meeting to a date certain; and

5. Take such additional, related, actions that may be desirable.

REQUEST
The applicant, Integral Communities, is proposing a development consisting of 318 residential dwelling units and a non-residential component with an approximately 127,000 square-foot light manufacturing building on the former Saugus Speedway property. The project also proposes to subdivide the property into five parcels with a Tentative Map that would allow for condominiums.

MEETING SCHEDULE
The project was introduced at the July 16, 2024, Planning Commission meeting. The meeting provided an opportunity for the community and the Planning Commission to receive a project introduction, discuss the project, and ask questions of the applicant and staff. Several members of the community spoke on the item as well as the applicant. The Planning Commission asked questions of the applicant and staff, and directed staff to bring the item back to the September 17, 2024, Planning Commission meeting.
3 Packet Pg. 123

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The project is located at 22500 Soledad Canyon Road (Assessor’s Parcel Number 2836-011-018) within the Mixed-Use Corridor (MX-C) zone in the community of Saugus. The project is also within the Jobs Creation Overlay Zone and the High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. The project site is directly adjacent to the Santa Clarita Metrolink Station and was formally utilized as the Saugus Speedway. Currently, there is a swap meet on Sundays and Tuesdays at the subject property. The property is approximately 35 acres in size and the majority of the site is relatively flat and paved, except for the northwest portion of the site which consists of a previously disturbed hillside. The overall cross slope of the site is approximately 14 percent.

The project includes a Tentative Map that would divide the site into five planning areas. Four of the planning areas would contain the residential component of the project and the fifth planning area would contain the non-residential, light manufacturing component. The site plan is attached for reference.

PLANNING COMMISSION FOLLOW-UP

During their discussion at the July 16 meeting, the Planning Commission posed several questions regarding the project and directed staff and the applicant to address some of the questions specifically. In summary, the Planning Commission asked for additional information regarding:
x Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) identified in the Housing Element; x Health of oak trees;
x Traffic impacts;
x Mixed use design;
x Operational characteristics of the light manufacturing use; x Buffers between transit corridors and the project;
x Phasing of the amenities;
x Transportation Demand Management Program;
x Rehabilitation Facility;
x Schools; and
x Jobs Creation Overlay Zone

Housing Element

The Planning Commission expressed a desire for the project to meet the minimum density for the residential component and wanted to know what the impacts to the RHNA would be for the proposed project based on the inclusion of the 22 affordable housing units. The project site is in the MX-C zone which allows for density ranging from 11 dwelling units per acre to 30 dwelling units per acre. The total site is approximately 35 acres so the minimum number of required dwelling units is 385 (11 units per acre) and the maximum number of required dwelling units is 1,050 (30 units per acre). As proposed, the project includes a Minor Use Permit to provide less density (318 units) than required by the Santa Clarita Municipal Code. The applicant is not proposing to increase the number of overall dwelling units or the number of affordable units.

3 Packet Pg. 124

The Riverview project site is identified as Suitable Site #23 in the Housing Element and is projected to have a capacity for 792 units with 225 units for low-income and 567 units for moderate-income levels. The project is proposing 22 units in the low-income category with the remaining 296 being market rate. The project does not propose any units in the moderate-income category.

Overall, the Housing Element has Citywide “buffer” of 345 low-income units and 462 moderate- income units. In other words, the City’s calculations for meeting its RHNA obligations includes a pool of excess units. When projects provide fewer units than were allocated for that site in the Housing Element, then the City must draw down from the excess units to remain on track for meeting RHNA obligations. Were this project approved as proposed, the overall Housing Element low-income buffer would be reduced to 142 units. However, the moderate-income buffer would be completely depleted and would require 105 units to be included in the moderate- income category from the “B List.” Table 1 below summarizes the impacts to the RHNA numbers if the project is approved.

Table 1
Moderate
Income
Low Income Market Rate
Suitable Site #23 567 225 n/a
Project 0 22 296
RHNA Buffer 462 345 6,791
RHNA Buffer if Project
Approved (as is)
-105 142 6,495
B List 890 3,427 N/A

California law (Government Code § 65915, et seq.) allows developers to increase the density of housing projects by building more affordable housing. This project, as currently proposed, would provide approximately 7% of the overall units as affordable. This does not allow the project to qualify for a density bonus. However, depending on the percentage of units designated as affordable, it is possible to receive a 100% density bonus (AB1287) which would double the maximum density from 1,050 units to 2,100 units. Furthermore, if a project provides 100% of the units as affordable and is within a half mile of a major transit stop, the City cannot limit the developer from requesting a density bonus in excess of 100% (AB1763). The applicant has is not proposing any changes to the number of units designated as affordable at this time.

Oak Trees

The project requires the removal of nine oak trees, including a heritage oak tree. The Planning Commission asked if any oaks, including the heritage tree, could potentially be saved and remain in place. Commissioners also asked what would happen to the oak trees that are removed.

All nine oak trees are located within areas that are within a proposed building footprint or within an area that would be graded, and therefore are proposed to be removed. According to City’s Special District’s Urban Forestry Division, the heritage oak tree has structural issues that could potentially jeopardize the success of its survival if it were to be relocated. Furthermore, the 3 Packet Pg. 125

heritage oak is located on a slope, which is typically not a good candidate for relocation. A tree that is located on a slope would need to be planted on a new slope and oriented in the same direction as the original location in order to create the ideal conditions for a successful transplant.

The Planning Commission could require the applicant to provide a “transplant study” prepared by an approved tree relocating company to see if the tree can be successfully relocated. Please refer to the attached oak tree report provided by the applicant for more information.

As a condition of approval, the applicant is required to recycle all material generated from the removal of the oaks and utilize the material on-site.

Traffic Impacts on Soledad Canyon Road and Commuter Way

The Planning Commission expressed concerns about the traffic impact of the project on Commuter Way and Soledad Canyon Road. The applicant’s traffic consultant, Gibson Transportation Consulting Inc., prepared a Traffic Analysis (attached) and alternatives for the design of Commuter Way, which also includes a level of services (LOS) analysis for the intersection of Commuter Way and Soledad Canyon Road. The analysis includes existing conditions, future conditions with the approval of the project, and future conditions with the approval of the project plus an increase in train traffic that doubles the automobile traffic in and out of the Metrolink station.

Under the existing conditions, the LOS for both Commuter Way and Soledad Canyon Road operates at an A level. If the project is approved, the LOS for both roads would remain at an A with increased traffic from the project. In the scenario with additional Metrolink traffic/ridership, Commuter Way would operate at an A level and Soledad Canyon Road would operate at a B level. If approved, the Traffic Division will work with the applicant to finalize the configuration of Commuter Way.

Mixed Use Design

The Planning Commission discussed the nature of the project as it related to the MX-C zone and whether or not a commercial/retail use would be more compatible with the residential portion of the project rather than the building proposed for light manufacturing. As proposed, the project contains a residential portion and a separate non-residential portion with a building that is proposed to be utilized for a light manufacturing use. The two uses are proposed on separate parcels and there are no connections between the two uses proposed. The applicant is not proposing any changes to the project at this time.

Operational Characteristics of a Light Manufacturing Use

The Planning Commission inquired about the daily operations of the light manufacturing use such as hours of operation and how and when the truck bays would be utilized. As a tenant has not been secured for the non-residential portion of the project, the applicant was not able to provide additional information into the daily operations at this time.

Buffers Between Transit Corridors

3 Packet Pg. 126

The Planning Commission wanted to better understand the relationship between the major transit corridors such as Soledad Canyon Road and the Union Pacific Railroad and the project. As such, the applicant provided cross sections (attached) that depict the buffer between the project and the transit corridors.

Cross Sections A and B depict the landscape buffer on Soledad Canyon Road along the frontage of the non-residential portion of the project and Cross Section C depicts the buffer from the non- residential portion to the residential portion of the project. There is a landscape parkway, a walkway or sidewalk and landscape buffer that ranges between approximately 16-feet and 47- feet wide along Soledad Canyon Road and the non-residential building. Between the residential and non-residential portions, the cross section depicts walkways, landscape buffers, driveways, and a drainage basin for an overall distance between the non-residential building and the residences of approximately 210 feet.

The applicant also provided cross sections depicting the buffers around the residential portion of the project. Section 1 shows the buffer between the Union Pacific Railroad and the residential portion of the project and includes the side yards of residences, a retaining wall, and a landscaped slope that leads up to the property line for a buffer that is approximately 49 feet wide.

Beyond the property line is an additional slope that leads up to the railroad tracks. Section 2 is from Soledad Canyon Road and depicts the parkway, sidewalk, landscaping, a retaining wall, and the rear yards of residences. The buffer between Soledad Canyon Road and the property wall in this section is approximately 29 feet wide. Finally, Section 3 is on Commuter Way and includes a parkway and a mixed-use trail leading up to the property line with a retaining wall, a sloped planting area, and an on-site sidewalk adjacent to the rear yards of residences. The buffer between Commuter Way and the residence at this cross section is approximately 32-feet wide.

Phasing of Amenities and Housing

The Planning Commission inquired about the timing of construction of the on-site amenities compared to the construction timing for each planning area. The applicant indicated that the amenities will be phased with each planning area so that residents have access to amenities throughout the construction process. A phasing or construction schedule that would provide a timeframe and specific dates for the phasing of amenities has not been provided at this time.

Transportation Demand Management Program

The Planning Commission asked to see an updated Transportation Demand Management Program (TDM) that quantified how the specified programs would reduce potential traffic to the non-residential portion of the project. The applicant has updated the TDM (attached) and concluded that the specified programs will reduce the inbound daily vehicle trips by 31.5 percent. This reduction in daily vehicle trips is then provided as justification for the parking reduction of 20 percent for the non-residential portion of the project.

Rehabilitation Facility

The Planning Commission wanted to ensure that the applicant reached out to the Action Rehabilitation Facility to the west of the project site. The applicant has confirmed that contact 3 Packet Pg. 127

was made and the Action Rehabilitation Facility is aware of the project.

Schools

The Planning Commission wanted to ensure that the local schools were notified of the project.

The Newhall School District, College of the Canyons, William S. Hart Union School District, and Saugus Union School District were notified of the project as part of the noticing for the Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND). No responses from the notified school districts were received. If approved, the developer would be responsible for payment of mitigation fees to each of the applicable school districts.

Jobs Creation Overlay Zone

The Planning Commission had questions regarding the residential portion of the project within the Jobs Creation Overlay Zone (JCOZ). The intent purpose of the JCOZ is to promote the creation of high-quality jobs and enhance the City’s overall jobs/housing balance and while there are specific incentives for office and industrial buildings within the JCOZ, the underlying zone of MX-C allows for residential uses. One of the incentives that is offered within the JCOZ is a parking reduction. The applicant is requesting the maximum reduction of required on-site parking of 20%. The applicant is not proposing to change the project at this time.

