Agenda packet — Vallejo City Council, April 30, 2024 (part 1 of 3)

Hybrid Options are available for members of the public to participate. To participate remotely:

https://ZoomRegular.CityofVallejo.net
Option to join by phone:

Dial (669) 900-6833
Enter Meeting ID: 914 0075 0676#
Press *9 to digitally raise your hand from the phone
For additional instructions on how to speak during public comment, please visit, www.cityofvallejo.net/publiccomment

CALL AND NOTICE OF

SPECIAL MEETING
AT 5:30 PM

OF THE VALLEJO CITY COUNCIL
APRIL 30, 2024

COUNCIL CHAMBERS
555 Santa Clara Street, Vallejo, California

NOTICE: Members of the Public will be able to participate in-person or remotely via Zoom.

City Hall and the Council Chambers will be open to members of the public 30 minutes prior to the start of the meeting.

PUBLIC COMMENT: Members of the Public may provide public comments during the City Council Meeting in person or via ZOOM (https://ZoomRegular.Cityofvallejo.net), or via phone, by dialing (669)
900-6833.

For additional instructions on how to speak remotely during public comment, please visit, www.cityofvallejo.net/publiccomment
VIEW THE MEETING:

There are four different ways you can view this public meeting:
• In Person
• Watch Vallejo local channel 28
• Stream from the City website: www.cityofvallejo.net/Streaming • Join the Zoom webinar:https://ZoomRegular.Cityofvallejo.net

Vallejo City Council Chambers ADA compliant. Devices for the hearing impaired are available from the City Clerk. Requests for disability related modifications or accommodations, aids or services may be made by a person with a disability to the City Clerk's office no less than 72 hours prior to the meeting as required by Section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the federal rules and regulations adopted in implementation thereof.

Hybrid Options are available for members of the public to participate. To participate remotely:

https://ZoomRegular.CityofVallejo.net
Option to join by phone:

TO THE MEMBERS OF THE VALLEJO CITY COUNCIL:

You are hereby notified that I do hereby call the Vallejo City Council in special session to consider only the matters stated on the agenda listed below.

NOTICE: Members of the public shall have the opportunity to address the City Council concerning any item listed on the agenda before or during consideration of that item. No other items may be discussed at this special meeting.

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ROLL CALL

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

4. REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION

5. ACTION CALENDAR
NOTICE: Members of the public wishing to address the Council on Action Calendar Items may do so in person by signing in to the Public Speaker's kiosk located in the back of the Council Chambers or via ZOOM (https://ZoomRegular.Cityofvallejo.net), or via phone, by dialing (669) 900-6833. Enter Meeting ID: 914 0075 0676#. Press *9 to digitally raise your hand from the phone. Press *6 to unmute/mute. For additional instructions on how to speak remotely during public comment, please visit, www.cityofvallejo.net/publiccomment. Each speaker is limited to five minutes pursuant to Vallejo Municipal Code Section 2.02.420 or as approved and announced by the Mayor. In person speakers will be recognized first.

A. CONSIDER THE WHOLE OF THE RECORD AND POSSIBLE ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION DENYING AN APPEAL (APP24-0001) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S APPROVAL, AND GRANTING WITH CONDITIONS, MAJOR USE PERMIT (UP22-0008) TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF A NEW
PUBLIC CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL WITH AN ENROLLMENT OF UP TO 400 STUDENTS IN AN EXISTING TWO-STORY BUILDING AT 241-255
GEORGIA STREET (APN:0055-170-390) AFTER FINDING THE PROJECT

CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER

THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (CLASS 32: IN-FILL PROJECTS).

Recommendation: After reviewing staff responses to Council questions, and responses to new issues brought up by the appellants at the meeting of April 23, 2024, consider the whole of the record and adopt a Resolution denying Appeal (APP) #24-0001, and granting approval with conditions Major Use Permit (UP) #22-0008 to allow the operation of a new public charter high school with an enrollment of up to 400 students in an existing two-story building at 241-255 Georgia Street (APN:0055-170-390) after finding the project Hybrid Options are available for members of the public to participate. To participate remotely:

https://ZoomRegular.CityofVallejo.net
Option to join by phone:

categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (CLASS 32: In-Fill Projects).

Contact: Christina Ratcliffe, AICP,
[email protected] & Development Services Director [email protected]

6. ADJOURNMENT

Dated: Monday, April 29, 2024

Robert H. McConnell, Mayor

I, Dawn Abrahamson, City Clerk, do herby certify that I have caused a true copy of the above notice and agenda to be delivered to , at the time and in the manner prescribed by law and that this agenda was posted at City Hall, 555 Santa Clara Street, CA at 5:30 p.m., Monday, April 29, 2024.

Dated: Monday, April 29, 2024

Dawn G. Abrahamson, City Clerk

ACTION ITEM 5.A.

DATE: April 30, 2024
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Christina Ratcliffe, AICP
Planning and Development Services Director
SUBJECT: CONSIDER THE WHOLE OF THE RECORD AND POSSIBLE ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION DENYING AN APPEAL (APP24-0001) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S APPROVAL, AND GRANTING WITH CONDITIONS, MAJOR USE PERMIT (UP22-0008) TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF A NEW PUBLIC CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL WITH AN ENROLLMENT OF UP TO 400 STUDENTS IN AN EXISTING TWO-STORY BUILDING AT 241-255 GEORGIA STREET (APN:0055-170-390) AFTER

FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL

REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (CLASS 32: IN-FILL PROJECTS).

RECOMMENDATION
After reviewing staff responses to Council questions, and responses to new issues brought up by the appellants at the meeting of April 23, 2024, consider the whole of the record and adopt a Resolution denying Appeal (APP) #24-0001, and granting approval with conditions Major Use Permit (UP) #22-0008 to allow the operation of a new public charter high school with an enrollment of up to 400 students in an existing two-story building at 241-255 Georgia Street (APN:0055-170-390) after finding the project categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (CLASS 32: In-Fill Projects).

REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION
The appeal is without merit, and the findings can be made to approve the Use Permit. Staff recommends that the City Council deny the appeal and adopt findings approving the Major Use Permit after determining that the project is categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (Class 32: In-Fill Projects).

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
LEVINE ACT: Government Code 84308
This item is subject to the Levine Act. City elected and appointed officials, including candidates for City elected office, (City Officers) who have received a contribution of more than $250 within 12 months prior from a party, participant, or their representatives involved in this proceeding may do either of the following: (1) disclose the contribution on the record and recuse themselves from this proceeding; OR (2) return the portion of the contribution that exceeds $250 within 30 days from the time the elected official knew or should have known about the contribution and participate in the proceeding.

All parties, participants, and their representatives must disclose on the record of this proceeding any contribution of more than $250 made to the City Officers, such as the Mayor and/or Councilmembers, within 12 months prior to the date of the proceeding. City Officers are prohibited from accepting, soliciting, or directing a contribution of more than $250 from a party, participant, or their representatives during a proceeding and for 12 months following the date a final decision is rendered.

Date: April 30, 2024
Subject: CONSIDER THE WHOLE OF THE RECORD AND POSSIBLE ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION DENYING AN APPEAL (APP24-0001) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S APPROVAL, AND GRANTING WITH CONDITIONS, MAJOR USE PERMIT (UP22-0008) TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF A NEW PUBLIC CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL WITH AN ENROLLMENT OF UP TO 400 STUDENTS IN AN EXISTING TWO-STORY BUILDING AT 241-255 GEORGIA STREET (APN:0055-170- 390) AFTER FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (CLASS 32: IN-FILL PROJECTS).

Page 2 ends

STANDARD OF REVIEW

Section 16.602.14.F and G of the Vallejo Municipal Code provides that the Council shall use the same standards for review required for the original decision. Council review of an appeal is De Novo, so the Council may, based upon all evidence, approve, deny or modify the Planning Commission action.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION

On March 18, 2024, after a duly noticed public hearing, the Planning Commission approved Major Use Permit (UP) #22-0008 to allow the operation of a new public charter high school with an enrollment of up to 400 students in an existing building at 241-255 Georgia Street. On March 28, 2024, Appellants Paul L. and Donna Beeman, filed a timely appeal.

Council meeting of April 23, 2024

At the Council meeting of April 23, 2024, Council received presentations from staff, the appellant and the applicant on the appeal of Major Use Permit (UP) #22-0008 to allow the operation of a new public charter high school with an enrollment of up to 400 students in an existing two-story building at 241-255 Georgia Street.

The Mayor opened the public hearing and Council received testimony on the item from approximately 48 members of the community. The Mayor closed the public hearing. The Council voted unanimously to continue discussion and decision on the item to April 30, 2024.Councilmembers have since sent questions to staff regarding the project. This supplemental report responds to the Councilmembers’ questions and addresses issues that were raised by the appellants at the public hearing that were not included in their original appeal.

Questions from Councilmembers

Following are the written questions received from Councilmembers after the hearing on April 23, 2024. Some questions were asked by more than one Councilmember, and have been combined and paraphrased. Related questions have been grouped together. Council questions are in italic font, staff responses are in upright font.

1. Did Elite look at other locations for their high school? Response: The attached list of sites evaluated by the applicant was provided to staff.

2.Why can’t Elite expand at their current site; it has lots of acreage? Response: The applicant informs staff that the current location is leased, and they therefore cannot expand.

3. [This is a question from a community member passed on by a Councilmember]: “Within a 500- foot radius of a school or park. The distance between a proposed Adult Use and the school or park shall be measured from the nearest exterior wall of the facility housing the Adult Use or proposed Adult Use to the nearest property line which includes a sensitive land use, along a straight line extended between the 2 points. From the Date: April 30, 2024
Subject: CONSIDER THE WHOLE OF THE RECORD AND POSSIBLE ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION DENYING AN APPEAL (APP24-0001) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S APPROVAL, AND GRANTING WITH CONDITIONS, MAJOR USE PERMIT (UP22-0008) TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF A NEW PUBLIC CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL WITH AN ENROLLMENT OF UP TO 400 STUDENTS IN AN EXISTING TWO-STORY BUILDING AT 241-255 GEORGIA STREET (APN:0055-170- 390) AFTER FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (CLASS 32: IN-FILL PROJECTS).

Page 3 ends

proposed location of the school at 255 Georgia St, Bambino's is only 154 feet away. Provisions is only 495 feet away. Would they loose their liquor licenses? And the Townhouse is only 528 feet away. Would their liquor license be up for debate?”
Response: The questioner appears to be conflating Adult Use regulations in the Vallejo Municipal Code (VMC) with those governing a liquor license. Per 16.701.02, Adult Business shall mean any one or more of the following:
• Adult Arcade
• Adult Bookstore
• Adult Cabaret
• Adult Hotel/Motel
• Adult Motion Picture Theater
• Adult Modeling Studio
• Adult retail store
(Complete definitions of these uses are omitted, but can be found in VMC 16.701.02) Adult uses listed above, if any application were submitted, would require a Major Use Permit to in the Downtown Mixed Use (DMX) zone and are not permitted within 500-feet of a school. The sale of beer, wine or liquor is not considered an Adult Use in the VMC. The addition of a new school within the census tract would not affect existing liquor licenses.