ENVIRONMENTAL

The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act. An IS/MND was prepared for the project by SWCA Environmental Consultants (SWCA) and circulated for a public review period from June 25, 2024, to July 16, 2024. The IS/MND analyzed potential impacts to seven areas and determined that, with mitigation, none of the impacts from the project would be significant.

Staff received comment letters regarding the IS/MND and are working with the applicant and SWCA to provide responses to comments.

CORRESPONDENCE

As of the writing of this staff report, staff has received three emails (attached) from the community regarding the status of the project, inquiring if more affordable housing could be provided at the project site, and if the site could be utilized as a park or remain as a race track.

CONCLUSION

Staff recommends the Planning Commission receive presentation from staff and the applicant, continue the public hearing, provide direction to staff, and continue the meeting to a date certain.

ATTACHMENTS
Overall Site Plan and Tentative Tract Map
3 Packet Pg. 128

Oak Tree Report
Riverview Cross Sections
Gibson Traffic Analysis
TDM
Email Correspondence
3 Packet Pg. 129

3.a
Attachment: Overall Site Plan and Tentative Tract Map (Riverview (MC21-205)) 5,9(59,(:
7(17$7,9(75$&70$3
ϯ
ϰ
ϲ
ϵ
6,7(

3.a
Attachment: Overall Site Plan and Tentative Tract Map (Riverview (MC21-205)) 5,9(59,(:
7(17$7,9(75$&70$3

3.a
Attachment: Overall Site Plan and Tentative Tract Map (Riverview (MC21-205)) 5,9(59,(:
7(17$7,9(75$&70$3

3.a
Attachment: Overall Site Plan and Tentative Tract Map (Riverview (MC21-205))



!




 
















0.08-0=



9?02=,7
:88@94?40>


. :
$0?0=
),906


',9
70809?0
'@4?0

"0B;:=?
0,.3







&02,=/492
&4A0=A40B
$=:50.?



':70/,/
,9D:9
&:,/



',9?,
7,=4?,




(:
*3:8

?
!,D
:9.0=9



?
?30
=0<@0>?
:1
?30
;=:;0=?D
:B90=


A4>4?0/
?30
,-:A0
=010=09.0/
>4?0
0.08-0=







B,>
,>60/
?:
;0=1:=8
,9
49A09?:=D
,9/
0A,7@,?4:9
:1
;=:?0.?0/
:,6
?=00>
:9
?30
;=:;0=?D
,9/
;=0;,=0
,
$=:?0.?0/
#,6
(=00
&0;:=?



!D
49>;0.?4:9
B,>
A4>@,7
:97D
,9/
;0=1:=80/
1=:8
2=:@9/
70A07


/4/
9:?
08;7:D
,9/

0C?09>4A0
:=
49A,>4A0
/4,29:>?4.>
1:=
?34>
?=00>
>?@/D

(=@96
,=0
80,>@=0/
,?

49.30>
,-:A0
>:47
2=,/0
30423?
4>
A4>@,77D
0>?48,?0/

(=00>
,=0
=,?0/
@>492
?30
.:9/4?4:9
=,?492
>D>?08
;=:A4/0/
-D
?30
.4?D
:1
',9?,
7,=4?,

(30
?=00>
49.7@/0/
49
?34>
>?@/D
,=0
4/09?4140/
-D
9@8-0=
B30=0
,
?,2
4>
?D;4.,77D
,??,.30/
?:
?30
:1
?30
?=@96

(=00
7:.,?4:9
,9/
7:.,?4:9
:1
;=:?0.?4A0
109.492
,=0
49/4.,?0/
:9
>4?0
;7,9>
,>
900/0/




!
#


?:?,7
:1



;=:?0.?0/
?=00>
,=0
49.7@/0/
,>
;,=?
:1
?34>
=0;:=?
,9/
,=0
4/09?4140/
,>
.:,>?
74A0
:,6

 



A,770D
:,6



,9/
>.=@-
:,6








(30
>4?0
.:9?,49>




 
>4E0
?=00
.:,>?
74A0
:,6



30=4?,20
:,6
?=00
4>
/01490/

,>
,9D
:,6
?=00
80,>@=492
:90
3@9/=0/
0423?



49.30>
49
.4=.@810=09.0
:=
49
?30
.,>0

:1
,
8@7?4;70
?=@96
?=00
?B:


:=
8:=0
?=@96>
80,>@=492
>0A09?D?B:


49.30>
0,.3

:=
2=0,?0=
49
.4=.@810=09.0
80,>@=0/
1:@=
,9/
:903,71

I

100?
,-:A0
?30
9,?@=,7

2=,/0
>@==:@9/492
>@.3
?=00



?:?,7
:1

;=:?0.?0/
:,6>
,=0
;=:;:>0/
1:=
=08:A,7
,>
;,=?
:1
?34>
;=:50.?
49.7@/492

0=4?,20
?=00



$3:?:>
,=0
;=:A4/0/
1:=
,77
49A09?:=40/
?=00>
49
?34>
>?@/D

3.b
Packet Pg. 134
Attachment: Oak Tree Report (Riverview (MC21-205))


























 





  


 

 

  






!




 























(30
,;;=:C48,?07D

,.=0
;=:;0=?D
4>
7:.,?0/
,?



':70/,/
,9D:9
&:,/
',9?,

7,=4?,




>>0>>:=
$,=.07
":







(30
;=:50.?
>4?0
4>
7:.,?0/
B4?349
?30

!+
E:90


(30
;=:50.?
49.7@/0>
?30
=0/0A07:;809?
:1
?30
;=:50.?
>4?0
B4?3
84C0/
@>0
/0A07:;809?
.:8;=4>0/
:1


>49270
1,847D
,??,.30/
@94?>

>49270
1,847D
/0?,.30/
@94?>
:9
?30

0,>?
09/
:1
?30
;=:50.?
>4?0
(30
B0>?
09/
B477
3,A0
,;;=:C48,?07D


><
100?
:1

>?@/4:
>?,20>
B4?3
;,=6492
>?=@.?@=0
3:7/492

,@?:>
,7:92
B4?3
>@=1,.0
;,=6492
,9/

[email protected]
;,=6492
&0<@4=0/
;,=6492
1:=
?30
=0>4/09?4,7
@94?>
,9/
?30
.:880=.4,7
>4?0
B:@7/
-0
;0=
?30
4?D
:1
',9?,
7,=4?,
[email protected];,7
:/0
,9/
B:@7/
49.7@/0
,
.:8-49,?4:9
:1
2,=,20>
,9/
>@=1,.0
>;,.0>






;;=,4>0/
?=00
A,7@0>
,=0
-,>0/
:9
.,7.@7,?4:9>
@>492
?30
G(=@96
:=8@7,H
,9/
:=
G&0;7,.0809?
:>?H
80?3:/
1=:8
?30


0/4?4:9
:1
G
@4/0
1:=
$7,9?
;;=,4>,7H





'0A0=,7
80?3:/>
,=0
@?474E0/
?:
/0?0=8490
?30
A,7@0
:1
7,9/>.,;0
;7,9?>

(30
?B:
8:>?
.:88:9
80?3:/>
,=0
?30
G(=@96
:=8@7,H
,9/
G&0;7,.0809?
:>?H
80?3:/>

#90
:1
?30
8:>?
.:88:9
;=,.?4.0>
4>
?30
G(=@96
:=8@7,
!0?3:/H
@>0/
B309
,
?=00
4>
7,=20=
?3,9
B3,?
4>
.:88:97D
,A,47,-70
49
?30
49/@>?=D

(30
G&0;7,.0809?
:>?H
4>
-,>0/
:9
?30
.:>?
:1
=0;7,.492
,
;7,9?
:1
?30
>,80
:=
.:8;,=,-70
>;0.40>
,9/
>4E0
49
?30
>,80
,=0,
,9/
G:>?
:1
&0;,4=H
.,9
-0
@>0/
B309
=0;,4=492
,
/,8,20/
;7,9?
49
,
?4807D
,9/
>,?4>1,.?:=D
8,990=
8,D
307;
?:
=0?@=9
?30
;7,9?
?:
90,=
4?>
1:=80=
.:9/4?4:9

:=
?34>
>?@/D
?30
,;;=:;=4,?0
80?3:/>
?:
-0
@>0/
,=0
?30
G(=@96
:=8@7,H
,9/
G&0;7,.0809?
:>?H
80?3:/>
?:
/0?0=8490
?30
A,7@0
:1
?=00>




:@=
;=48,=D
1,.?:=>
,=0
@>0/
?:
307;
/0?0=8490
?30
A,7@0
:1
7,9/>.,;0
;7,9?>
?30>0

49.7@/0
?=00
>;0.40>
.:9/4?4:9
>4E0
,9/
7:.,?4:9

'4E0
4>
/0?0=8490/
-D
80,>@=0809?
B3470
?30
:?30=
1,.?:=>
,=0
>@-50.?4A0

';0.40>
=,?492
:1?09
A,=40>
20:2=,;34.,77D
?34>
=,?492
4>
/0?0=8490/
-D
?30
( 

:9/4?4:9
1,.?:=>
49.7@/0
30,7?3
,9/
>?=@.?@=0
:1
=::?>
?=@96
>.,11:7/
-=,9.30>
>8,77
-=,9.30>
,9/
?B42>
1:74,20
,9/
-@/>



:.,?4:9
49A:7A0>
?30
>4?0
:1
,
;=:;0=?D
:=
7,9/>.,;0
,
;7,9?>
@94<@0
1@9.?4:9,7
,9/
,0>?30?4.
.:9?=4-@?4:9
,9/
?30
;7,.0809?
:1
?30
49/4A4/@,7
;7,9?
49
,
>;0.414.
7,9/>.,;0
(30
7:.,?4:9
=,?492
4>
?30
,A0=,20
:1
?30
>4?0
.:9?=4-@?4:9
,9/
;7,.0809?
;0=.09?,20
=,?492>




-,>0
A,7@0
4>
0>?,-74>30/ 0C?=,;:7,?0/
@>492
.@==09?
9@=>0=D
,9/
9@=>0=D
2=:B0=
.:>?>
,9/
?309
>:80
/0;=0.4,?4:9
4>
1,.?:=0/
49
-,>0/
:9
>;0.40>
,9/
.:9/4?4:9
:1
?30
;7,9?


" 


(30
;=:;0=?D
4>
,
7,=20
;=48,=47D
A,.,9?
>4?0
.:9?,49492
,
10B
:7/
>?=@.?@=0>


(30
>4?0
4>
8:>?7D
70A07
?0==,49
B4?3
3477>
,?
?30
>:@?3B0>?
09/
:1
?30
>4?0

3.b
Packet Pg. 135
Attachment: Oak Tree Report (Riverview (MC21-205))


























 





  


 

 

  






!




 





















!:>?
:1
?30
?=00>
:9
?34>
>4?0
,=0
49
,A0=,20
.:9/4?4:9

0=4?,20
?=00


,;;0,=>
?:
-0
49

>?,-70
30,7?3
-@?
3,>
>0A0=0
>?=@.?@=,7
/010.?>
?3,?
3,A0
=0>@7?0/
49
?30
7:>>
:1
,-:@?
 

:1
4?>
.=:B9
?30
?=00
,7>:
.:9?,49>
9:?,-70
.,A4?40>
,9/
,=0,>
:1
/0.,D
:9
7,=20
>.,11:7/
748->





"! 


&010=
?:
49.7@/0/
>;=0,/>300?>
1:=
>;0.414.
?=00
491:=8,?4:9
>;0.414.,?4:9>
.:9/4?4:9
=,?492
,9/
=07,?4A0
.:8809?>

9
,;;=,4>,7
A,7@0
3,>
-009
.,7.@7,?0/
1:=
,77
;=:?0.?0/
?=00>
49/4A4/@,7
,;;=,4>,7
B:=6
>300?>
,=0
;=:A4/0/
1:=
,77
;=:;:>0/
?=00
=08:A,7>
,9/

09.=:,.3809?>




! 



 



 


$=:;:>0/
/0A07:;809?
49.7@/0>
8,5:=
2=,/492
,9/
.:9>?=@.?4:9
:1
>?@/4:
-@47/492>
=0>4/09?4,7
3:80>
,9/
;,=6492
>?=@.?@=0 7:?>



$=:;:>0/
/0A07:;809?
B477
49A:7A0
?30
=08:A,7
:1

:1
?30

;=:?0.?0/
?=00>
:9
>4?0

49.7@/492

0=4?,20
:,6


A,770D
:,6


B477
-0
;=0>0=A0/
49
;7,.0
B4?3
9:

09.=:,.3809?
,>
?30
90,=0>?
/0A07:;809?
4>
,;;=:C


100?
,B,D
1=:8
?30
?=00



(=00>




,=0
7:.,?0/
49
1::?;=49?
:1
2=,/492
:=
-@47/492>




!

!  

  

-0740A0
?3,?
;=:;:>0/
/0A07:;809?
4>
=0,>:9,-70
@>0
:1
?30
;=:;0=?D
,9/
B477
093,9.0
?30
.:88@94?D


0=4?,20
:,6


,7?3:@23
30,7?3D
3,>
>@110=0/
7,=20
>?08
1,47@=0>
,9/
.:9?,49>
>429414.,9?
>?=@.?@=,7
/010.?>
70,A492
4?
,?
=4>6
1:=
,//4?4:9,7
748-
1,47@=0>

  


(30
:B90=
4>
8:=0
?3,9
B477492
?:
84?42,?0
?30
=08:A,7
:1
:,6
?=00>
-D
;7,9?492
=0;7,.0809?
?=00>
:9
:=
:11>4?0





(=00
:9/4?4:9
&,?492
'D>?08


F
#@?>?,9/492


30,7?3D
>:@9/
,9/
A42:=:@>
?=00
.3,=,.?0=4>?4.
:1
4?>
>;0.40>
,9/
=0,>:9,-7D
1=00
:1
,9D
A4>4-70
>429>
:1
>?=0>>
>?=@.?@=,7
;=:-708>
/4>0,>0
:=
;0>?
4910>?,?4:9


F
-:A0
,A0=,20


30,7?3D
>:@9/
,9/
A42:=:@>
?=00
B4?3
849:=
>429>
:1
>?=0>>
/4>0,>0
,9/
:=
;0>?
4910>?,?4:9


F
A0=,20

7?3:@23
30,7?3D
49
:A0=,77
,;;0,=,9.0
?30=0
0C4>?>
,9
,-9:=8,7
,8:@9?
:1
>?=0>>
;0>?
4910>?,?4:9
:=
A4>@,7
>429>
:1
849:=
>?=@.?@=,7
;=:-708>

F
07:B
A0=,20 $::=

(34>
?=00
4>
.3,=,.?0=4E0/
-D
0C34-4?492
,
2=0,?
/02=00
:1
>?=0>>
;0>?>
:=
/4>0,>0>
,9/
,;;0,=>
?:
-0
49
,
=,;4/
>?,?0
:1
/0.7490

(30
/02=00
:1
/0.7490
.,9
A,=D
2=0,?7D
,9/
8,D
49.7@/0
/40-,.6
:=
,/A,9.0/
>?,20>
:1
;0>?>
:=
/4>0,>0>

(30=0
8,D
,7>:
-0
A4>@,7
>429>
:1
>?=@.?@=,7
;=:-708>
>@.3
,>
.,A4?40>
/0.,D
:=
/,8,20/
=::?>


F
0,/

(34>
?=00
0C34-4?>
9:
>429
:1
7410
B3,?>:0A0=

3.b
Packet Pg. 136
Attachment: Oak Tree Report (Riverview (MC21-205))


























 





  


 

 

  






!




 



















 


  

!





":
.3,920>
49
>:47
2=,/0
>3,77
-0
8,/0
B4?349
?30
?=00
;=:?0.?4:9
E:90
:?30=
?3,9
49
?30
,;;=:A0/
B:=6
,=0,


":
30,AD
0<@4;809?
>3,77
-0
8:A0/
B4?349
?30
;=:?0.?0/
E:90
:1
,9D
;=0>0=A0/
?=00


:9>?=@.?4:9
/0-=4>
>3,77
9:?
-0
>?:=0/
:=
/4>;:>0/
:1
B4?349
?30
;=:?0.?0/
E:90
:1
,9D
?=00


9D
=0<@4=0/
;=@9492
:1
?=00>
>3,77
-0
>@;0=A4>0/
,9/
;0=1:=80/
?:
800?
'
,9/

"'

;=@9492
>?,9/,=/>


":
7,9/>.,;492
:=
4==42,?4:9
>3,77
-0
49>?,770/
B4?349
?30
;=:?0.?0/
E:90
:1
,9D
:,6
?=00
:=
.7:>0=
?3,9


100?
?:
?30
?=@96


$7,9?492
:1
84?42,?4:9
?=00>
>3,77
-0
/:90
49
.:8;74,9.0
B4?3
.4?D
8,9/,?0

,9/>.,;492
90,=
:,6>
>3,77
-0
7484?0/
?:
/=:@23?
?:70=,9?
:=
9,?4A0
;7,9?>
:97D

":
4==42,?4:9
>3,77
-0
49>?,770/
.7:>0=
?3,9


100?
?:
,9
:,6
?=00
,9/
>3,77
9:?
B0?

?=@96>

":
?@=1
>3,77
-0
;7,9?0/
B4?349
?30
/=4;7490
:1
,9D
:,6

?
>3:@7/
-0
9:?0/
?3,?
?30
>?@/D
:1
?=00>
4>
9:?
,9
0C,.?
>.409.0
,9/
,=-:=4.@7?@=0
/:0>
9:?
/0?0.?
:=
;=0/4.?
B4?3
,9D
.0=?,49?D

(30
,=-:=4>?
?30=01:=0
4>
9:?
=0>;:9>4-70
1:=
?=00
/010.?>
:=
>:47
.:9/4?4:9>
?3,?
.,99:?
-0
4/09?4140/
-D
,
;=@/09?
,9/
=0,>:9,-70
49>;0.?4:9

1
D:@
3,A0
,9D
<@0>?4:9>
:=
=0<@4=0
:?30=
>0=A4.0>
;70,>0
.:9?,.?
80
,?
?30
9@8-0=
74>?0/
-07:B



&0>;0.?1@77D

=-:=
>>09.0














0==D
":=8,9



'
&024>?0=0/
:9>@7?492
=-:=4>?


'
:,=/0=?4140/
!,>?0=
=-:=4>?
*



'
(=00
&4>6
>>0>>:=
%@,7414.,?4:9
0C;

9.7:>0/

#,6
?=00
=0;:=?

';=0,/>300?> (=00
';0.>

(=00
,;;=,4>,7
B:=6>
>300?>

'4?0
;7,9 ?=00
8,;

(=00
;3:?:>

3.b
Packet Pg. 137
Attachment: Oak Tree Report (Riverview (MC21-205))
Date: December 30, 2021
Job name: Riverview Project
22500 Soledad Cyn Rd
Santa Clarita, CA
Arbor Essence
Tree Survey
Tree # Description Circumf. Ht Canopy Condition Comments/Impact 180 Coast live oak (
Quercus agrifolia) 37.70" 18' 18' B
Tree in stable condition with no
apparent pest problems. Proposed for
removal, located in building footprint
181 Coast live oak 34.557" 20' 20' B
Tree in stable condition with no
apparent pest problems. Proposed for
removal, located in building footprint
182 Scrub oak (
Quercus berberidifolia)

12.6"/

12.6"/

12.6"
12' 15' C- 1 of 3 stems dead. Proposed for
removal, located in building footprint
183 Scrub oak 9 stems
1-9.42"
3-12.57"
5-15.7"
15' 20' C
Tree in stable condition with no
apparent pest problems. Proposed for
removal, located in grading area
184 Scrub oak 15.7" 10' 8' N/W C
Tree in stable condition wtih no
apparent pest problems. Proposed for
removal, located in building footprint
185 Scrub oak 1-12.57".
1-9.42" 6' 8' W B
Tree in stable condition wtih no
apparent pest problems. Proposed for
removal, located in grading area
186 Coast live oak, Heritage 3 stems
1-50.26"
1-78.54"
1-94.24"
40' 30' C health
D structure
History of large stem failures and
contains defects in large limbs.

Proposed for removal, located in
grading area
187 Coast live oak 44" 30' 30' B
Tree in stable condition wtih no
apparent pest problems. Proposed for
removal, located in grading area

3.b
Packet Pg. 138
Attachment: Oak Tree Report (Riverview (MC21-205))
Date: December 30, 2021
Job name: Riverview Project
22500 Soledad Cyn Rd
Santa Clarita, CA
Arbor Essence
Tree Survey
Tree # Description Circumf. Ht Canopy Condition Comments/Impact 188 Coast live oak 4 stems
2-25"
1-31.4"
1-34.55"
30' 30' B
Tree in stable condition wtih no
apparent pest problems. Proposed for
removal, located in grading area
189 Valley oak (
Quercus lobata) 18.85" 25' 8' B
Tree in stable condition with no
apparent pest problems. Preserve in
place, no encroachment or develpoment
within 135'
Heritge tree

3.b
Packet Pg. 139
Attachment: Oak Tree Report (Riverview (MC21-205))
Date: December 30, 2021
Job name: Riverview Project
22500 Soledad Cyn Rd.