4. Provide a complete explanation of how liquor licenses will be processed if the school is approved. Current businesses when their license expires, as well as the process that new business applicants will have to go through in order to obtain a license to sell liquor. Will this school, if approved, have ANY input on whether licenses will be renewed or issued new?
Response: Approval of the high school would not change how the City would process a new request for an “on-sale” or “off-sale” alcoholic beverage license within the census tract. Vallejo Municipal Code Chapter

16.305 imposes a Use Permit requirement for off-site and on-site consumption unless the sale or service is associated with a bona fide eating place. Several conditions, and a finding of Public Convenience or Necessity (PCN), which involves weighing the following factors is necessary:

1. Special or unusual circumstances that justify a new establishment or license including, but not limited to, providing a service that existing alcohol sales uses do not offer;

2. Evidence that the proposed outlet needs the license in order to operate profitably;

3. If the business has a license at a different location and is relocating within the same census tract;

4. Consistency of the proposed use with the general plan and any applicable specific plan or planned development approval and evidence that the proposed retail outlet will not have impacts detrimental to development or people living or working in the immediate surrounding neighborhood;

5. Proximity of other alcohol retail outlets, which would serve the needs of prospective patrons; Date: April 30, 2024
Subject: CONSIDER THE WHOLE OF THE RECORD AND POSSIBLE ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION DENYING AN APPEAL (APP24-0001) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S APPROVAL, AND GRANTING WITH CONDITIONS, MAJOR USE PERMIT (UP22-0008) TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF A NEW PUBLIC CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL WITH AN ENROLLMENT OF UP TO 400 STUDENTS IN AN EXISTING TWO-STORY BUILDING AT 241-255 GEORGIA STREET (APN:0055-170- 390) AFTER FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (CLASS 32: IN-FILL PROJECTS).

Page 4 ends

6. Proximity of the proposed site to a residential neighborhood or other sensitive land use such as elementary, secondary and high schools, transitional housing, or facilities providing services to homeless persons;

7. Whether the economic benefit of the proposed outlet to the district and/or the city will outweigh any possible negative impacts because the proposed use will attract patrons to the area and positively effect adjacent businesses by furthering a city objective, such as the creation and enhancement of entertain and craft beverage areas; and;

8. Whether there is a history of alcohol-related crimes or calls for police service for the area where the use is proposed.

This is a Director-level or Planning Commission decision, unless appealed to City Coiuncil.

Staff also discussed this requirement in the Council Staff Report of April 23, 2024 and noted the fact that there are two existing educational uses already documented in close proximity of the project site. These already existing uses would need to be considered for a PCN finding in this census tract even if the proposed project were approved. Thus, the approval of the high school in the Census Tract would not change how the City would process any new request for an “on-sale” or “off-sale” alcoholic beverage license.

Staff notes that there are no current applications for new alcohol licenses in this census district and that it would be inappropriate to consider a speculative use that may or may not occur.

5. If they are initially leasing the building, wouldn’t the owner continue to pay the property tax based on commercial use and not educational/non profit use since they still own it, not Elite? Response: Per the applicant, Elite Public Schools can transfer their tax exempt status to the property when leasing.

6. Was the traffic study paid by city or Elite?
Response: As with other studies prepared in the evaluation of discretionary permits, the City chooses a consultant and enters into an agreement with that consultant. The City requires the applicant (Elite in this case) to enter into a reimbursement agreement that covers the cost of the study, plus 20% administration fee.

The City directs the consultant, not the applicant.

7. Elite claims that this building provides 80sqft /student, instead of 20 sqft, 34,000/400= 80. Isn’t the requirement 90sqft?
Response: There are no square footage requirements for school facilities that are applicable to charter schools, including in the California Education Code or the Building Code, or the California Code of Regulations. There is 22,990 square feet of space on the ground floor, which would allow up to 267 students on the first floor, accommodating the initial phase of the project. When Phase 2 is implemented, adding the 11,860 square feet on the second floor increasing total square footage to 34,850. With the second floor, the proposed 400 students would have sufficient space under California Code.

Staff notes that the applicant submitted a letter on April 26, 2024 offering additional Conditions of Approval, Date: April 30, 2024
Subject: CONSIDER THE WHOLE OF THE RECORD AND POSSIBLE ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION DENYING AN APPEAL (APP24-0001) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S APPROVAL, AND GRANTING WITH CONDITIONS, MAJOR USE PERMIT (UP22-0008) TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF A NEW PUBLIC CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL WITH AN ENROLLMENT OF UP TO 400 STUDENTS IN AN EXISTING TWO-STORY BUILDING AT 241-255 GEORGIA STREET (APN:0055-170- 390) AFTER FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (CLASS 32: IN-FILL PROJECTS).

Page 5 ends

one of which states:

The use permit allows a maximum of 400 students. The phasing for the school shall be as follows. The phasing begins on the first academic school year that the school is in op eration at this site.

YEAR Two Three Four
Student
Enrollment
One

200

260 315 400

This has been added as a Condition of Approval.

8. Please discuss the sequence of events/changes to the Downtown specific plan in 2021.There is no mention of a school/learning center, right?
Response: The Downtown Vallejo Specific Plan (DVSP) has always allowed high schools as a use within the Georgia Corridor, which is located in the Arts and Entertainment (A&E) District. In 2005, when the DVSP was first adopted, the use was permitted by right except on the ground floor. In 2008, the DVSP was modified to allow schools in the Georgia Street Corridor with a Minor Use Permit and dropped the requirement that these uses be located above the ground floor. The 2021 Zoning Code Project eliminated the land use regulations from the Specific Plan and incorporated them into the new Zoning Ordinance. Land uses in the Downtown Vallejo Specific Plan area are now regulated under the Downtown-Mixed Use (DMX) zoning designation. The DMX zoning designation permits a high school of over 10,000 SF with a major use permit.

Staff has attached excerpts of the old Use Tables from the DVSP from 2005 and 2008 as well as an excerpt from the current Zoning Code Use Table for reference.

9. Traffic Study. I want more details on what was reviewed. I cannot believe that adding 600+ cars per day on that block will not cause choke points for City Hall, JFK Library, Housing Authority etc. not to mention the businesses near the area. Residents will not want to go in the area during school hours. I know that I will not go near the Charter school on Valle Vista near the post office because traffic is backed up for an hour around start and end time of school. Also, parents park all over the street, including blocking driveways and no parking areas so their kids don't have to walk. I get complaints from constituents all the time about traffic from that school so I am certain this new school would be the same.

Response: Fehr and Peers, the consultant who performed the traffic analysis for this project, has prepared a memo (attached) to answer these specific questions. The consultant will also be available at the hearing to provide an overview of the Traffic Impact Analysis and answer any questions.

The following is added as a Condition of Approval:
"Prior to the issuance of any permits, the Applicant shall prepare and submit for approval to the City’s Traffic Engineering Division, a proposed Parking and Circulation Plan, which will describe in detail: proposed hours, days of operation, staffing, permanent and temporary signage, methods of dissemination/distribution of information, enforcement mechanisms, and proposed operational procedures for implementing the pedestrian, Date: April 30, 2024
Subject: CONSIDER THE WHOLE OF THE RECORD AND POSSIBLE ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION DENYING AN APPEAL (APP24-0001) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S APPROVAL, AND GRANTING WITH CONDITIONS, MAJOR USE PERMIT (UP22-0008) TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF A NEW PUBLIC CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL WITH AN ENROLLMENT OF UP TO 400 STUDENTS IN AN EXISTING TWO-STORY BUILDING AT 241-255 GEORGIA STREET (APN:0055-170- 390) AFTER FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (CLASS 32: IN-FILL PROJECTS).

Page 6 ends

bicycles and vehicular circulation/parking noted in the plan. At least two copies of the approved plan shall be provided to the City Traffic Engineering and Planning Divisions to be retained as a Public Record and to ensure future enforcement of the Major Use Permit Conditions of Approval. Violations of City approved Conditions of Approvals may result in future Use Permit revocation actions.The required plan shall:
a. Direct parents/guardians to the Georgia Street loading/unloading zone when dropping off or picking up their students.
b. Require that staff, students, and visitors will be responsible for paying for their parking spots in the City- owned and publicly available parking within the surrounding area. c. Identify vehicles regularly parked in the schools loading zone that need to be ticketed and towed by the City and a mechanism to regularly share this information with Vallejo Police Department and Public Works d. Detail how (School) Staff will be stationed at unique locations at the loading zones and meet vehicles at the curb to help direct drivers entering/exiting the loading areas. At least six staff members should be stationed on Georgia Street and three on Sacramento Street. At least one staff member should be stationed at the southwest corner of Georgia Street/Sacramento Street to ensure vehicles are not blocking the intersection. e. Detail the schedule for staff to be stationed at the loading zones at least one hour before the first morning bell and stay approximately 10 minutes after the start of school. In the afternoon, staff should be stationed at the loading zones at least 10 minutes before the last afternoon bell and stay approximately five minutes after the queues have dissipated.
f. Require parent’s vehicles to pull forward in the loading zones as far as possible to allow for the maximum number of vehicles to drop-off/pick-up their student(s). g. Require parents/guardians to stay in their vehicles at all times while students exit/enter via the right side of the vehicles when greeted by the staff member.
h. Include a written drop-off and pick-up procedure with supporting graphics that can be communicated with the students’ parents/guardians via handouts and shared electronically through the school’s website."

In addition, the Applicant has accepted the recommendations of the traffic report prepared by Fehr & Peers dated July 2023,and will have staff stationed at the loading zones one hour before the start of school until ten minutes after classes start in the morning. They will have staff stationed at the same loadingzones for pick-up ten minutes before the afternoon dismissal through five minutes after pick-up queues have dissipated in the afternoon. One staff member will be located at the corner of Georgia Street and Sacramento Street to ensure vehicles are not blocking the intersection. This has been added as a condition of approval.

10. Is there a draft/outline of the TIA-recommended Parking and Circulation Plan?Response: Yes, this is contained in Section 8.7 of the Traffic Impact Analysis Report by Fehr and Peers, attached to the Planning Commission packet. In addition,
the Applicant has accepted the recommendations of the traffic report prepared by Fehr & Peers dated July 202 3,and will have staff stationed at the loading zones one hour before the start of school until ten minutes after cl asses start in the morning. They will have staff stationed at the same loadingzones for pick- up ten minutes before the afternoon dismissal through five minutes after pick-up queues have dissipated in the afternoon. One staff member will be located at the corner of Georgia Street and Sacramento Street to ens Date: April 30, 2024
Subject: CONSIDER THE WHOLE OF THE RECORD AND POSSIBLE ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION DENYING AN APPEAL (APP24-0001) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S APPROVAL, AND GRANTING WITH CONDITIONS, MAJOR USE PERMIT (UP22-0008) TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF A NEW PUBLIC CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL WITH AN ENROLLMENT OF UP TO 400 STUDENTS IN AN EXISTING TWO-STORY BUILDING AT 241-255 GEORGIA STREET (APN:0055-170- 390) AFTER FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (CLASS 32: IN-FILL PROJECTS).

Page 7 ends

ure vehicles are not blocking the intersection. This has been added as a condition of approval.

The consultant also prepared a memo (attached) to answer specific questions raised. This memo details the pick-up/drop-off plan, as well as queueing at intersections.

11.Have we done another traffic study on the Charter School on Valle Vista now that it has been open for a few years? We could probably gleem a lot of info from that for this school.

Response: No study is required, nor has one been done for the Charter School on Valle Vista. Staff notes that traffic studies are particular to the location of the specific use, including type and layout of streets and roadway improvements, including traffic lights, etc.