Santa Clarita, CA
Arbor Essence
Tree Appraisals
Tree # Description
Appraised
Trunk area
sq. in.

Unit Cost
Basic Tree
Cost, incl
replacment
Species Condition Location Appraised
cost
180 Coast live oak (
Quercus agrifolia) 89.25 $109 15,018 90% 80% 100% $10,800 181 Coast live oak 71.25 $109 13,038 90% 80% 100% $9,400 182 Coast live oak 15.25 $109 6,878 90% 60% 100% $3,700 183 Scrub oak (
Quercus berberifdifolia) 122.25 $109 18,525 90% 40% 100% $12,500 184 Scrub oak, Replacement cost 5" 5,200 90% 75% 100% $3,700, incl $200 clean up
185 Scrub oak, Replacement cost 6" 5,200 90% 75% 100% $3,700, incl $200 clean up
186 Coast live oak, Heritage tree 1375.3 $109 155,102 90% 50% 100% $69,800 187 Coast live oak 130.25 $109 19,397 90% 80% 100% $14,000 188 Coast live oak 250.25 $109 32,477 90% 80% 100% $23,400 189
Valley oak (
Quercus lobata)
Replacement cost 6" 5,200 90% 80% 100%
$3,944, incl
$200 clean
up cost
Heritage Tree

3.b
Packet Pg. 140
Attachment: Oak Tree Report (Riverview (MC21-205))

3.c
Packet Pg. 141
Attachment: Riverview Cross Sections (Riverview (MC21-205)) Section 1 - Through Railroad

RIVERVIEW - SANTA CLARITA
Oakridge Landscape
Project No.: ORL02-D
Date: June 06, 2024
City Comment Revisions
8'
Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
0 4'2'
KEYMAP Not to Scale
SOLEDAD CANYON RD.

Section 1

3.c
Packet Pg. 142
Attachment: Riverview Cross Sections (Riverview (MC21-205)) Section 2 - Soledad Canyon Road

RIVERVIEW - SANTA CLARITA
Oakridge Landscape
Project No.: ORL02-D
Date: June 06, 2024
City Comment Revisions
8'
Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
0 4'2'
KEYMAP Not to Scale
SOLEDAD CANYON RD.

Section 2

3.c
Packet Pg. 143
Attachment: Riverview Cross Sections (Riverview (MC21-205)) Section 3 - Through Commuter Way

RIVERVIEW - SANTA CLARITA
Oakridge Landscape
Project No.: ORL02-D
Date: June 06, 2024
City Comment Revisions
8'
Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"
0 4'2'
KEYMAP Not to Scale
SOLEDAD CANYON RD.

Section 3

3.c
Packet Pg. 144
Attachment: Riverview Cross Sections (Riverview (MC21-205)) 1 MEMORANDUM
TO: Joel Bareng
Ian Pari
FROM: Patrick Gibson
Richard Gibson
DATE: August 9, 2024
RE: Riverview Mixed-Use Development (MC 21-205)
Discussion of Conditions of Approval Ref: J1977 The City of Santa Clarita has issued proposed Conditions of Approval (COA) for the Riverview Mixed-Use Project (Project). This memorandum provides responses and additional information on four of the proposed COAs. All other COAs are acceptable to the Project Applicant.

Condition 1. Right-of-Way

1. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall acquire and dedicate to the City the right-of-way required for all street improvements as identified in the traffic study, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

RESPONSE:

There is sufficient ROW to provide the right turn lane into the westerly manufacturing driveway. All other needed ROW along Soledad Canyon Road already belongs to the Project Applicant and will be offered for dedication to the City prior to issuance of building permits.

The only ROW in questions related to Condition 18 wherein the City requests a widening of Commuter Way as the street approaches Soledad Canyon Road. This is discussed under Condition 18 below.

Condition 14. Access Limitations at the Westerly Non-Residential Driveway

14. Access at the western non-residential driveway shall be limited to right-in (one-way) only. Right turns out of the project site and left turns into or out of the project site at this location shall be prohibited. Soledad Canyon Road shall be widened and sufficient right-of-way dedicated along the project frontage to provide an exclusive right-turn pocket at this location. The right-turn pocket shall be designed with sufficient storage length and taper to accommodate larger vehicles to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. This improvement shall be shown on all applicable plans prior to issuance of first building permit.

3.d
Packet Pg. 145
Attachment: Gibson Traffic Analysis (Riverview (MC21-205)) 2 RESPONSE:

The traffic study always assumed right-in/ri ght-out movements would be allowed at this driveway. The City is concerned that there is insufficient length for trucks to get up to a safe speed as they turn onto Soledad Canyon Road and therefore, the COA recommends that the westerly commercial driveway be designed as a one-way right turn inbound only driveway.

No vehicles would be allowed to leave the site via the westerly driveway.

The Applicant is concerned with the proposed one-way inbound restriction. A compromise solution exists that would address the City’s concerns by prohibiting all truck exits from this driveway. There is already a security control gate planned for the south end of the westerly commercial driveway that will require all inbound trucks to check-in with a security person.

Upon entry, every truck will be told that they must exit the site via the signalized driveway on the east side of the commercial site. The security person would not open the gate for any trucks wanting to exit the site and therefore the only northbound vehicles on the westerly commercial driveway would be automobiles.

The project will provide an extra lane along the entire project frontage along eastbound Soledad Canyon Road. This additional lane can be used for acceleration and deceleration for autos leaving the westerly commercial driveway and all vehicles entering the easterly commercial driveway. In addition, if trucks are prohibited from exiting this driveway onto Soledad Canyon Road, the corner radius on the southeast corner of the westerly T- intersection driveway can be reduced.

This addresses the concern about trucks entering Soledad Canyon Road from a STOP sign control and not being able to reach merging sp eed in time. All exiting trucks would use the easterly signalized commercial driveway, and there is a simple and effective way to enforce that restriction.

The Project Applicant would request a modification to Condition 14 to allow right turns into the site and right turns for automobiles out of the site at the westerly non-residential driveway.

Condition 16. Westerly Residential Driveway Access Limitations

16. Access at the western residential driveway shall be limited to right-in/right-out only. Left turns into or out of the project site at this location shall be prohibited. Soledad Canyon Road shall be widened and sufficient right-of-way dedicated along the project frontage to provide an exclusive right-turn pocket at this location. This improvement shall be shown on all applicable plans prior to issuance of first building permit.

RESPONSE:

The traffic study assumed left turns into the residential site at this location. The City believes that by eliminating the left turn into the westerly residential driveway, the westbound left turn lane into the commercial site could be lengthened.

3.d
Packet Pg. 146
Attachment: Gibson Traffic Analysis (Riverview (MC21-205)) 3 This Condition would be acceptable to the Project Applicant as long as a westbound to eastbound U-turn movement (operating on the green arrow) would be permitted at the signalized easterly commercial driveway. With this U-turn movement allowed, WB residents headed for the westerly residential driveway could make a U-turn at the signalized commercial driveway and then turn right into the residential driveway. The residents that would use the U- turn movement would primarily be returning home from work in the afternoon hours when the inbound traffic flow to the manufacturing site would be light.

Condition 18. Design of the Soledad Canyon Road/Commuter Way Intersection

18. The intersection at Soledad Canyon Road and Commuter Way shall be widened to provide three northbound lanes on Commuter Way (one right-turn lane, two left-turn lanes).

Soledad Canyon Road shall be widened and sufficient right-of-way dedicated along the project frontage to provide an exclusive right-turn pocket at this location. This improvement shall be shown on all applicable plans prior to issuance of first building permit.

RESPONSE:

The Project is already planning to widen Commuter Way to add an additional southbound lane along the west side of Commuter Way. This additional lane would extend along the entire frontage of the Project.

Discussions with City staff have led to the development and evaluation of three alternate designs for this intersection, as described below.

Alternates 1A and 1B – Five-Lane Commuter Way Cross Section

The site traffic study showed that the intersection would provide an acceptable level of service with two NB exit lanes on Commuter Way. Rather than widening this minor street to a six-lane facility, Alternate 1A would stripe the five lanes proposed for Commuter Way as two southbound lanes, two NB left turn lanes and one NB right turn lane at its intersection with Soledad Canyon Road. The center lane would be converted to a SB left turn lane at the commuter parking lot entrance to the south. This would give the two northbound left turn lanes a storage length of approximately 105 feet for the westerly left turn lane and 215 feet for the easterly of the two left turn lanes for a total of 320 feet of left turn storage. The remaining northbound right turn exit lane would also provide a storage length of 215 feet.

If the City is concerned about the striping of the two northbound left turn lanes, Alternate 1B proposes the south portion of the westerly left turn lane could be striped at a two-way-center- left-turn-lane (TWLTL) to give the NB to WB left turns at Soledad Canyon Road some more flexibility in the use of the left turn lanes.

If the five-lane cross section is acceptable to the City, no additional ROW would be required above what is already proposed in the Project Application.

Figures 1 and 2 show the two alternates described above.

3.d
Packet Pg. 147
Attachment: Gibson Traffic Analysis (Riverview (MC21-205)) 4 Alternate 2 – COA Proposal

This Alternate would widen Commuter Way by approximately 10-12 feet along the east side adjacent to the train station to provide a northbound right turn lane from Soledad Canyon Road southerly to the first driveway serving the train station parking lot. This would provide a storage length of approximately 215 feet.

The widening would require the relocation of the existing sidewalk, two light poles, one traffic signal pole and a pedestrian signal pole. It would al so require the removal of three existing trees. If the land east of the existing sidewalk belongs to Metrolink, a sidewalk easement may also be needed.

The resulting cross section for Commuter Way would provide three southbound lanes, two northbound left turn lanes (each with 215 feet of storage) and one 215-foot-long northbound right turn lane.

Alternate 3 – Shifted Five-Lane Commuter Way Cross Section This Alternate, shown in Figure 3, would provide the City’s desired three-lane northbound cross section by widening into the train station site as proposed in Alternate 2. However, since Commuter Way does not require six travel lanes to serve the future traffic volumes, the widening of Commuter Way has been shifted from the west side to the east side of the street between Soledad Canyon Road and the first driveway to the parking lot.

Commuter Way would provide two southbound lanes and they would function just as they do now.

Commuter Way would be widened on the west side of the street south of the first train station driveway in order to provide a right turn lane into the Project Site.

EVALUATION OF COMMUTER WAY ALTERNATES
The Existing and Future travel volumes through the Commuter Way corridor are shown in Figures 4 and 5. Figure 5 shows Future Year 2026 volumes with and without the Project traffic and it shows the 2026 volumes with the Project assuming that the train service to the station is increased and the automobile traffic to/from the train station approximately doubles.

Level of Service
Tables 1 and 2 show the intersection capacity calculations for the Soledad Canyon Road/Commuter Way intersection using the Synchro signal timings obtained from City staff.

The Attachment to this memo contains the Synchro worksheets.

3.d
Packet Pg. 148
Attachment: Gibson Traffic Analysis (Riverview (MC21-205)) 5 Since the future cross sections of all three Alternates under consideration have two northbound left turn lanes and one northbound right turn lane, they all have the same Level of Service LOS results.

Table 1 shows that the existing cross section oper ates at LOS A before the addition of Project traffic. With Project traffic and the widening of Commuter Way to provide three northbound lanes, the intersection would continue to operate at LOS A with only a slight increase in intersection delay.

Table 2 shows that the future traffic levels could be supported by any of the three Commuter Way Alternates with resulting operations at LOS A before the train service activity increase and LOS A or B even with the increased train service.

Queuing
Table 3 evaluates the queuing at the signalized in tersection under the conditions tested above.

The first four sets of AM and PM peak hour results show the queues that would form if the intersection remained in its current configuration. As shown, the current intersection (with only two northbound exit lanes) could satisfactorily accommodate the future traffic volumes, even with the increased train service in place.

The analysis of the Alternates shows that when three northbound lanes are provided along Commuter Way, the queues decrease and can easily be accommodated by any of the three Alternate designs. Again, any adjustment of the traffic signal timing to give more green time to the Commuter Way phases would reduce these queues even more.

REQUEST
The Project Applicant respectfully requests that serious consideration be given to Alternate 3 which provides a five-lane cross section for Commuter Way at Soledad Canyon Road. The Alternate provides three full-length lanes to accommodate the anticipated peak queues for the two northbound left turn lanes and one northbound right turn lane and still provides two inbound lanes for vehicles entering the Project Site and the transit station.

3.d
Packet Pg. 149
Attachment: Gibson Traffic Analysis (Riverview (MC21-205)) ),*85(
$

3.d
Packet Pg. 150
Attachment: Gibson Traffic Analysis (Riverview (MC21-205)) 



 



   



  
"

     
 
  
  

      








  

 






 

(   





















 


 



  





 
HXFJi e
4a1Ri 2Pci
53GLK46
i 54i *%
7$
i
<"G.i Zd/
i
i Bf
0gi
;4Q+i 
N(&CI
8Ti _[ =E^USi b9\>
i
LO?Mi %/i
4@VD,-4i WYi h`] i
!#G.i ''
i )*:Ai









  

 












 




 



















(  






(
(!(



























"(#(($

%



&

'



((

















 
 

  




 
 
 

),*85(

3.d
Packet Pg. 151
Attachment: Gibson Traffic Analysis (Riverview (MC21-205)) 



 










 


     
 
  
  
     












 















 












 """




  



  




  

 






"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"



"

"




.
.


 


!!







 



. & '$
.!.
. #

()--'*#+.
-. ".

HWFJh d3_0Rh1Pah
42GLK35
h 43h)$
6#h
<!G-h Xb.
h
h B
e
/fh
;3Q*h

N'%CI
7Th ]Y
=E\USh`8Z>
h
LO?Mh
$.h
3@VD+,3h 9h cg^[h
"G-h &&

h ():Ah










 
 


  

   

 

. %,.
),*85(

3.d
Packet Pg. 152
Attachment: Gibson Traffic Analysis (Riverview (MC21-205))

3.d
Packet Pg. 153
Attachment: Gibson Traffic Analysis (Riverview (MC21-205))

3.d
Packet Pg. 154
Attachment: Gibson Traffic Analysis (Riverview (MC21-205)) Delay LOS Delay LOS ¨'HOD\ Impact

1. Commuter Way & A.M. 2.8 A 4.2 A 1.4 No
Soledad Canyon Road P.M. 8.1 A 9.1 A 1.0 No
Notes:

Intersection is signalized.
([LVWLQJZLWK
3URMHFW&RQGLWLRQV
(;,67,1*&21',7,216
<($5

,17(56(&7,21/(9(/62)6(59,&(
No. Intersection
/267$%/(
3HDN+RXU
([LVWLQJ
&RQGLWLRQV

3.d
Packet Pg. 155
Attachment: Gibson Traffic Analysis (Riverview (MC21-205)) Delay LOS Delay LOS ¨'HOD\ Impact Delay LOS ¨'HOD\ Impact

1. Commuter Way & A.M. 2.9 A 4.2 A 1.3 No 5.3 A 2.4 No
Soledad Canyon Road P.M. 9.0 A 9.5 A 0.5 No 11.8 B 2.8 No Notes:

Intersection is signalized.
/267$%/(
)8785(&21',7,216
<($5

,17(56(&7,21/(9(/62)6(59,&(
No. Intersection 3HDN
+RXU
)XWXUHZLWKRXW
3URMHFW&RQGLWLRQV
)XWXUHZLWK
3URMHFW&RQGLWLRQV
)XWXUHZLWK3URMHFWZLWK
,QFUHDVHG7UDQVLW

3.d
Packet Pg. 156
Attachment: Gibson Traffic Analysis (Riverview (MC21-205)) 7XUQ
3RFNHW
/HQJWK
7XUQ
3RFNHW
/HQJWK
)XWXUHZLWK3URMHFW&RQGLWLRQV
7XUQ
3RFNHW
/HQJWK
,QFUHDVHG7UDQVLWZLWK3URMHFW
&RQGLWLRQV
,QWHUVHFWLRQ&RPPXWHU:D\ 6ROHGDG&DQ\RQ5RDG Vehicles Storage Required (feet) Vehicles Storage Required
(feet) Vehicles Storage Required
(feet)
Eastbound U-Turn [a] A.M. N/A N/A 2 50 2 50
from Soledad Canyon Road to Soledad Canyon Road P.M. N/A N/A 1 25 1 25 Eastbound Right-Turn A . M . 12 5 12 5 12 5
from Soledad Canyon Road to Commuter Way P . M . 12 5 12 5 25 0 Westbound Left-Turn A.M. 2 50 3 75 3 75
from Soledad Canyon Road to Commuter Way P.M. 3 75 4 100 4 100 Northbound Left-Turn plus Right-Turn A.M. 3 75 5 125 6 150 from Commuter Way to Soledad Canyon Road P.M. 14 350 11 275 14 350 ALTERNATE 1
Northbound Left-Turn A.M. 4 100 4 100
from Commuter Way to Soledad Canyon Road P.M. 8 200 12 300 Northbound Right-Turn [a] A.M. 3 75 4 100
from Commuter Way to Soledad Canyon Road P.M. 7 175 8 200 ALTERNATE 2
Northbound Left-Turn A.M. 41 0 0 41 0 0
from Commuter Way to Soledad Canyon Road P.M. 8 200 12 300 Northbound Right-Turn [a] A.M. 37 5 4 1 0 0
from Commuter Way to Soledad Canyon Road P.M. 71 7 5 82 0 0 ALTERNATE 3
Northbound Left-Turn A.M. 4 100 4 100
from Commuter Way to Soledad Canyon Road P.M. 8 200 12 300 Northbound Right-Turn [a] A.M. 37 5 4 1 0 0
from Commuter Way to Soledad Canyon Road P.M. 71 7 5 82 0 0 Notes:

Queues based on 95th percentile queue calculated b y the HCM methodology. [a] Estimated distance as turn lane has not yet been constructed 430
215
320
215
430
215
430
215
150
285
430
215
320
215
150
150
285
430 430430
7$%/(
150
150
285
Intersection 3HDN
+RXU
)8785(&21',7,216
<($5

,17(56(&7,2148(8(6
)XWXUHZLWKRXW3URMHFW&RQGLWLRQV
4XHXH/HQJWK
150

3.d
Packet Pg. 157
Attachment: Gibson Traffic Analysis (Riverview (MC21-205)) 1 ATTACHMENT

CAPACITY CALCULATION WORKSHEETS

3.d
Packet Pg. 158
Attachment: Gibson Traffic Analysis (Riverview (MC21-205)) HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Commuter Way & Soledad Cyn

1. ExLVWLQJZLWKRXW3URMHFWAM Synchro 11 Report

Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 1079 46 20 2026 18 11
Future Volume (veh/h) 1079 46 20 2026 18 11
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 1173 50 22 2202 16 16
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222
Cap, veh/h 4391 1363 23 4612 64 33
Arrive On Green 0.86 0.86 0.01 0.90 0.04 0.02
Sat Flow, veh/h 5274 1585 1781 5274 1781 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 1173 50 22 2202 16 16
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1702 1585 1781 1702 1781 1585
Q Serve(g_s), s 5.5 0.6 1.6 9.7 1.2 1.3
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.5 0.6 1.6 9.7 1.2 1.3
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 4391 1363 23 4612 64 33
V/C Ratio(X) 0.27 0.04 0.95 0.48 0.25 0.48
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 4391 1363 216 4612 445 372
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 1.7 1.3 65.1 1.1 61.9 63.9
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.1 41.7 0.4 0.7 4.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 1.3 0.2 1.8 0.3 1.0 1.0
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 1.8 1.4 106.8 1.4 62.6 67.9
LnGrp LOS A A F A E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 1223 2224 32
Approach Delay, s/veh 1.8 2.5 65.3
Approach LOS A A E
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.7 117.5 123.2 8.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 6.0 6.0 6.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.5 69.0 89.0 31.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.6 7.5 11.7 3.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 17.4 51.5 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 2.8
HCM 6th LOS A
Notes
([LVWLQJZLWKRXW3URMHFW$0


3.d
Packet Pg. 159
Attachment: Gibson Traffic Analysis (Riverview (MC21-205)) HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Commuter Way & Soledad Cyn 08/02/2024

2.ExLVWLQJZLWKRXW3URMHFWPM 3HDN Synchro 11 Report

Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 2270 44 24 1311 107 81
Future Volume (veh/h) 2270 44 24 1311 107 81
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 2467 48 26 1425 102 103
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222
Cap, veh/h 4069 1263 26 4299 173 130
Arrive On Green 0.80 0.80 0.01 0.84 0.10 0.08
Sat Flow, veh/h 5274 1585 1781 5274 1781 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 2467 48 26 1425 102 103
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1702 1585 1781 1702 1781 1585
Q Serve(g_s), s 25.1 0.8 1.9 8.1 7.2 8.4
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 25.1 0.8 1.9 8.1 7.2 8.4
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 4069 1263 26 4299 173 130
V/C Ratio(X) 0.61 0.04 0.98 0.33 0.59 0.79
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 4069 1263 216 4299 445 372
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 5.3 2.8 65.0 2.3 57.0 59.5
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.7 0.1 45.6 0.2 1.2 4.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 10.2 0.4 2.1 2.5 6.0 6.4
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 5.9 2.9 110.6 2.5 58.2 63.5
LnGrp LOS A A F A E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 2515 1451 205
Approach Delay, s/veh 5.9 4.4 60.9
Approach LOS A A E
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.0 109.2 115.1 16.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 6.0 6.0 6.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.5 69.0 89.0 31.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.9 27.1 10.1 10.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 36.5 24.0 0.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 8.1
HCM 6th LOS A
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. ([LVWLQJZLWKRXW3URMHFW303HDN