12. Is it possible to limit approval for this school for two years and re-evaluate the decision to see if their are issues that we were not aware of? 40 years is a long time to lock the city into this agreement.

Response: The Council may put a sunset date on a Major Use Permit approval. However the applicant has indicated that such a short timeframe is not viable for them in leasing/purchasing the property. Elite is working with an investor for this project. This investor will be purchasing the property and leasing it to Elite, as well as providing up-front funding for the cost of the tenant improvements to the site.

Per the applicant: “this investor will not move forward with the project, including spending tens of millions of dollars, if the approval is only for two years, with the very real possibility that the approval of ELITE’s entitlement could be pulled. This would mean asking them to invest tens of millions of dollars to purchase a property that has been sitting vacant for years, and improve the property for ELITE to establish a school, with the potential scenario that in two years they will be left holding a facility with no tenant, and that has specifically been entitled and improved for a school use (so their ability to thereafter find a new tenant would be extremely limited and extremely expensive). No investor would be willing to do this.” Staff notes that any applicant holding a Major Use Permit must abide by all conditions of the Use Permit, and that if they do not, the Use Permit may be called up for review and/or revocation. Staff also notes that the City is not entering into an agreement, but possibly granting a permit that has specific conditions that must be met to allow the use to continue.

13.Who currently owns the building that the proposed school is applying to occupy? Response: The current owner of the property is the Brian Baylies Trust.

14. The schools security plan is not clear to me. I heard them mention that students will be kept safe by the use of cameras on the school property. My concern is there is a lot of car vandalism in that area and I would like to know that there will be security guards at the school to keep students safe while in campus. Our police force does not have capacity to handle this additional patrol and increase in calls because of the already high crime rate in that area.

Response: The applicant will ensure the security of the Georgia Street campus through the following measures:

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (CLASS 32: IN-FILL PROJECTS).

Page 8 ends

• ELITE will have a minimum of two security guards on-site, which will likely increase as enrollment increases. These security guards will patrol the campus during all hours when students are on campus.
• ELITE will have a full camera system throughout the campus, both interior cameras and cameras focused on the exterior of the Building.

ELITE will install security film on all windows to ensure the safety of all individuals inside the Building. Security film is typically this product: https://www.3m.com/3M/en_US/building-window-solutions-us/resources/window- film-for-schools/ This film makes it harder for intruders to break glass to enter a facility through a window. • There will be only one entrance into the Building, and a guard will be stationed at the entrance, which is the side facing Parking Lot G.
• All ELITE staff and students will have identification badges that they wear while on campus. In addition, ELITE students all wear uniforms.
• All doors on the campus will have the required locking mechanisms. This will ensure that teachers can lock classrooms in the event of an intruder, as well as allowing students to exit quickly and safely in the event of an emergency (earthquake, etc.)
• ELITE is installing a fence between the Transportation Center and the Building. Although there initially a fence on the front façade (not in the public right of way), Elite has determined to remove the fence on the front elevation. This is included as a Condition of Approval. • ELITE performs regular earthquake, fire and active shooter drills, as required by state law.

Further, the City’s Parking Enterprise provides parking enforcement in Downtown and the Waterfront under an authorization from the Chief of Police. Enforcement is provided by the City’s contractor SP+ and is conducted 6 days/week. The Enforcement Officer patrols all of the paid city parking lots checking license plates against the paid database, enforces street sweeping regulations in the morning, and enforces time-limited parking (mostly 2-hour zones) on the streets in the district.

16. Economic Development is one of Councils most important goals. Do we have a written recommendation from our Economic Development Director, Michael Nimon on the impact of a school in the downtown area given there is an economic development strategic plan Vallejo will be implementing soon? The plan is currently in review. If not please explain why this was not done. I would like to request that Mr. Nimon provide the recommendation now and it be reviewed and acknowledged by our City Manager Ms. Marshall.

Response: Director Nimon reviewed the project early on, but had not provided written comments until the Councilmember’s request. Attached is a written memo from Mr. Nimon addressing the project.

17. Dr. Eyler who has led our Economic Development Strategic planning process should also weigh in on the impact of the project via a written memo to Council before the Council meeting on April 30th.

Response: Dr. Eyler is not under contract with the City for this type of work. However Mr. Nimon consulted with Dr. Eyler on the attached memo referenced above.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (CLASS 32: IN-FILL PROJECTS).

Page 9 ends

18. How would this project would play out if we were to incorporate downtown into an EIFD? Response: Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts (EIFDs) are a type of Tax Increment Financing (TIF) district that cities and counties could form to help fund economic development projects. School Districts do not pay into EIFDs.

19. When making the determination that Pathways School and Immersive Learning Center were comparable to the proposed school, were site visits made by staff or the consultant to determine the size, location, students attending and programs provided and other pertinent information?Response: Staff did not visit the sites, and states in the report that the type of uses are “similar and complimentary” to the proposed school.

Pathways, a small charter school, and Immersive Learning Center, which is a STEAM focused community learning center, are both education-related uses and fall in the same umbrella category in the Zoning Ordinance Use Table as a High School.

20. Has the building that Elite is looking to acquire been retrofitted for earthquake safety? The 2014 Napa Earthquake caused damage in the downtown area and California requires school facilities that ensure structural safety.Response: Building division records show that the building completed a seismic upgrade on January 4, 1994. Staff notes that prior to any tenant improvements, applicants must submit to the Building Division for permits. The Building Division plan review ensures that all buildings meet code requirements for specific uses.

21. Do you have any documentation to share with Council that looks at gas pipes, sewage, heating and cooling (HVAC) for this building?Response: This level of detailed information is not required for review for a discretionary permit. During the Building Permit process Building Division staff, along with the Fire Department, Water Department and Vallejo Flood and Wastewater District will review plans for Code conformance.

22. Do you have the names of the ~40 nearby businesses that were in support of ELITE charter school? Response: Attached is the scan of letters submitted to the City from business owners stating support of the project. These are also included in the “Written Communications” link for the project.

23. Additionally, if we were to redevelop our City-owned parking lots, I'd like to know if this would potentially conflict with the aforementioned Parking and Circulation Plan.

Response: This really depends on what is being developed and the Traffic Demand Management (TDM) plans proposed by the future development. Any project would need its own traffic study to evaluate potential impacts of that project on existing conditions.

New Issues Brought Up By Appellant at April 23, 2024 Meeting

At the April 23, 2024 City Council meeting the appellants presented a PowerPoint presentation that included Date: April 30, 2024
Subject: CONSIDER THE WHOLE OF THE RECORD AND POSSIBLE ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION DENYING AN APPEAL (APP24-0001) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S APPROVAL, AND GRANTING WITH CONDITIONS, MAJOR USE PERMIT (UP22-0008) TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF A NEW PUBLIC CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL WITH AN ENROLLMENT OF UP TO 400 STUDENTS IN AN EXISTING TWO-STORY BUILDING AT 241-255 GEORGIA STREET (APN:0055-170- 390) AFTER FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (CLASS 32: IN-FILL PROJECTS).

Page 10 ends

additional issues not brought up in the original appeal letter. Below are a list of these issues and staff’s responses.

1. Project should not be exempt from CEQA under Class 32 because Project cannot result in any significant effects relating to: Traffic analysis should have considered potential overflow of Parent/Drop-off and Pick-up into non-designated area
Response: Fehr and Peers (Traffic Consultant) Considered all traffic impacts under assumption that 50% of students and staff would drive to the school.

2. Noise analysis did not consider operational noise impacts such as periodic bells, PA system for announcements on nearby businesses
Response: This was not considered because this is not a part of the project. The project does not propose any bells or a PA system that would be audible outside the building. Announcements to students and staff will be via land-line speaker phones inside the building.

3. uniqueness of location and compact nature of downtown Response: Staff is unclear as to what this refers. The noise analysis did consider surroundings and found that any potential impact was less than significant.

4. impact on Marina Towers Senior Housing within approx. 275 ft.

Response: There is a less than significant noise impact at the project site, it follows that will be less than significant noise impact further from the site. See attached memo from Ascent.

5. Air quality analysis did not address Impacts on Marina Towers Senior Housing as a sensitive receptor Response: There is a less than significant air quality impact at the project site, it follows that will be less than significant air quality impact further from the site.

ii Cumulative effect of Toxic Air Contaminants from SR 29 (Sonoma Blvd.) Response: Under certain circumstances siting of a school may consider Toxic Air Contaminants (TAC) if the highway is 500 feet or less from the school’s proposed location. See attached memo from Ascent, which concludes that this was considered and determined not to be an issue.

iii Idling vehicles during drop-off and pick-up hours
Response: This was evaluated as part of the Air Quality Analysis, see attached memo from Ascent.

iv Failed to identify baseline levels of toxic air contaminants Response: This was evaluated as part of the Air Quality Analysis, see attached memo from Ascent.

6. Water quality
Response: There is no evidence of significant effects on water quality by the occupancy of a vacant office building.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (CLASS 32: IN-FILL PROJECTS).

Page 11 ends

7. Safety CEQA Check-list includes impact on public services (Police).

Response: This inquiry is not required when a project is exempt from CEQA. Pub. Resources Code, §§ 21065, 21080.

There are three fundamental steps in the review process under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq. The first step is jurisdictional and requires a public agency to determine whether a proposed activity is a project. If a proposed activity is a project, the agency proceeds to the second step of the CEQA process. At the second step, the agency must decide whether the project is exempt from the CEQA review process under either a statutory exemption citation or a categorical exemption set forth in the CEQA Guidelines. Unlike statutory exemptions, categorical exemptions are subject to exceptions. If a project is categorically exempt and does not fall within an exception, it is not subject to CEQA requirements and may be implemented without any CEQA compliance whatsoever. (Protect Tustin Ranch v.

City of Tustin (2021) 70 Cal.App.5th 951, 951.)

If the project is not exempt, the agency must proceed to the second tier and conduct an initial study. Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15063. (Eureka Citizens for Responsible Government v. City of Eureka (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 357, 358.)

However, staff notes the applicant submitted a safety plan, which was reviewed by the Police Department. In an email from Interim Chief Ta to Director Ratcliffe, the Chief stated: “I don't believe there is any empirical evidence to support whether a school will create any more or less crime and safety. Arguably, activating an unused space reduces crime.”

8. Analysis does not consider safety concerns for students.

Response: Appellants have not cited any specific evidence constituting a safety concern. However the applicant does have a safety plan, see above and Conditions of Approval.

9. No evidence provided that police department was contacted for input on proposed project.

Response: Staff notes that no evidence was provided at the hearing because analysis of impact on public services is not required when project is exempt from CEQA. See also response to CEQA: Public Servuices issue, above.

10. Zoning Code
DMX District Requires Project to Implement Downtown Vallejo Specific Plan Response: This statement misquotes the Code. Section 16.203.01 provides:
“The DMX Zoning District is intended to create and establish regulations to implement the Downtown Vallejo Specific Plan that will promote a vibrant, pedestrian-oriented place that seamlessly integrates Downtown with the waterfront. A broad range of permitted uses are allowed to provide flexibility in the use of space. Standards for physical form will create an urban character in Downtown, with minimal setbacks and views into ground floor space to activate frontages.”
Date: April 30, 2024
Subject: CONSIDER THE WHOLE OF THE RECORD AND POSSIBLE ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION DENYING AN APPEAL (APP24-0001) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S APPROVAL, AND GRANTING WITH CONDITIONS, MAJOR USE PERMIT (UP22-0008) TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF A NEW PUBLIC CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL WITH AN ENROLLMENT OF UP TO 400 STUDENTS IN AN EXISTING TWO-STORY BUILDING AT 241-255 GEORGIA STREET (APN:0055-170- 390) AFTER FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (CLASS 32: IN-FILL PROJECTS).