3.d
Packet Pg. 160
Attachment: Gibson Traffic Analysis (Riverview (MC21-205)) HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Commuter Way & Soledad Cyn 08/05/2024
.ExLVWLQJZLWK3URMHFWZLWK0LWLJDWLRQ AM Synchro 11 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 47 1111 48 28 2064 0 44 0 30 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 47 1111 48 28 2064 0 44 0 30 0 0 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 0 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 51 1208 52 30 2243 0 48 0 33
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222220202
Cap, veh/h 188 4296 1333 31 4540 0 174 0 56
Arrive On Green 0.83 0.84 0.84 0.02 0.89 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.04 Sat Flow, veh/h 169 5106 1585 1781 5274 0 3456 0 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 51 1208 52 30 2243 0 48 0 33
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 169 1702 1585 1781 1702 0 1728 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 12.1 6.5 0.7 2.2 11.5 0.0 1.8 0.0 2.7
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 17.2 6.5 0.7 2.2 11.5 0.0 1.8 0.0 2.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 188 4296 1333 31 4540 0 174 0 56 V/C Ratio(X) 0.27 0.28 0.04 0.96 0.49 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.59 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 188 4296 1333 216 4540 0 864 0 372 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 4.3 2.2 1.7 64.8 1.4 0.0 60.4 0.0 62.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 3.5 0.2 0.1 35.7 0.4 0.0 0.3 0.0 3.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 0.9 2.0 0.2 2.3 1.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 2.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 7.8 2.3 1.8 100.5 1.8 0.0 60.7 0.0 66.5 L n G r p L O S AAAFAAEAE
Approach Vol, veh/h 1311 2273 81
Approach Delay, s/veh 2.5 3.1 63.0
Approach LOS A A E
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.3 115.0 121.4 10.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 6.0 6.0 6.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.5 69.0 89.0 31.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.2 19.2 13.5 4.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 22.4 52.1 0.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 4.2
HCM 6th LOS A
Notes
User approved ignoring U-Turning movement.
([LVWLQJZLWK3URMHFWZLWK0LWLJDWLRQ$0

3.d
Packet Pg. 161
Attachment: Gibson Traffic Analysis (Riverview (MC21-205)) HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Commuter Way & Soledad Cyn 08/05/2024
.ExLVWLQJSOXV3URMHFWZLWK0LWLJDWLRQPM Synchro 11 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 33 2314 50 42 1346 0 126 0 95 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 33 2314 50 42 1346 0 126 0 95 0 0 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 0 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 36 2515 54 46 1463 0 137 0 103
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222220202
Cap, veh/h 331 3988 1238 53 4294 0 340 0 132
Arrive On Green 0.77 0.78 0.78 0.03 0.84 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.08 Sat Flow, veh/h 363 5106 1585 1781 5274 0 3456 0 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 36 2515 54 46 1463 0 137 0 103
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 363 1702 1585 1781 1702 0 1728 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.5 28.1 1.0 3.4 8.4 0.0 4.9 0.0 8.4
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.0 28.1 1.0 3.4 8.4 0.0 4.9 0.0 8.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 331 3988 1238 53 4294 0 340 0 132 V/C Ratio(X) 0.11 0.63 0.04 0.87 0.34 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.78 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 331 3988 1238 216 4294 0 864 0 372 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 4.2 6.2 3.3 63.8 2.3 0.0 55.9 0.0 59.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.7 0.8 0.1 14.7 0.2 0.0 0.3 0.0 3.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 0.5 11.8 0.5 3.1 2.6 0.0 3.9 0.0 6.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 4.8 7.0 3.3 78.5 2.6 0.0 56.1 0.0 63.1 L n G r p L O S AAAEAAEAE
Approach Vol, veh/h 2605 1509 240
Approach Delay, s/veh 6.9 4.9 59.1
Approach LOS A A E
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.9 107.1 115.0 17.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 6.0 6.0 6.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.5 69.0 89.0 31.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.4 30.1 10.4 10.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 35.1 25.1 0.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 9.1
HCM 6th LOS A
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

User approved ignoring U-Turning movement.
([LVWLQJSOXV3URMHFWZLWK0LWLJDWLRQ30

3.d
Packet Pg. 162
Attachment: Gibson Traffic Analysis (Riverview (MC21-205)) HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Commuter Way & Soledad Cyn 08/05/2024
.FXWXUHZLWKRXW3URMHFWAM Synchro 11 Report

Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 1330 46 20 2287 18 12
Future Volume (veh/h) 1330 46 20 2287 18 12
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 1446 50 22 2486 16 17
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222
Cap, veh/h 4390 1363 23 4611 65 34
Arrive On Green 0.86 0.86 0.01 0.90 0.04 0.02
Sat Flow, veh/h 5274 1585 1781 5274 1781 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 1446 50 22 2486 16 17
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1702 1585 1781 1702 1781 1585
Q Serve(g_s), s 7.3 0.6 1.6 12.2 1.2 1.4
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.3 0.6 1.6 12.2 1.2 1.4
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 4390 1363 23 4611 65 34
V/C Ratio(X) 0.33 0.04 0.95 0.54 0.25 0.50
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 4390 1363 216 4611 445 372
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 1.8 1.3 65.1 1.2 61.8 63.9
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.1 41.7 0.5 0.7 4.3
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 1.8 0.2 1.8 0.4 1.0 1.1
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 2.0 1.4 106.8 1.7 62.6 68.2
LnGrp LOS A A F A E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 1496 2508 33
Approach Delay, s/veh 2.0 2.6 65.5
Approach LOS A A E
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.7 117.5 123.2 8.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 6.0 6.0 6.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.5 69.0 89.0 31.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.6 9.3 14.2 3.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 23.9 59.0 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 2.9
HCM 6th LOS A
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. )XWXUHZLWKRXW3URMHFW$0

3.d
Packet Pg. 163
Attachment: Gibson Traffic Analysis (Riverview (MC21-205)) HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Commuter Way & Soledad Cyn 08/02/2024
.FXWXUHZLWKRXW3URMHFWPM Synchro 11 Report

Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 2641 44 24 1163 108 83
Future Volume (veh/h) 2641 44 24 1163 108 83
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 2871 48 26 1264 104 104
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222222
Cap, veh/h 4066 1262 26 4296 175 131
Arrive On Green 0.80 0.80 0.01 0.84 0.10 0.08
Sat Flow, veh/h 5274 1585 1781 5274 1781 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 2871 48 26 1264 104 104
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1702 1585 1781 1702 1781 1585
Q Serve(g_s), s 34.6 0.8 1.9 6.9 7.4 8.5
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 34.6 0.8 1.9 6.9 7.4 8.5
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 4066 1262 26 4296 175 131
V/C Ratio(X) 0.71 0.04 0.98 0.29 0.60 0.79
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 4066 1262 216 4296 445 372
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.3 2.8 65.0 2.2 57.0 59.4
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.1 0.1 45.6 0.2 1.2 4.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 13.2 0.4 2.1 2.2 6.1 6.4
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 7.3 2.9 110.6 2.4 58.2 63.4
LnGrp LOS A A F A E E
Approach Vol, veh/h 2919 1290 208
Approach Delay, s/veh 7.2 4.6 60.8
Approach LOS A A E
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.0 109.1 115.1 16.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 6.0 6.0 6.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.5 69.0 89.0 31.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.9 36.6 8.9 10.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 31.0 19.4 0.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 9.0
HCM 6th LOS A
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. )XWXUHZLWKRXW3URMHFW30

3.d
Packet Pg. 164
Attachment: Gibson Traffic Analysis (Riverview (MC21-205)) HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Commuter Way & Soledad Cyn 08/05/2024

7.FXWXUHZLWK3URMHFWZLWK0LWLJDWLRQVAM Synchro 11 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 47 1362 48 28 2325 0 44 0 30 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 47 1362 48 28 2325 0 44 0 30 0 0 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 0 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 51 1480 52 30 2527 0 48 0 33
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222220202
Cap, veh/h 152 4296 1333 31 4540 0 174 0 56
Arrive On Green 0.83 0.84 0.84 0.02 0.89 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.04 Sat Flow, veh/h 128 5106 1585 1781 5274 0 3456 0 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 51 1480 52 30 2527 0 48 0 33
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 128 1702 1585 1781 1702 0 1728 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 20.6 8.6 0.7 2.2 14.3 0.0 1.8 0.0 2.7
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 28.6 8.6 0.7 2.2 14.3 0.0 1.8 0.0 2.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 152 4296 1333 31 4540 0 174 0 56 V/C Ratio(X) 0.33 0.34 0.04 0.96 0.56 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.59 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 152 4296 1333 216 4540 0 864 0 372 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.0 2.3 1.7 64.8 1.6 0.0 60.4 0.0 62.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 5.8 0.2 0.1 35.7 0.5 0.0 0.3 0.0 3.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 1.2 2.7 0.2 2.3 1.2 0.0 1.4 0.0 2.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 11.9 2.6 1.8 100.5 2.1 0.0 60.7 0.0 66.5 L n G r p L O S BAAFAAEAE
Approach Vol, veh/h 1583 2557 81
Approach Delay, s/veh 2.8 3.3 63.0
Approach LOS A A E
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.3 115.0 121.4 10.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 6.0 6.0 6.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.5 69.0 89.0 31.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.2 30.6 16.3 4.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 25.1 58.6 0.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 4.2
HCM 6th LOS A
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

User approved ignoring U-Turning movement.
)XWXUHZLWK3URMHFWZLWK0LWLJDW$0

3.d
Packet Pg. 165
Attachment: Gibson Traffic Analysis (Riverview (MC21-205)) HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Commuter Way & Soledad Cyn 08/05/2024

8.FXWXUHZLWK3URMHFWZLWK0LWLJDWLRQPM Synchro 11 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 33 2685 50 42 1718 0 126 0 95 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 33 2685 50 42 1718 0 126 0 95 0 0 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 0 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 36 2918 54 46 1867 0 137 0 103
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222220202
Cap, veh/h 235 3988 1238 53 4294 0 340 0 132
Arrive On Green 0.77 0.78 0.78 0.03 0.84 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.08 Sat Flow, veh/h 245 5106 1585 1781 5274 0 3456 0 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 36 2918 54 46 1867 0 137 0 103
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 245 1702 1585 1781 1702 0 1728 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.0 38.6 1.0 3.4 12.1 0.0 4.9 0.0 8.4
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 10.2 38.6 1.0 3.4 12.1 0.0 4.9 0.0 8.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 235 3988 1238 53 4294 0 340 0 132 V/C Ratio(X) 0.15 0.73 0.04 0.87 0.43 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.78 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 235 3988 1238 216 4294 0 864 0 372 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 5.5 7.4 3.3 63.8 2.6 0.0 55.9 0.0 59.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.4 1.2 0.1 14.7 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.0 3.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 0.6 15.3 0.5 3.1 3.8 0.0 3.9 0.0 6.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 6.9 8.6 3.3 78.5 3.0 0.0 56.1 0.0 63.1 L n G r p L O S AAAEAAEAE
Approach Vol, veh/h 3008 1913 240
Approach Delay, s/veh 8.5 4.8 59.1
Approach LOS A A E
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.9 107.1 115.0 17.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 6.0 6.0 6.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.5 69.0 89.0 31.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.4 40.6 14.1 10.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 27.6 38.6 0.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 9.5
HCM 6th LOS A
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

User approved ignoring U-Turning movement.
)XWXUHZLWK3URMHFWZLWK0LWLJDWLRQ30

3.d
Packet Pg. 166
Attachment: Gibson Traffic Analysis (Riverview (MC21-205)) HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Commuter Way & Soledad Cyn 08/05/2024

9.FXWXUHZLWK3URMHFWZLWK0LWLJDWLRQZLWK,QFUHDVHG7UDQVLW$0 Synchro 11 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 47 1362 75 39 2325 0 59 0 47 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 47 1362 75 39 2325 0 59 0 47 0 0 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 0 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 51 1480 82 42 2527 0 64 0 51
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222220202
Cap, veh/h 149 4183 1298 48 4474 0 218 0 76
Arrive On Green 0.80 0.82 0.82 0.03 0.88 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.05 Sat Flow, veh/h 128 5106 1585 1781 5274 0 3456 0 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 51 1480 82 42 2527 0 64 0 51
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 128 1702 1585 1781 1702 0 1728 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 22.8 9.7 1.3 3.1 16.0 0.0 2.3 0.0 4.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 31.3 9.7 1.3 3.1 16.0 0.0 2.3 0.0 4.2 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 149 4183 1298 48 4474 0 218 0 76 V/C Ratio(X) 0.34 0.35 0.06 0.88 0.56 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.67 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 149 4183 1298 216 4474 0 864 0 372 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 7.4 3.0 2.3 64.0 2.0 0.0 59.0 0.0 61.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 6.2 0.2 0.1 17.3 0.5 0.0 0.3 0.0 3.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 1.3 3.7 0.5 2.9 2.7 0.0 1.9 0.0 3.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 13.6 3.3 2.4 81.3 2.5 0.0 59.3 0.0 65.5 L n G r p L O S BAAFAAEAE
Approach Vol, veh/h 1613 2569 115
Approach Delay, s/veh 3.6 3.8 62.1
Approach LOS A A E
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.5 112.1 119.7 12.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 6.0 6.0 6.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.5 69.0 89.0 31.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.1 33.3 18.0 6.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 24.2 57.5 0.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 5.3
HCM 6th LOS A
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

User approved ignoring U-Turning movement.

)XWXUHZLWK3URMHFWZLWK0LWLJDWLRQZLWK,QFUHDVHG7UDQVLW$0

3.d
Packet Pg. 167
Attachment: Gibson Traffic Analysis (Riverview (MC21-205)) HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary
1: Commuter Way & Soledad Cyn 08/05/2024

10.FXWXUHZLWK3URMHFWZLWK0LWLJDWLRQZLWK,QFUHDVHG7UDQVLWPM Synchro 11 Report

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 33 2685 106 54 1718 0 192 0 120 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 33 2685 106 54 1718 0 192 0 120 0 0 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 0 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 36 2918 115 59 1867 0 209 0 130
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 P e r c e n t H e a v y V e h , % 222220202
Cap, veh/h 227 3846 1194 69 4199 0 404 0 161
Arrive On Green 0.74 0.75 0.75 0.04 0.82 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.10 Sat Flow, veh/h 245 5106 1585 1781 5274 0 3456 0 1585
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 36 2918 115 59 1867 0 209 0 130
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 245 1702 1585 1781 1702 0 1728 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.7 43.4 2.5 4.3 13.5 0.0 7.5 0.0 10.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 11.1 43.4 2.5 4.3 13.5 0.0 7.5 0.0 10.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 227 3846 1194 69 4199 0 404 0 161 V/C Ratio(X) 0.16 0.76 0.10 0.85 0.44 0.00 0.52 0.00 0.81 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 227 3846 1194 216 4199 0 864 0 372 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.7 9.4 4.3 63.0 3.3 0.0 54.8 0.0 58.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.5 1.5 0.2 10.2 0.3 0.0 0.4 0.0 3.6 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 0.7 18.2 1.3 3.8 5.1 0.0 5.9 0.0 7.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 8.2 10.8 4.5 73.3 3.6 0.0 55.2 0.0 61.6 L n G r p L O S ABAEAAEAE
Approach Vol, veh/h 3069 1926 339
Approach Delay, s/veh 10.6 5.8 57.6
Approach LOS B A E
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.1 103.4 112.6 19.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 6.0 6.0 6.0
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.5 69.0 89.0 31.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.3 45.4 15.5 12.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 23.0 38.3 0.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 11.8
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.

User approved ignoring U-Turning movement.
)XWXUHZLWK3URMHFWZLWK0LWLJDWLRQZLWK,QFUHDVHG7UDQVLW30

3.d
Packet Pg. 168
Attachment: Gibson Traffic Analysis (Riverview (MC21-205))

REVISED RIVERVIEW MIXED-USE RESIDENTIAL AND

MANUFACTURING/INDUSTRIAL PROJECT

PRELIMINARY TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM) PROGRAM

May 30, 2024
Revised June 14, 2024

Riverview Mixed-Use Project (Project) is mixed-use development consisting of manufacturing/industrial and residential uses located adjacent to the Santa Clarita Metrolink Station. This development would promote non-auto travel through design and orientation that is pedestrian-friendly and facilitates transit use.

The TDM Program outlined below represents a set of strategies for the Project that encourage Project residents, employees, and visitors to reduce vehicular traffic on the street and freeway system, particularly during the most congested ti me periods of the day, by promoting non-auto travel. The TDM Program includes TDM strategies to be implemented with occupation of the Project.

As per the City of Santa Clarita standards, this Preliminary TDM Program is submitted as part of the City’s Application Process. If the Project is approved, a more detailed TDM Program tailored to the approved Project will be prepared for City approval.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The Project Site is located on the south side of Soledad Canyon Road on the site of the former Saugus Raceway.

Original Project

The Original Project consisted of 318 dwelling units, including several configurations of both attached and detached single family units, and a commercial movie and television studio with six sound stages totaling approximately 66,000 square feet (sf) of stages and supporting production offices on the western portion of the Project Site.

3.e
Packet Pg. 169
Attachment: TDM (Riverview (MC21-205))

The residential portion of the Project would provide a total of 839 parking spaces, while the studio component would provide 370 automobile spaces plus 60 spaces for production and delivery trucks, approximately 50 of which would be provided in marked spaces within the parking lots and 10 spaces of which would be provided in base camps immediately adjacent to the stages.

Revised Project

The Revised Project retains all the residential components of the Original Project and changes the studio component to a manufacturing/industrial building located on the western portion of the Project Site (the site of the previously proposed studio).

The manufacturing building will be a single building containing 106,790 sf of manufacturing/industrial space and 10,000 sf of ancillary office space and will provide 203 employee and visitor automobile parking spaces (inc luding electric vehicle spaces) and parking spaces for truck trailers.

PROJECT ACCESS

Residential access remains as proposed in the Original Project.

The manufacturing building would be accessed via a main driveway (Main Manufacturing Driveway) at the northeast corner of the manufacturing site and a minor right-turn in-and-out driveway at the northwest corner of the site. The developer has requested that the Main Manufacturing Driveway be controlled by a traffic signal.

All Project driveways would be served by Soledad Canyon Road.

TDM STRATEGIES FOR RIVERVIEW MIXED-USE PROJECT

The following TDM strategies will be implemented under the TDM Program:

3.e
Packet Pg. 170
Attachment: TDM (Riverview (MC21-205))

x Flexible Work Schedules and Telecommuting Programs
x Bicycle Amenities (Bicycle Racks, Lockers, Showers, etc.) x Rideshare Services
x Bikeshare Services
x Carpool/Vanpool Programs and Support
x Transportation Information Center (TIC)
x Guaranteed Ride Home (GRH) program
x Tax Benefits for Transit Users
x Preferential Parking Locations for high occupancy vehicles (HOV) x Join an Existing Transportation Management Association

Details on each of these strategies are presented in the following pages.

Flexible Work Schedules and Telecommuting Programs

The Riverview Mixed-Use Project will offer residents and employees flexible work arrangements including telecommuting (work from home), flextime hours (variable shift start and end times), and flexible work schedules (varying the days worked each week).

Telecommuting and flexible/alternative work schedules can help reduce peak hour traffic generation and can consist of any combination of the following work schedules:

x Flextime . This means that employees are allowed some flexibility in their daily work schedules. Flextime employees can select one start time and end time and keep it the same every day, change their schedule at so me logical interval depending on business needs and management approval, or vary their schedule daily if the job requires/allows.

x Telecommuting. Support and utilize telecommuting for any employees that can adequately perform their jobs while working away from the office. Telecommuting is a work arrangement where employees, for a portion of their arranged work hours, perform their regular responsibilities away from their primary business location. The remote location is either the employee’s residence or an approved remote office location.

x Remote Work. Support and utilize remote work arrangements for any employees that can adequately perform their jobs in a remote setting. Remote work employees will perform their full-time work responsibilities exclusively from a location outside of their primary work site – usually their home or a satellite office. This arrangement differs from telecommuting in that it requires the creation of infrastructure supports that are independent from an on- site office.

3.e
Packet Pg. 171
Attachment: TDM (Riverview (MC21-205))

Bicycle Amenities (Bike Racks, Lockers, Showers, etc.)

Non-motorized transportation includes walking and bicycling. These modes provide both recreation and transportation, although users may consider a particular trip to serve both objectives. For example, some people will choose to walk or bicycle rather than drive because they enjoy the activity, although it takes longer.