Page 12 ends

The DMX Zoning District allows a school with a major use permit. So long as the findings for a major use permit can be made, the project is consistent with the DMX Zoning District and the Downtown Vallejo Specific Plan.

11. PC Staff report failed to address any DVSP policies Response: If error, City Council review is de novo and acts as cure. The analysis will be provided to Council.

12. Project is in A&E District; High School is not an A&E Use Response: The DVSP always included high schools as a use in the Georgia Corridor, which is in the A&E District. In 2005, the use was permitted by right except on the ground floor. In 2008, the Specific Plan was modified to allow schools in the Georgia Street Corridor with a Minor Use Permit and dropped the requirement that these uses be located above the ground floor. The 2021 Zoning Code Project eliminated the land use regulations from the Specific Plan and incorporated them into the new Zoning Ordinance. Land uses in the Downtown Vallejo Specific Plan area are now regulated under the Downtown-Mixed Use (DMX) zoning designation. The DMX zoning designation permits a high school with a major use permit.

13. Conflicts with General Plan PoliciesPolicy NBE-3.3 Entertainment. Promote a variety of retail, restaurant, and entertainment uses that bring economic vitality to downtown, enhance the Downtown Arts District, and activate the pedestrian environment.

Response: While the school is not an entertainment venue per se, the Downtown Vallejo Specific Plan has always allowed elementary, middle, and high schools in the Georgia Street Corridor within the Arts and Entertainment District and it is reasonably foreseeable that students and parents, teachers and staff, would activate the pedestrian environment.

Further, the applicant in their April 26, 2024 letter, has offered to allow other organizations the opportunity to use the multi-purpose room for entertainment purposes during non-school hours. Staff has included this as a Condition of Approval.

14. Building will be vacant during evening hours, weekends, holidays, summer months, and staff does not address this void and potential lost of opportunity for above uses.

Response: See above response.

15. Inconsistent with General (Specific) Plan Policies
Policy EET-1.5 Arts and Entertainment. Foster a vibrant local arts community to strengthen Vallejo’s position as a regional destination for arts and entertainment.

Response: General plan policies and actions are not exclusionary and both the General Plan and Specific Plan envisioned a wide variety of uses in the Downtown district. A project is consistent with the general plan (and any specific plan adopted to further the objectives of the general plan) “if, considering all its aspects, it will further the objectives and policies of the general plan and not obstruct their attainment.” Sierra Club v.

County of Napa (2004) 121 Cal.App.4th 1490, 1509. A given project need not be in perfect conformity with each and every general plan policy. Id. To be consistent, a [project] must be ‘compatible with’ the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the general plan.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (CLASS 32: IN-FILL PROJECTS).

Page 13 ends

16. Action EET-3.3A. Use the Vallejo Marketing program and media campaign to promote tourism and day visits to the city, highlighting the historic Downtown and its emergence as an arts and entertainment district.

Response: Not applicable to this use.

17.Action NBE-3.4C Continue to support the Downtown Arts & Entertainment District consistent with the Downtown Specific Plan.

High School not an A&E Use
Response: As stated above, the DVSP always included high schools as an allowed use in the Georgia Corridor, which is in the A&E District. The 2021 Zoning Code Project eliminated the land use regulations from the Specific Plan and incorporated them into the new Zoning Ordinance. Land uses in the Downtown Vallejo Specific Plan area are now regulated under the Downtown-Mixed Use (DMX) zoning designation. The DMX zoning designation permits a high school with a major use permit.

18. Staff Report Cites Consistency with Quality School Policy. School Quality is not a land use issue.

Response: School Quality is an issue of General Plan consistency. See Exhibit B of the draft resolution analyzing General Plan Consistency.

19. High School is not pedestrian-focused retail use.

Response: Although not a retail use, as stated above, the DVSP always included high schools as an allowed use in the Georgia Corridor, which is in the A&E District. The 2021 Zoning Code Project eliminated the land use regulations from the Specific Plan and incorporated them into the new Zoning Ordinance. Land uses in the Downtown Vallejo Specific Plan area are now regulated under the Downtown-Mixed Use (DMX) zoning designation. The DMX zoning designation permits a high school with a major use permit.

20. Policy CP-1.6 C. Encourage school siting decisions that take safe walking and bicycling access into account. Georgia Street is a Class III Bike Route; there is no separate bike lane and safety for students is questionable.

Response: This was analysed in the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), which did not find any safety concerns.

21. Policy 5.3.2 Maximize on-street parking to serve short-term parking needs.

Response: The 5.3.2 Policy actually reads: “Maximize on-street parking in Downtown to provide a buffer between the street and sidewalk zones.” The policy further states: Downtown streets are an important public asset that can be used to accommodate several functions.” As the TIA demonstrated, there is ample parking downtown. The creation of a pick-up and drop-off zone in front of the project does not conflict with this policy. Further, per the City’s Transportation Manager, it is not unusual for Public Works to work with property owners to address their needs. Such as designating 20-minute parking zones or loading zones.

22. Policy 6.2.1 Maximize on street parking to serve short-term parking needs. Project requires removal of on- Date: April 30, 2024
Subject: CONSIDER THE WHOLE OF THE RECORD AND POSSIBLE ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION DENYING AN APPEAL (APP24-0001) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S APPROVAL, AND GRANTING WITH CONDITIONS, MAJOR USE PERMIT (UP22-0008) TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF A NEW PUBLIC CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL WITH AN ENROLLMENT OF UP TO 400 STUDENTS IN AN EXISTING TWO-STORY BUILDING AT 241-255 GEORGIA STREET (APN:0055-170- 390) AFTER FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (CLASS 32: IN-FILL PROJECTS).

Page 14 ends

street spaces; limits businesses and employees from parking on street four hours each weekday.

Response: The TIA shows that there is ample parking downtown, further the City’s Transportation Manager reviewed the report and supports its conclusions.

23. Property does not contain any outdoor area specifically for students; requires sharing courtyard with general public
Response: The courtyard is and will remain a public space and it is not exclusive to anyone. Further, in a letter dated 4/26/2024, the applicant has offered that they shall not use the public paseo for sponsored/organized events without first obtaining any required permits from the City.

24. Project proposes to install 6-foot fencing enclosing existing pedestrian walkway on Georgia Street.

Response: The originally proposed fence was not proposed to be located in the public right of way. In any event, the applicant has is proposing to remove the fence from the front elevation. Staff has included this as a Condition of Approval.

25. Project is incompatible with some permissible land uses. Staff report cites nearby similar uses. Pathways Charter School is unable to locate records indicating a minor use permit granted for a school.

Response: If the school began its operations when a minor use permit was required, it is now an existing non- conforming use. If the project began under the current zoning code and is less than 10,000 sf in size, it is permitted by right. The project is compatible with the existing operation of the Pathway Charter School in that it is an educational use.

26. WIT AcademyGranted a minor use permit in 2012
Never operated as a school/afterschool tutoring program only Zoning code provides that permit expires if not activated within 2 years Smaller space and significantly less students
Response: It is unclear if the Minor Use Permit has expired as appellant claims, as the operator maintained a business license for WIT Academy through 2016. If the permit was timely activated, it runs with the land. A finding of compatibility with existing and permissible land uses within the zoning district and general area “may include” considerations such as “size, intensity, hours of operation, number of employees, or the nature of the operation,” but as the wording indicates, are not required.

27. Restaurants, Bars, Tasting Rooms and Entertainment Venues that Serve Alcohol (goes to finding D. of MJP, “Proposed use is compatible with existing and permissible land uses within the zoning district and general area which may include but not be limited to size, intensity, hours of operation, number of employees, or the nature of the operation)
Existing permits may have been granted due to size and operating characteristics of Pathways and Immersive Learning Center
Response: Staff is not clear how this is relevant.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (CLASS 32: IN-FILL PROJECTS).

Page 15 ends

28. New Alcohol sales require a PCN finding (must consider all criteria) Response: Yes, if license to be issued in an over-concentrated area. See discussion above, Council Questions #4.

29. Finding includes proximity to schools and other uses- 400-student school will have more scrutinty Response: Finding does include proximity to schools and other uses. It is speculative as to whether 400- student school will receive more scrutiny than any other listed factor.

30. Staff failed to address state law that allows ABC to deny a business within 600’ of a school (Section 23789)
Response: Proximity to a school alone is not sufficient legal grounds for ABC to deny a license. See Reimel v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board (1967) 255 Cal. App. 2d 40.

31. Physical location of the use on the site is compatible with and will not adversely affect the livability or appropriate development of abutting properties and the surrounding neighborhood.

1. Businesses will have less on and off-street parking

2. Parking will be restricted during drop-off and pick-up hours (4 hours each weekday)

3. Project may be a deterrent for future businesses

4. No support for claim that parents and staff will bring pedestrians to the Downtown other than to the school site.

Response: There is ample parking downtown, as shown in the TIA. Stating that the project is a deterrent is vague and speculative. It is not unreasonable to foresee that the project will increase number of pedestrians in the downtown.

32. Public Hearing Transparency
Administrative record includes 3 letters from CCRC that were not provided to the Planning CommissionCCRC originally supported but then rescinded its support Support letters to the PC did not specify project location, type of school, or # of students

Response:

Staff is aware of two letters regarding this project from CCRC. One that was in support and a later communication asking that the first letter be withdrawn, both signed by the same person. Staff has included as an attachment both these letters.

Conclusion

Staff recommends that the City Council deny the appeal and adopt findings approving the Major Use Permit after determining that the project is categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Date: April 30, 2024
Subject: CONSIDER THE WHOLE OF THE RECORD AND POSSIBLE ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION DENYING AN APPEAL (APP24-0001) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S APPROVAL, AND GRANTING WITH CONDITIONS, MAJOR USE PERMIT (UP22-0008) TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF A NEW PUBLIC CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL WITH AN ENROLLMENT OF UP TO 400 STUDENTS IN AN EXISTING TWO-STORY BUILDING AT 241-255 GEORGIA STREET (APN:0055-170- 390) AFTER FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (CLASS 32: IN-FILL PROJECTS).

Page 16 ends

Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (Class 32: In-Fill Projects).

Below are staff’s recommended findings, which are also contained in the resolution.

FISCAL IMPACT
Although the presence of a school at this location might remove approximately $7,000 per year from the property tax received by the City, the presence of the students, parents, faculty and staff would energize the vitality of downtown and bring in spending power which would off-set this amount.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project is exempt from environmental review under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (Class 32: In-fill Projects) because the project is on a site less than 5 acres in size, within city limits surrounded by urban uses, is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with the applicable zoning designation and regulations, has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species, is adequately served by all required utilities and public services, and approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. Further, none of the exceptions pursuant to Section 15300.2 of the CEQA Guidelines apply as discussed herein previously.

ATTACHMENTS

1. 241 Georgia AppealPackage_3-28-24

2. ELITE's Response to Appeal (2024)

3. 241 Georgia St - PC Packet

4. PC 24-04 - signed

5. SCOBE letter 3-13-24

6. Ordinance 1853 Downtown SPA (002)

7. List of sites - ELITE (4856-0172-8186.v2)

8. SP and ZC Land Use Table Comparison 2005-2021

9. FandP Elite Charter School - RTC - 4.26.24

10. EliteCharterSchoolEconImpacts

11. 2024_04_25_11_29_09 Biz owner letters

12. Air and Noise Vallejo Memo_04292024

13. Elite letter 2-26-24

14. CCRC Letter 3.28.2023

15. CCRC Retraction Letter 7.26.2023

16. Written Communications
Date: April 30, 2024
Subject: CONSIDER THE WHOLE OF THE RECORD AND POSSIBLE ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION DENYING AN APPEAL (APP24-0001) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S APPROVAL, AND GRANTING WITH CONDITIONS, MAJOR USE PERMIT (UP22-0008) TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF A NEW PUBLIC CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL WITH AN ENROLLMENT OF UP TO 400 STUDENTS IN AN EXISTING TWO-STORY BUILDING AT 241-255 GEORGIA STREET (APN:0055-170- 390) AFTER FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (CLASS 32: IN-FILL PROJECTS).

Page 17 ends

CONTACT
Christina Ratcliffe, AICP, [email protected] & Development Services Director [email protected]

STAFF REPORT

CITY OF VALLEJO

PLANNING COMMISSION

I. PROJECT INFORMATION Item No. 7-A

DATE OF MEETING: March 18, 2024

PROJECT NUMBER: Major Use Permit (UP22-0008)

PREPARED BY: Erwin Ordoñez, Planning Consultant

PROJECT LOCATION: 241-255 Georgia Street

APPLICABLE ZONING
CODE SECTION(S): Schools: Vallejo Municipal Code (VMC) §16.335; Major Use Permit VMC §§16.301-A and 16.606;
Development Standards: Mixed -Use Districts
VMC §16.203-A;
Minimum Parking Requirements VMC
§16.508.04

PROJECT SUMMARY: The project is proposing the phased conversion of a vacant two -story, 34 ,819 square -foot office
building in Downtown Vallejo with associated
interior/exterior on-site and right -of-way
improvements allowing for the operation of a new
charter high school with an enrollment of up to
400 students.

CEQA DETERMINATION: The project is exempt from environmental review under California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section
15332 (Class 32 : In -fill Projects) because the
project is on a site of less than 5 acres within city
limits surrounded by urban uses , is consistent
with the applicable general plan designation and
all applicable general plan policies as well as with
the applicable zoning designation and
regulations, has no value as habitat for
endangered, rare or threatened species , is
adequately served by all required utilities and
public services, and approval of the project would
not result in any significant effects relating to
traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. None of
the exceptions under CEQA Guidelines Section
15300.2 apply.

2 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. PC 2 4-XX APPROVING
UP22-0008, subject to the attached conditions of
approval, after FINDING the project categorically
exempt pursuant to CEQA Section 15332 ( Class
32: In-fill Exemption).

APPLICANT: Elite Public Schools
100 Whitney Ave.

Vallejo, CA 94589

PROPERTY OWNER: Brian Baylies
51 Red Cypress Ct.

Danville, CA 94506

GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: District – Downtown Waterfront (D-D/W)

ZONING DISTRICT: Downtown Mixed Use (DMX)

EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant Office Building

SURROUNDING LAND USE: North – Vallejo Housing Authority Office, Special Education Private School
(Immersive Learning Center)
South – Downtown Parking Lot G/
Vallejo Transit Center
East – Commercial (Restaurant/Office/Retail)
West – Commercial (Vacant Offices)

LOT AREA: 30,666 square feet (.704 acres)

TOTAL FLOOR AREA: 34,819 square foot building, 1.14 FAR

PARKING REQUIREMENTS/
PROVIDED: No on-site parking required (Downtown Parking District)

II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

A. Background

In May 2022, Elite Public Schools , the project applicant, submitted a Preliminary Review application, requesting feedback from City staff on a proposed charter high school for 190 students at 241-255 Georgia Street. Staff reviewed the submittal and returned written comments regarding requirements under the Vallejo Municipal Code, associated development standards and processing procedures and additional filing requirements necessary for a formal application.

On July 7, 2022, the applicant applied for a Major Use Permit proposing the phased conversion of the vacant two-story, 34,819 square -foot office building at this location along with associated interior /exterior on-site and right-of-way improvements that would allow for the operation of a new public charter high school 3 charter high school with an enrollment of up to 400 students. Staff determined that the project might qualify for a CEQA exemption and commissioned back-up studies for Greenhouse Gas emissions (GHG), Noise and Transportation. A traffic consultant prepared a Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) and an environmental consultant prepared background analysis and documentation materials regarding GHG , noise analysis and potential historic/cultural resources impacts necessary to make a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) exemption determination.

Location and Land Use Context

The project is proposed for an existing vacant two-story office building located on a 30, 666 square foot corner lot in the Downtown, with frontages along Georgia Street and Sacramento Street. The site is located across the street from the Vallejo Housing Authorit y, with private offices and a private school use to the north, commercial uses to the east and west, and Downtown Parking Lot G and Vallejo Transit Center to the south:

Table 1 – Surrounding Uses
Direction Land Uses
North
Public (Vallejo Housing Authority), Offices
Special Education Private School
(Immersive Learning Center)
East Commercial (Restaurants/Offices/Retail)

South Downtown Parking Lot G/
Vallejo Transit Center
West
Commercial
(Cal Maritime Anchor Center, Vacant Offices)

The immediate vicinity of the project site is characterized by existing commercial , office, retail, and public/quasi-public uses. City Hall , the John F. Kennedy Library, and M arina Vista Memorial Park are approximately 500 feet northwest of the project site. The Waterfront and Ferry Landing are approximately 1,000 feet southwest of the project site.

4 Figure 1 – Vicinity Map

Figure 2 – Surrounding Uses

5 B. Project Description

The proposed project is requesting approval of a Major Use Permit for the phased conversion of a vacant two-story office building in Downtown Vallejo with associated interior/exterior , on-site and right-of-way improvements allowing for the operation of a new charter high school with an enrollment of up to 400 students. Proposed school hours are Monday through Friday between 8:00 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. with occasional afterschool activities , weekend events, monthly board meetings, and semi -annual parent engagement events.

The existing two-story building is located at 241-255 Georgia Street and has a total building area of 34,819 square feet. Of the interior space, 22,959 SF will be dedicated to school-related education use s on the ground floor and 11,860 square feet of existing mezzanine space on the second floor that will be used for administrative offices. The balance of the second floor volume is open to the floor below creating double height ceilings. Most of the renovation work will be in the form of interior tenant improvements to facilitate the operation of the high school . There is no on-site parking, but adequate public parking is available on - street or in the surrounding Downtown Parking District lots . Visitors, students, and faculty that drive to the school will need to purchase parking passes in the Downtown Parking District lots or use on-street public parking or drop-off when visiting the school. A total of 38 bicycle parking spaces will be provided on-site to comply with City requirements.

The applicant is proposing that t he project will be completed in phases as the school continues to grow enrollment and additional funds for construction become available. Enrollment during the initial phase is anticipated to be approximately 250 students but the applicant is seeking approval for a maximum of 400 students. Staff will include 10 teachers with 25 administrative staff during the initial phase. The proposed initial phase of this project will be to develop approximately 18,000 square feet of interior space suitable for classrooms, bathroom facilities, a serving kitchen, common areas and a future gymnasium on the ground floor with administrative offices planned for the second story and the potential to incorporate additional student capacity and other education -related amenities in future project phases as the existing offices spaces are remodeled. Recreation use areas for PE classes will be provided within the building.

On-site improvements for the initial phase will include:

1. Tenant improvements for 18,000 square feet on the ground floor including installation of entrance door key fob system.

2. Installation of Full Fire Life Safety System building wide - (Fire Sprinklers and Fire Alarm system)

3. Replacement of existing light fixtures to LED to meet Title 24 requirements.

4. Restroom upgrades to meet fixture count and A mericans with Disability Act (ADA) requirements.

5. Removal and replacement of interior walls to create classrooms for the student population.

6. Constructing a serving kitchen for lunch

7. Constructing a future interior basketball court (under a separate building permit)

8. Erecting perimeter fencing and locked security/emergency exit doors.

9. Installation of a perimeter and entrance security camera

10. Construction of ADA access ramp at South entrance

Except for the installation of perimeter fencing at the North- and South-facing elevations of the building and a new accessible ramp to the South, no on-site major exterior (elevation) improvements are currently anticipated (See Figure s 3 & 4). Signs with the school’s name will be proposed to be posted at select location(s) on the building façade and a separate sign permit will be applied for when locations have been identified.

Off-site right-of-way improvements (See Figure 4 & 5) include:

1. Repainting curbs
6 2. Installation of additional signs on Georgia and Sacramento Street frontages to reflect limited hours for “vehicle loading zone only/no parking” during posted weekday morning and afternoon drop off periods.

3. Installation of “Do Not Block Intersection” signs.

4. Removal of 16 diagonal parking spaces and bulb outs on the Sacramento Street frontage and reconstruction of 8 parallel spaces to facilitate the proposed vehicle loading zones.

Figure 3 – Proposed Elevations

7 Figure 4 – Proposed Site Plan

8 Figure 5 – Existing Site Plan

III. STAFF ANALYSIS

Required Permits

The project requires the following approval under the Vallejo Municipal Code (VMC):

Table 2 – Required Permits
Permit Type Description VMC Chapter Review Authority
Major Use Permit School K-12, over 10,000 SF §§16.301-A and

16.606
Planning Commission
Action

9 The Planning Commission is being asked to review and act on the Major Use Permit.

General Plan Consistency

The General Plan 2040 Land Use Designation for the subject property is District – Downtown Waterfront (D-DW). The General Plan characterizes this designation as follows:

The D‐D/W designation applies to the downtown area, consistent with the Downtown Specific Plan; the adjacent Central Waterfront, subject to the Waterfront Planned Development Master Plan; and the Southern Waterfront. It is intended to promote a vibrant, pedestrian‐oriented place that seamlessly integrates downtown with the wat erfront. Layering compatible land uses and public amenities, together at various scales and intensities, the D‐D/W designation allows for multiple functions within the same building or adjacent to one another in the same general vicinity to foster a mix of uses that encourages people to live, work, play, and shop in close proximity. The D‐D/W designation is also intended to create a vibrant destination for people from other parts of the city and the region. The maximum permitted FAR in the D‐D/W designation is 6.0, with a minimum residential density of 30 dwelling units per acre up to 90 dwelling units per acre.

The project is consistent with the D-DW land use designation in that a school is a resident serving use that helps foster a mix of uses so people can live, work, play and shop in close proximity.

Table 3 - General Plan 2040 Policies and Actions
Policies and Actions Staff’s Analysis
POLICY CP-3.1
High Quality Education. Foster
high quality schools that enhance
civic pride.

Action CP-3.1D
Work with charter schools, private
schools, parochial schools,
and preschools to assess needs for a
range of high-quality.
educational opportunities in the
community.

The proposed charter school will provide a high-quality educational choice with easy access and adjacent to the Immersive Learning Center, which focuses on Science
Technology Engineering Arts Mathematics (STEAM).
10 POLICY CP-1.6
Active Transportation Network.

Promote the health benefits of
walking and bicycling by providing a
convenient and safe network of
bicycle paths and routes, sidewalks,
pedestrian paths, and trails, including
connections with major destinations
such as civic facilities, educational
institutions, employment centers,
shopping, and recreation areas.