Support bicycling through the provision of bike storage facilities throughout the Project. In addition, employees who walk or bike to work ma y use shower facilities available on the lot.

Shower facilities and locker rooms must be provided for employees.

Rideshare Services

Offer an online ride matching service for all of its employees through RideLinks, Inc or similar service.

Bikeshare Services

Offer a location or multiple locations to install a third-party bike-share docking station that can provide short-term rental bikes to residents or employees of the Project.

Carpool/Vanpool Programs and Support

Offer priority carpool/vanpool parking locations for registered carpools as an incentive to form and continue to participate in carpools.

3.e
Packet Pg. 172
Attachment: TDM (Riverview (MC21-205))

Transportation Information Center (TIC)

A TIC is a centrally-located commuter information center where the Project employees and residents can obtain information regarding commute programs, and individuals can obtain real-time information for planning travel without using an automobile. A TIC provides orientation for new employees and residents as well as providing information about transit schedules, commute planning, rideshare, telecommuting, bicycle and pedestrian plans, and the flex car program.

A virtual TIC, providing every employee and resident access to commuter information through an online portal is acceptable.

Guaranteed Ride Home (GRH) Program

GRH is typically a Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) service managed by a Transportation Management Association. A typical policy would include the following:

x Eligibility: The program covers all employees participating in the carpool/vanpool program or using transit to/from the Project.
x Trips eligible for the program: The program is available for employees who have an emergency situation that requires them to leave work early. It also covers employees who have to work unexpected overtime, thus leaving them without transportation home. x Maximum Allotment: The program typically limits each employee to 2-3 GRH per year.

Tax Benefits for Transit Users

Employees who use mass transit to commute to work are able to take advantage of a program that allows them to pay for transit services with pre-tax dollars.

3.e
Packet Pg. 173
Attachment: TDM (Riverview (MC21-205))

Preferential Parking Locations for HOV

Preferential parking location involves designation of the most convenient locations in employee parking areas for HOV such as carpools and vanpools. Having preferential facilities can encourage employees to use higher-occupancy modes of travel, such as transit, carpools, and vanpools.

Transportation Management Association (TMA)

Join a TMA. The goal of the TMA is to promote awareness of the available TDM strategies and create Transportation Management Plans (TMPs) for the residents, employees, and visitors of both the Project and a broader area. Specific components of the TMA would include:

x Rideshare matching
x Administrative support for formation of vanpools and/or carpools x Bike and walk to work promotions
x Emergency ride home program
x TIC support

Riverview Residential would participate in the TMA by paying dues to the organization and committing annual dues for 10 years to get the TMA started on a strong financial footing.

Preliminary Riverview Mixed-Use Development
TDM Program

Accepted by:

_______________________________
City of Santa Clarita

_______________________________
Date

3.e
Packet Pg. 174
Attachment: TDM (Riverview (MC21-205))

TDM PROGRAM EFFECTIVENESS

The City of Santa Clarita has requested an estimate of the overall effectiveness of the Transportation Demand Management Program as a means to justify the 20% parking reduction associated with the Jobs Creation Overlay Zone (JCOZ).

While most of the research into TDM Program effectiveness is aimed at documenting the potential reduction in Project automobile trips, it is possible to relate that trip reduction to the resulting reduction in parking demand for the Project Site.

The primary research into TDM effectiveness was conducted in 2010 by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) and this research has been updated and expanded as the importance of the measurement of vehicle miles travelled (VMT) has increased as a result of its adoption into the California Environment Quality Act (CEQA) through Senate Bill 325.

CAPCOA and the more recent VMT research have estimated the potential effectiveness of various TDM and VMT strategies and have suggested ways to calculate the likely effectiveness of each of these strategies for a particular development project.

Table 1 summarizes the effectiveness of the TDM Programs included in the Riverview Mixed-Use Project. CAPCOA research suggests that the TDM strategies included in the Riverview TDM Program could reduce the inbound daily trips by up to approximately 44%. To be conservative, estimates less than the maximum levels were applied to the Riverview Project in the strategy areas of Parking Reduction, Carpool, Increased Transit, and Education/Support. These reductions resulted in an estimated TDM effectiveness for the Riverview TDM Program that would yield a

31.5% reduction in inbound daily trips to the manufacturing/industrial portion of the Project Site.

The effect of this TDM Program would mean that the parking demand at the manufacturing/industrial portion of the site could be approximately 30% less than a similar project without a TDM Program in a location not near a rail transit station.

The national and state research shows that the 20% reduction in parking supply allowed by the JCOZ is supportable by the Project’s location and the TDM Program associated with the Riverview Mixed-Use Project.

June 14, 2024

3.e
Packet Pg. 175
Attachment: TDM (Riverview (MC21-205))
Table 1
Transportation Demand ManagôıôIJťϙ„ŘĺČŘÍıϙ(ƯôèťĖŽôIJôŜŜ

TDM Program Category
C A P C O A RĖŽôŘŽĖôſϙPŘĺČŘÍıϙ(ƯôèťĖŽôIJôŜŜ
Maximum Daily Inbound Parking
(ƯôèťĖŽôIJôŜŜ (1) “ŘĖŕϙ‡ôîŪèťĖĺIJ (1) "ôıÍIJîϙ‡ôîŪèťĖĺIJϙ Parking Programs

x ͑͏҇ϙ„ÍŘħĖIJČϙ‡ôîŪèťĖĺIJ 12.5% 10% 10%
x Preferential Parking Locations for HOVs
(High Occupancy Vehicles)

Mode Shift and Rideshare Programs
x Rideshare Services 0.7% 0.5% 0% x Bikeshare Services 0.25% 0.25% 0.25% x Carpool/Vanpool Programs and Support 15% 10% 8.4% x Increased Transit Usage (Travel Behavior Change) 8% 5% 5% x Bicycle Amenities (Bicycle Racks, Lockers, Showers, etc.) 1.25% 1.25% 1.25% x Pedestrian Connection to Transit Station 2% 2% 2% x Guaranteed Ride Home (GRH) program
x Tax Benefits for Transit Users

(îŪèÍťĖĺIJϙÍIJîϙ‹ŪŕŕĺŘťϙ„ŘĺČŘÍıŜ
x Flexible Work Schedules and Telecommuting Programs 4% 2.5% 2% x Transportation Information Center (TIC)
x Join an Existing Transportation Management Association TOTAL 43.7% 31.5% 28.9%
(1) SOURCE: A. “ †ŪÍIJťĖċƅĖIJČϙ@ŘôôIJēĺŪŜôϙ@ÍŜϙaĖťĖČÍťĖĺIJϙaôÍŜŪŘôŜ”Ϡϙ ÍīĖċĺŘIJĖÍϙ
ĖŘϙ„ĺīīŪťĖĺIJϙ
ĺIJťŘĺīϙiƯĖèôŘŜϙ
ŜŜĺèĖÍťĖĺIJϙϼCAPCOA),
2010
B. ““"aϙ‹ťŘÍťôČĖôŜϙĖIJϙťēô
Ėťƅϙĺċϙ[ĺŜϙ
IJČôīôŜϙ«ôēĖèīôϙaĖīôŜϙ“ŘÍŽôīϙ
ÍīèŪīÍťĺŘϠϙ[ĺŜϙ
IJČôīôŜϙ"ôŕÍŘťıôIJťϙĺċϙ“ŘÍIJŜŕĺ؝͝ĖĺIJ” ,
>ôēŘϙЭϙ„ôôŘŜϠϙ͑͏͐͘

3.e
Packet Pg. 176
Attachment: TDM (Riverview (MC21-205))
From: Emily Rubalcava
To: Justin Sauder
Subject: FW: RIVERVIEW (MASTER CASE 21-205)
Date: Tuesday, August 13, 2024 2:08:29 PM
Attachments: image001.png
See below from Planning inbox
From: Andrea Mason <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2024 12:45 PM
To: PLANNING <[email protected]>
Subject: RIVERVIEW (MASTER CASE 21-205)
CITY WARNING: This email was sent from an external server. Use caution clicking links or opening attachments.

Hello,
Looking for additional details for a planning and zoning project: RIVERVIEW (MASTER CASE 21-205)
What is the outcome/status of the municipal approvals? What is the next step for this applicant.

Any information would be greatly appreciated. Please feel free to either call or email me at your earliest convenience.
6732738
Andrea Mason
Sr. Content Specialist
p: 770-209-3811

3.f
Packet Pg. 177
Attachment: Email Correspondence (Riverview (MC21-205)) From: Emily Rubalcava
To: Justin Sauder
Subject: FW: Spectrum News reported that the Saugus Speedway Property and Swap Meet property, might soon be developed
Date: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 9:46:26 AM
Forward from our Planning inbox. Thanks!

From: Lance Johannsen <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, August 23, 2024 1:09 PM
To: PLANNING <[email protected]>
Subject: Spectrum News reported that the Saugus Speedway Property and Swap Meet property, might soon be developed

CITY WARNING: This email was sent from an external server. Use caution clicking links or opening attachments.

Why doesn't CA and in this case, Santa Clarita, get serious about our housing shortage? 28 acres of vacant land, could easily support between 500 and 700 multi units of apartments or condos. The units could be considerably more affordable price than what is being suggested:

Less than 200 units (both detached and attached). The proposal suggested, will make these units pricees, well beyond the reach of most entry-level home buyers. Gerald Lance Johannsen, Carlsbad, CA

3.f
Packet Pg. 178
Attachment: Email Correspondence (Riverview (MC21-205)) From: Emily Rubalcava
To: Justin Sauder
Subject: FW: Riverview (Saugus Speedway)
Date: Tuesday, September 10, 2024 10:25:14 AM
See below. Could you respond?

From: Jim Thurman <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2024 10:05 AM
To: PLANNING <[email protected]>
Subject: Riverview (Saugus Speedway)

CITY WARNING: This email was sent from an external server. Use caution clicking links or opening attachments.

Hi,

It's a bit late in the process, but has the city considered buying this property to make it a park, open space and heritage site? The swap meet, and other activities could continue. While it isn't likely to be viable as a race track any longer, with the impending closure of Irwindale Speedway, that is a possibility as well (sound walls and foliage buffers could be constructed). It is a community resource and asset that once gone, isn't coming back. It is something unique, and historic.

While auto racing isn't as popular as it once was, the only reason racing ended at the speedway was because the Bonelli family decided to end it.

Another plan for keeping the track. Asheville Speedway in Asheville, North Carolina was closed, and converted into a park with the race track used for cycling, roller skating and running/jogging. The same could be done with the Saugus Speedway.

Sincerely,
Jim Thurman

3.f
Packet Pg. 179
Attachment: Email Correspondence (Riverview (MC21-205))