A proposed high school walking distance to the Vallejo Transit Center, civic facilities such as the John F. Kennedy Library, the Vallejo Ferry Landing, parks, and the waterfront supports this policy by supporting multiple modes of
transportation for students, faculty, and visitors . Additionally, Georgia Street is identified as a Class III Bicycle Facility (Bike Route) in the City’s Bikeway Master Plan . The applicant is also providing 38 bicycle parking spaces on site for use by faculty and students.

Action CP-1.6C
Encourage school siting decisions that
take safe walking and bicycling access
into account.

The school is in walking and bicycling distance to downtown retail, civic facilities, parks and the waterfront and Georgia Street is a Class III Bicycle Route. In addition, the applicant is providing bike racks to accommodate 38 bikes.

POLICY CP-1.8
Strong Schools, Engaged Students
and Families. Support efforts by
schools to reduce the dropout rate in
recognition that education is a
predictor of health.

A proposed public charter high school near the Vallejo Transit Center in the Downtown supports this policy because it
allows for additional choice options for a greater geographic diversity of potential students who could benefit from high quality, alternative teaching methods and learning
environments. In addition, a complimentary educational use, the Immersive Learning Center, which focuses on Science Technology Engineering Arts Mathematics (STEAM) and
computer technology focused K-12 grade education, tutoring, workshops, and summer camps, is loc ated immediately
across Georgia Street from the proposed project site,
potentially creating synergy for the student population.

Policy NBE-2.8:

Infill Development. Promote infill
development targets vacant and
underutilized sites for community-
desired and enhancing uses that is
compatible with surrounding uses.

The project proposes the renovation and adaptive reuse of a vacant office building in the Downtown and facilitates the addition of a new business that both serves City residents and helps activate the underutilized site and its surroundings.

The additional activity provided by the proposed school use is also anticipated to enhance economic activity with new potential customers, clients, and patrons for surrounding commercial uses.

Vallejo Municipal Code Compliance

The project site is zoned Downtown Mixed Use (DMX ), and the Zoning Code provides the following description of the DMX district:

The DMX Zoning District is intended to create and establish regulations to implement the Downtown Vallejo Specific Plan that will promote a vibrant, pedestrian-oriented place that seamlessly integrates Downtown with the waterfront. A broad range of permitted uses are allowed to provide flexibility in the use of space. Standards for physical form will create an urban character in Downtown, with minimal setbacks and views into ground floor space to activate frontages.

11 The applicants are proposing to occupy an existing vacant two-story office building and operate a public charter high school with an enrollment of up to 400 students and staff of 35 employees . The proposed renovations are in line with an adaptive reuse of the building because the “look and feel” of the building exteriors are generally being maintained and tenant improvements are focused internally on the requirements of the proposed educational use . No major exterior modifications are proposed for the building’s exterior walls and site improvements include fencing on the north and south sides and an ADA access ramp for the building’s two south entrances. Existing landscaping areas will be retain ed and upgraded with new plant materials.

The project is consistent with the applicable standards in the DMX zoning district as demonstrated in the Table, below:

Table 4 – Downtown Mixed Use
Development and Parking Standards (VMC Sections 16.203-A and 16.508.04) Code Section Development Standard Proposal Compliant

16.203.03 D.b.

Entrances: All non-
residential activities
located at the street level
shall provide one direct at-
grade entrance from the
public right-of-way for each
street frontage exceeding
50 feet.

An entrance is located on Georgia
Street, and two additional entrances
are provided on the South building
elevation facing Lot G. Due to grade
difference these are accessed via a
proposed new Sacramento Street
ADA ramp.

Yes

16.508.04 A
Minimum Parking
Requirements: Downtown
Mixed-Use Zoning
District: Buildings and
building additions
constructed prior to
adoption of the Downtown
Specific Plan (September
2005) are exempt from
the requirements of this
chapter. All other
construction and uses in
the downtown shall
provide parking in
compliance with Table

16.508-A: Parking
Requirements in
Downtown Specific Plan
Districts.

City records show that the building
was constructed in 1966, therefore it
is exempt from parking requirements.

Yes

Conditional Use in Downtown Mixed-Use District

Additionally, VMC Table 16.301 -A: Land Use Regulations, lists a School (K -12): large (10,000 sf or more) in the DMX district and indicates that a Major Use Permit application for this use is required to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission.

12 Additional School Standards
VMC Section 16.335 (SCHOOLS) further specifies that a Major Use Permit is required for establishment of a school in all or part of an existing building that was not designed for or occupied by a K -12 school and that to grant the Use Permit, the Director or the Planning Commission shall determine, based on the information presented by the applicant that the following standards of Chapter 16.335 apply:

Table 5 – Schools
Standards (VMC Section 16.335.02)
Code Section Standard Proposal Compliant

16.335.02. A.3.a
That the school location is
appropriate for the use,
and that adjacent uses
will not be adversely
affected.

A similar and
complimentary
educational use is located
across Georgia Street
from the site. Students
also have easy Access to
the library. In addition, the
school would bring staff,
students and parents into
the downtown area
increasing pedestrian
traffic to restaurants and
shops.

Yes

16.335.02. A.3.b
That adequate access,
student drop-off areas
and required off-street
parking is provided
Under 16.508.04 A, no
parking is required for this
site. No off-street parking
is available on the site;
however, on-street public
parking is available on
Georgia and Sacramento
Streets.

Additional parking to
support the school and
other nearby uses is
available in the
Downtown Parking
District parking lots via
parking passes which can
be purchased.

The applicant is
proposing drop-off zones
along the curbline of the
Georgia and Sacramento
Street during the morning
and afternoon which will
temporarily reduce the
availability of the on-
street parallel spaces
Yes
13 during this period. Sixteen
(16) diagonal spaces on
Sacramento Street will be
permanently converted
into 8 parallel spaces.

The TIA analyzed these
issues and made
recommendations which
have been incorporated
into the Conditions of
Approval.

16.335.02. A.3.c
That outdoor play areas
are appropriately sized,
furnished with facilities
and equipment, safe, and
secure.

No outdoor recreation
activities are proposed on
site or required by the
State.

Yes

16.335.02. B.1
That the applicant’s site
plan has the proposed
enrollment and student
capacity of the school
A maximum of 400
students Yes

16.335.02. B.2
That the applicant’s site
plan has the size and
location of all indoor and
outdoor areas for physical
education;
PE indoor space noted on
plans Yes

16.335.02. B.3
That the applicant’s site
plan has t he pedestrian
and traffic circulation
systems proposed for the
site, include student drop -
off areas, in addition to
queuing areas for pick up
The TIA and Site Plan
show proposed drop off
and circulation; A
Condition of Approval
requires submission of
circulation plan consistent
with the TIA prior to
issuance of permits.

Yes

16.335.02. B.4
That the applicant’s site
plan has the proposed
parking, both on-site and
off-site
No on-site parking. Off-
site street parking and
Downtown Parking Lot G
are both shown on the
site plan.

Yes

16.335.02. B.5
That the applicant’s site
plan has the development
phasing schedule, if the
school will be developed
in phases.

The development plans
and project description
show the proposed
phasing
Yes

16.335.02. C.1
If the proposed site is
within 1,500 feet of a
railroad track easement, a
safety study shall be
submitted with the Use
Permit application
N/A, not within 1,500 of
railroad Yes
14 16.335.02. C.2
If the proposed site is
within 1,500 feet of an
above-ground fuel
storage tank or high-
pressure oil or gas
pipeline, or within 2,000
feet of a hazardous waste
disposal site, a hazards
risk assessment shall be
submitted with the Use
Permit application
N/A, none apply Yes

16.335.02. D.1
The site shall be easily
accessible from arterial or
collector streets and shall
allow minimum peripheral
visibility from planned
driveways and drop-off
areas.

The site on the corner of
Georgia and Sacramento
Streets. Sacramento is a
collector. The site is also
easily accessible from
Mare Island Way and
Curtola Parkway, which
are both arterial streets.

Yes

16.335.02. D.2
Parent drop-off areas,
queuing areas for pick up,
bus loading areas if
provided, and on-site
parking shall be
separated from walkways
to allow students to enter
and exit the school
grounds safely.

Walkway separation is
provided Yes
15 16.335.02. D.3
Adequate outdoor or
indoor play areas shall be
provided to meet the
needs for the planned
enrollment. The minimum
standard is 50 square feet
of active play area per
student. The Director or
the Planning
Commission, may reduce
this requirement upon
finding that:
a. Public parks are with
one-quarter mile of
the school and a joint-
use agreement with
the City has been
executed, or
b. The scheduling of
Physical Education
(e.g., staggered
recess times)
permits more
efficient use of on-
site facilities.

No outdoor play areas are
provided.

1,685 square feet of
indoor space for PE
activities is provided
(accommodates
approximately 34
students at one time)
There will be four PE
classes daily, five
days/week, which is
sufficient to
accommodate all 400
students.

Staff and the City
Attorney have concluded
that the proposed indoor
recreational
space/staggered PE class
schedule would be
sufficient for Staff’s
recommendation pending
Planning Commission
review as formal approval
body.

16.335.02. F.3
Entries shall be lighted to
ensure the safety of
persons and the security
of buildings. Outdoor
lighting that is not
required for security shall
be turned off when a
building or outdoor
recreational area is not in
use.

Proposed lighting is
shown on the
development plans and is
sufficient to ensure the
safety of persons and
security of the Building.

Yes

The project as proposed with the conditions of approval included in this report complies with the applicable development standards of the DMX District.

16 Discussion

The following comments provide a summary of the staff analysis of the project. They are separated by subject to facilitate the review by the Planning Commission. The information provided is referenced in Section IV, the Findings section at the end of this report.

Recreational space

The proposed charter high school is requesting approval for an enrollment of up to 400 students which would require 50 square feet of recreation space or 20,000 square feet on-site to be consistent with the basic standard noted by VMC 16.335.02.D.3 . The applicant proposes to satisfy the students ’ recreational needs with two designated interior PE areas totaling 1,685 square feet, staggered PE class schedules. The VMC provide s that the Planning Commission has the authority to reduce the 20,000 square foot requirement as part of its review of the Major Use Permit application by finding that :

a) Public parks are with one -quarter mile of the school and a joint -use agreement with the City has been executed , or b) The scheduling of Physical Education (e.g., staggered recess times) permits more efficient use of on-site facilities.

The applicant is requesting approval of its proposal based on the staggered use and size of the proposed interior recreational spaces. Staff believes that this meets the requirement of the code.

Off-Street Parking

The existing building has no off-street parking spaces on site. Per Section 16.508.04 A:

Downtown Mixed-Use Zoning District. Buildings and building additions constructed prior to adoption of the Downtown Specific Plan (September 2005) are exempt from the requirements of this chapter. All other construction and uses in the downtown shall provide parking in compliance with Table 16.508-A: Parking Requirements in Downtown Specific Plan Districts.

City records show that the existing building was constructed in 1966, prior to the adoption of the Downtown Specific Plan, and therefore exempt from parking requirements. The property is located within the Downtown Parking District and the project’s occupants and visitors will be eligible to purchase parking passes and use the parking lots within the Downtown Parking District. The TIA prepared by the Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants documented ample available parking in most of the nearby Parking District lots.

In addition, as previously noted, the applicant is providing bike racks and the site is immediately adjacent to the Downtown Vallejo Transit hub, which provides easy access bus service.

Review of Potential Traffic Impacts

During the review process, planning staff had initial concerns regarding potential traffic impacts. The proposed charter high school use is expected to generate 688 average daily trips, with 276 trips occurring in the a.m. peak hour and 166 trips in the p.m. peak hour. The City Traffic Engineer reviewed the site plan , project description and concurred with the appropriateness of retaining a consultant to prepare a Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA). The City retention of a consultant to prepare a TIA was funded by the applicant in early 2023 and work was completed in December 2023 . The City’s Traffic Engineer has reviewed and approved the TIA, which is included as Attachment 3.

The TIA was prepared to determine significant transportation impacts related to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the project based on standards and methodologies set forth by the City of Vallejo. As required by CEQA, Potential significant impacts from traffic were analyzed using Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Level of Service (LOS), Site access, circulation, off-site parking, and off-site queuing were also analyzed.
17 The TIA concluded that the project would not have significant impacts based on VMT or LOS criteria and noted that ample parking is available for the proposed use in the Downtown Parking District lots.

Additionally, the TIA made recommendations to minimize potential queuing impacts from the proposed drop-off and pick -up operations . These recommendations have been incorporated into staff’s recommended conditions of approval for the project.

In addition to the TIA, staff had an environmental consultant study potential noise, air quality, and historic/cultural resources impacts. The studies show that there will be no significant impact , which supports the recommended Class 32: In-fill exemption.

IV. FINDINGS

Major Use Permit Findings

VMC Section 16.606.03, requires the review authority to make the following findings prior to granting a Major Use Permit (the findings are in bold, and staff’s determination follows in italics):

A. The proposed use is conditionally allowed within the applicable zoning district and complies with all other applicable provisions of the Zoning Code and all other titles of the Vallejo Municipal Code.

The proposed project is located on a property zoned Downtown Mixed Use (DMX). Vallejo Municipal Code Table 16.301-A: Land Use Regulations, requires a Major Use Permit for a School more than 10,000 square feet. With the granting of a Use Permit, the project is consistent with the applicable development standards outline d in Title 16 of the Vallejo Municipal Code (VMC), as proposed and conditioned.

B. The proposed use is consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plan or planned development and any other applicable plans.

The project site is designated as District – Downtown Waterfront (D-D/W) on the General Plan Land Use Map. It is intended to promote a vibrant, pedestrian ‐oriented place that seamlessly integrates downtown with the waterfront. Layering compatible land uses and public amenities, together at various scales and intensities, the D‐D/W designation allows for multiple functions within the same building or adjacent to one another in the same general vicinity to foster a mix of uses that encourages people to live, work, play, and shop in close proximity. The D ‐D/W designation is also intended to create a vibrant destination for people from other parts of the city and the region . The project as proposed and conditioned adds 400 students and support staff to the Downtown area in an existing building that has remained vacant for years. This will also bring p arents into the downtown and help to activate economic vitality to the Downtown. The project is also consistent with applicable General Plan 2040 policies as noted above in the report.

C. The subject parcel is physically suitable for the type of land use being proposed.

The public charter high school is proposing to renovate and occupy a vacant two -story office building in the Downtown area. No major exterior alterations are proposed for the exterior design of the building. The subject parcel is physically suitable for the proposed use because most activities associated with the school use will occur indoors, the applicant has agreed to incorporate changes to their proposed operational plans and procedures and will construct off -site public improvements to ensure that the proposed use will not create negative impacts on the surrounding properties. These plans and procedures are included as Conditions of Approval. The applicant is proposing to satisfy recreational needs of students with staggered scheduling in the interior recreation areas.

18 D. The proposed use is compatible with existing and permissible land uses within the zoning district and the general area in which the proposed use is to be located which may include but not be limited to size, intensity, hours of operation, number of employees, or the nature of the operation.

The proposed project is compatible with existing and permissible land uses within the zoning district. A similar educational use is located immediately across Georgia Street f rom the project site, the use will activate a vacant commercial building and includes site improvements to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses. The proposed use plans to operate between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Monday-Friday with occasional after-school events and activities. Conditions of approval have been added to reflect these hours and reasonable limitations.

E. The physical location or placement of the use on the site is compatible with and will not adversely affect the livability or appropriate development of abutting properties and the surrounding neighborhood.

The physical location of the proposed project inside an existing vacant office building will not adversely affect the livability or appropriate development of abutting properties and the surrounding neighborhood. Conditions of approval have been added to address vehicle queuing during drop- off and pick up hours.

F. The proposed use and related project features will not create any nuisances arising from the emission of odor, dust, gas, noise, vibration, smoke, heat or glare at a level exceeding ambient conditions and would not otherwise be detrimental to the public in terest, health, safety, or general welfare.

As proposed and conditioned, the public charter high school will not create any nuisances from odors, dust, gas, noise, vibration, smoke, heat or glare exceeding ambient conditions. As proposed and conditioned, the use will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, or general welfare.

G. The project has been reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, if applicable, and the requirements of this chapter.

Following a review of the project, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission find the project categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to Section 15332 , Class 32 : In-fill Projects. Staff required studies that support this exemption, which is discussed in more detail, below.

V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Following a review of the project, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission find it exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Under CEQA, the State has identified classes of projects which have been determined to not have a significant impact on the environment and are therefore exempt from the requirements of CEQA.

The project is exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (Class 32: In-fill Projects) because the project is on a site of less than 5 acres within city limits surrounded by urban uses, is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and al l applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations, has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species, is adequately served by all required utilities and public services, and approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.

Further, none of the exceptions pursuant to Section 15300.2 of the CEQA Guidelines apply. 19 As part of the development application review process, the City retained consultants to prepare additional analysis, research and document topic areas to assist City staff’s review of potential impacts.

Specifically, Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants , were retained to prepare a Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) for the project and Ascent Environmental Consultants, were retained to provide additional research and background documentation regarding potential noise, air quality, and historic/cultural resources impacts. A summary of each analysis is discussed below and copies of the background documentation/analysis are provided in Attachments 4-6.

Transportation Impact Analysis
A Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) was prepared by Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants for this project that includes a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis, Level of Service (LOS) assessment, and site plan review with recommendations.

The VMT Analysis was based on guidelines from the City of Vallejo’s CEQA Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (Revised October 2020) determined that the Project is not expected to have a VMT-related transportation impact because it is within a Transit Priority Area , is “local-serving” in nature, and is therefore screened out of any additional VMT analysis . This is consistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3(b) which notes that “Generally, projects within one half -mile of either an existing major transit stop or a stop along an existing high -quality transit corridor should be presumed to cause a less than significant transportation impact.”

The LOS analysis concluded that a Level of service analysis is not required under Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) and CEQA but continued to analyze the project’s effect on intersection operations by evaluating eight study intersections. Under Opening Year and Cumulative conditions, the LOS analysis concluded that “the Project does not cause any study intersection to degrade to unacceptable conditions, based on the City’s level of service policies. Therefore, the Project is not required to provide intersection improvements.”

The Intersections analyzed by the TIA include:

1. Sonoma Boulevard/Florida Street

2. Mare Island Way/Georgia Street

3. Santa Clara Street/Georgia Street

4. Sacramento Street/Georgia Street

5. Sonoma Boulevard/Georgia Street

6. Mare Island Way/Maine Street

7. Maine Street/Sacramento Street

8. Sonoma Boulevard/Curtola Parkway

The TIA also documented the following:

• All study intersections are expected to operate acceptably under the Opening Year and Opening Year Plus Project Conditions.
• All study intersections are expected to operate acceptably under the Cumulative and Cumulative Plus Project Conditions.
• The Project proposes no features that would be hazardous to pedestrian travel and does not conflict with any pedestrian facilities plans or programs. The Project is not expected to result in significant adverse impacts related to pedestrian facilities. • The proposed project Trip Generation for the proposed private high school with 400 students was estimated to generate 688 average daily trips, with a total of 276 peak hour trips in the morning (172 in-bound, 104 out-bound), and 166 peak hour trips in the afternoon (64 in-bound, 102 out-bound).
20 • The publicly available parking lots in the vicinity of the Project site have considerable availability.
• The Project must include an additional two bicycle parking spaces (3 8 total) to satisfy the City’s requirements.

The TIA included the following recommendations which have been incorporated into the recommend Conditions of Approval:

• Add "No parking from 7 to 9 AM and 3 to 5 PM on weekdays - violators will be towed" signs along both loading zones.
• Paint the curbs white in both loading and unloading zones. • The school should work with the City and local towing operators to actively enforce the no parking restriction.
• Install traffic control devices compliant with “Manual Uniform Traffic Control Devices” (MUTCD) - R10-7 “DO NOT BLOCK INTERSECTION” on all four approaches to the Santa Clara Street/Georgia Street and Sacramento Street/Georgia Street intersections. Signs shall be mast arm mounted, if possible, with existing equipment (street mounted/installed if not possible on the existing signal mast arms).
• School staff should be stationed at various fixed locations at the loading zones to meet vehicles at the curb and to direct drivers entering/exiting the loading areas. At least six staff members should be stationed on Georgia Street and three on Sacramento Street. At least one staff member should be stationed at the southwest corner of Georgia Street/Sacramento Street to ensure vehicles are not blocking the intersection. • In the morning, staff should be stationed at the loading zones at least one hour before the first morning bell and stay approximately 10 minutes after the start of school. In the afternoon, staff should be stationed at the loading zones at least 10 minutes before the last afternoon bell and stay approximately five minutes after the queues have dissipated. • Vehicles are to pull forward in the loading zones as far as possible to allow for the maximum number of vehicles to drop-off/pick-up their student(s). • Parents/guardians are to stay in their vehicles at all times while students exit/enter via the right side of the vehicles when greeted by the staff member. • The school should create a written drop-off and pick-up procedure with supporting graphics that can be communicated with the students’ parents/guardians via handouts and shared electronically through the school’s website.

Air Quality
The purpose of the Air Quality Study (Attachment 4) is to evaluate whether the proposed project could potentially result in any significant effects related to air quality for purposes of determining consistency with the requirements of a Class 32 Categorical Exemption under CEQA. This study includes a brief explanation of the project, applicable standards of significance, analysis of air quality impacts, emission modeling results, and conclusions.

The Study concludes that the “… Project generated construction and operational criteria air pollutant and precursor emissions would not exceed BAAQMD recommended thresholds of significance for project related construction or operational emissions and thus would not result in a cumulative ly considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. The project would generate minimal additional vehicle trips but would not result in substantial mobile or stationary sources of TACs and would not result in sources of odors. Thus, approval of the project would not result in a significant effect related to air quality.”

21 Noise Study
The purpose of th e Noise Study (Attachment 5) is to evaluate whether the project would have a significant effect related to noise. This study includes a brief explanation of the project, applicable standards of significance, analysis of noise and vibration impacts, and conclusions .

The Noise Study concludes that the “…Project-generated construction noise would be short-term and temporary and would comply with the City of Vallejo’s construction noise standards and would not expose sensitive land uses to excessive noise. The project would not result in operational sources of substantial vibration. Project construction would not require the use of vibration-inducing equipment such as pile drivers and all construction would occur during the less sensitive daytime hours when people are awake thereby reducing the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial vibration levels.

Operational stationary noise sources would not result in new substantial sources of noise in the project area or exceed applicably City standards. Operational increases in noise levels from vehicle trips would not result in a substantial increase in noise over existing conditions. Therefore, project related construction and operational noise and vibration would not be expected to exceed federal, state, or local standards or expose sensitive land uses to substantial increases in noise or vibration levels. Thus, approval of the project would not result in a significant effect related to noise.”

Historic/Cultural Resources Study
The purpose of the Study (Attachment 6) is to evaluate whether the project would have a potential significant effect on . The Study concluded that the project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource , including both built environment features and archaeological sites.

The Study notes that “…building at 241 -255 Georgia Street is not listed on the CRHR or as a City of Vallejo Landmark. The project does not have the potential to cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. …

There are no known archeological or tribal cultural resources on the site that qualify as historical resources, according to readily available material. Given that the property has been previously disturbed, the likelihood of finding such resources intact and within their relevant historic context is relatively low. Although not required to support an infill exemption or an SB 330 application, the project would comply with Public Resources Code and Health and Safety Code requirements that protect unanticipated cultural discoveries.”

The Study also provides references to Public Resources Code section 21083.2 (archaeological resources) and Health and Safety Code section 7050.5 (“adopted best practices” for cultural resource discoveries). Staff has incorporated the consultant’s information in the recommended Conditions of Approval to ensure compliance with these regulations.

VI. NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENTS

On March 4, 2024, p ursuant to VMC Section 16.602.08 – Noticing, a notice of this hearing was published in the Times Herald, mailed to all active neighborhood groups, all property owners within 500 feet of the subject property, and any other local agency expected to provide water, wastewater treatment, or other essential facilities or services to the project, as well as to members of the Planning Commission, the applicant and property owner . Interested parties were also notified in the same manner.

At the writing of this report, no written communication has been received.

VII. CONCLUSION / STAFF RECOMMENDATION

22 Based on the analysis contained in this staff report and the project’s consistency with General Plan 2040 and the Vallejo Municipal Code, staff recommends that the Planning Commission APPROVE Major Use Permit (UP22 -0008), with the Class 32 Categorical Exemption , based on the findings provided in the attached Resolution and subject to the Conditions of Approval provided as Exhibit A to the Resolution.

VIII. EXPIRATION

Pursuant to VMC Section 16.602.12 (A.2), approval of the Major Use Permit, shall automatically expire two years after approval, unless authorized construction has commenced prior to the expiration date (March 18, 2026; if approved at this meeting and not appealed).

IX. APPEAL PROCEDURE

VMC Section 16.602.14, Appeals, the applicant, or any party adversely affected by the decision of the Planning Commission may, within ten days after the rendering of the decision of the Planning Commission, appeal in writing to the City Council by filing a written appeal with a fee of $1,409.21 with the City Clerk. Such written appeal shall state the reason or reasons for the appeal and why the applicant believes he or she is adversely affected by the decision of the Planning Commission. Such appeal shall not be timely filed unless it has been received by the City Clerk or designee no later than the close of business on the tenth calendar day after the decision of the Planning Commission. If such date falls on a weekend or City holiday, then the deadline shall be extended until the next regular business day.

Notice of the appeal, if any, including the date and time of the City Council’s consideration of the appeal, shall be sent by the City Clerk to all property owners within five hundred feet of the project boundary.

The Council may affirm, reverse, or modify any decision of the Planning Commission that is appealed.

X. ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution No. PC 24-XXX and Exhibit A – Conditions of Approval

2. Project Plans

3. Traffic Impact Study, dated December 2023

4. Ascent Memorandum: Air Quality, dated February 21, 2024

5. Ascent Memorandum: Noise, dated February 21, 2024

6. Ascent Memorandum: Historic Resources, dated February 21, 2024

CITY OF VALLEJO PLANNING COMMISSION

RESOLUTION NO. PC 24-XXX

A RESOLUTION APPROVING MAJOR USE PERMIT (UP22-0008)

ALLOWING THE OPERATION OF A NEW PUBLIC CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL WITH AN ENROLLMENT OF UP TO 400 STUDENTS IN AN EXISTING TWO-STORY BUILDING AT 241-255 GEORGIA STREET (APN:0055-170-390) AND

FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL

REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15332 (CLASS 32: IN-FILL

PROJECTS)

*********************************************************

I. GENERAL FINDINGS

WHEREAS, on August 29, 2017, the City Council adopted General Plan 2040 which serves as a guide for the community’s future growth and development; and

WHEREAS, the Major Use Permit approval is being requested for property that has a General Plan 2040 Land Use Designation of District – Downtown Waterfront (D-D/W); and

WHEREAS, on July 22, 2021, the City Council adopted the Zoning Code and Zoning Map to implement General Plan 2040‘s Land Use Plan; and

WHEREAS, the property is located in the Downtown Mixed Use (DMX) Zoning District; and

WHEREAS, on July 7, 2022, Elite Public Schools submitted an application for a Major Use Permit to allow the operation of a new public charter high school with an enrollment of up to 400 students in an existing two-story building at 241-255 Georgia Street; and

WHEREAS, on August 11, 2023, the application was determined to be complete; and

WHEREAS, on March 18, 2024, the City of Vallejo Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered testimony and evidence, both written and oral, provided at the public hearing, as well as other documents contained in the record of proceedings relating to the Project, which are maintained in the offices of the City of Vallejo Planning Division; and

WHEREAS, based on evidence received in the staff report and at the public hearing, the Planning Commission makes the following factual findings:

II. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING

ATTACHMENT 1

Following a review of the project, the Planning Commission has determined that it is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements. The project is exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (Class 32: In-fill Projects) because the project is on a site of less than 5 acres within city limits surrounded by urban uses, is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with the applicable zoning designation and regulations, has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species, is adequately served by all required utilities and public services, and approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. Further, none of the exceptions pursuant to Section 15300.2 of the CEQA Guidelines apply, in that
a. There is no reasonable possibility that the renovation of an empty office building will have a significant effect on the environment as there are no unusual circumstances associated with this downtown in-fill site; and b. There will be no damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway, as the location is not near a scenic highway;
c. The project site is not included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code pertaining to hazardous materials; and d. The project will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.

III. FINDINGS RELEVANT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE MAJOR USE PERMIT

Vallejo Municipal Code (VMC) Section 16.606.03 requires the review authority to make the following findings prior to granting a Major Use Permit. the findings are in bold, and staff’s determination follows in italics.

The proposed project is located on a property zoned Downtown Mixed Use (DMX). Vallejo Municipal Code Table 16.301-A: Land Use Regulations, requires a Major Use Permit for a school more than 10,000 square feet. The project is consistent with the applicable development standards outlined in Title 16 of the VMC, as proposed and conditioned.

B. The proposed use is consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plan or planned development and any other applicable plans.

The project site is designated as District – Downtown Waterfront (D-D/W) on the General Plan Land Use Map. It is intended to promote a vibrant, pedestrian‐oriented place that seamlessly integrates downtown with the waterfront. Layering compatible land uses and public amenities, together at various scales and intensities, the D‐D/W designation allows for multiple functions within the same building or adjacent to one another in the same general vicinity to foster a mix of uses that encourages people to live, work, play, and shop in close proximity. The D‐D/W designation is also intended to create a vibrant destination for people from other parts of the city and the region. The project as proposed and conditioned adds 400 students and support staff to the Downtown area in an existing building that has remained vacant for years. This will also bring parents into the downtown

and help to activate economic vitality to the Downtown. The project is also consistent with applicable General Plan 2040 policies as noted above in the report.

C. The subject parcel is physically suitable for the type of land use being proposed.

The public charter high school is proposing to renovate and occupy a vacant two-story office building in the Downtown area. No major exterior alterations are proposed for the exterior design of the building. The subject parcel is physically suitable for the proposed use because most activities associated with the school use will occur indoors, the applicant has agreed to incorporate changes to their proposed operational plans and procedures and will construct off-site public improvements to ensure that the proposed use will not create negative impacts on the surrounding properties. These plans and procedures are included as Conditions of Approval. The applicant is proposing to satisfy recreational needs of students with staggered scheduling in the interior recreation areas.

D. The proposed use is compatible with existing and permissible land uses within the zoning district and the general area in which the proposed use is to be located which may include but not be limited to size, intensity, hours of operation, number of employees, or the nature of the operation.

The proposed project is compatible with existing and permissible land uses within the zoning district. A similar educational use is located immediately across Georgia Street from the project site, the use will activate a vacant commercial building and includes site improvements to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses. The proposed use plans to operate between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Monday-Friday with occasional after- school events and activities. Conditions of approval have been added to reflect these hours and reasonable limitations.

As proposed and conditioned, the public charter high school will not create any nuisances from odors, dust, gas, noise, vibration, smoke, heat or glare exceeding ambient conditions.

As proposed and conditioned, the use will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, or general welfare.

G. The project has been reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, if applicable, and the requirements of this chapter.

Following a review of the project, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission find the project categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to Section 15332, Class 32, In-fill Projects. Staff required studies that support this exemption, which is discussed in more detail, below.

IV. DETERMINATIONS RELEVANT TO THE APPROVAL OF ESTABLISHMENT

OF A SCHOOL IN ALL OR PART OF AN EXISTING BUILDING THAT WAS NOT DESIGNED FOR OR OCCUPIED BY A K-12 SCHOOL

VMC Section 16.335.02 A 3 requires the review authority to make the following determinations to grant a Use Permit (the determinations are in bold, and staff’s determination follows in italics):

a. The school location is appropriate for the use, and that adjacent uses will not be adversely affected.

The school location is appropriate for the use, and adjacent uses will not be adversely affected in that a similar and complimentary educational use is located across Georgia Street from the site and students also have easy access to the John F. Kennedy library.

In addition, the school would bring staff, students and parents into the downtown area increasing pedestrian traffic to restaurants and shops.

b. Adequate access, student drop-off areas and required off-street parking is provided.

Under VMC section 16.508.04 A, no parking is required for this site; however, on- street public parking is available on Georgia and Sacramento Streets. Additional parking to support the school and other nearby uses is available in the Downtown Parking District parking lots via parking passes which can be purchased. The applicant is proposing drop-off zones along the curbline of the Georgia and Sacramento Streets during the morning and afternoon which will temporarily reduce the availability of the on-street parallel spaces during this period. Sixteen (16) diagonal spaces on Sacramento Street will be permanently converted into 8 parallel spaces. In addition, the site is adjacent to the Vallejo Transit Hub, and has easy walking or biking via the Class III bike lanes. The applicant is providing bike racks for 38 bikes.

c. Outdoor play areas are appropriately-sized, furnished with facilities and equipment, safe, and secure.

N/A. While indoor PE areas are provided, there are no outdoor facilities.

V. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PROJECT AT 241-255 GEORGIA STREET NOW, THEREFORE, LET IT BE RESOLVED that the Planning Commission hereby FINDS that the project is exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (Class 32: In-fill Projects), based on the above findings.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission hereby APPROVES Major Use Permit (UP22-0008) subject to the Conditions of Approval attached to this Resolution.

VI. VOTE

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Vallejo, State of California, on the 18th day of March 2024 by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

_______________________________________________________

JAMAR STAMPS, CHAIRPERSON
City of Vallejo Planning Commission

Attest:

_______________________________

CHRISTINA RATCLIFFE, AICP, SECRETARY
City of Vallejo Planning Commission

Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval

EXHIBIT A

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

MAJOR USE PERMIT (UP22-0008)
241-255 GEORGIA STREET, VALLEJO CA, 94589
APN: 0055-170-390

PERMIT DESCRIPTION: The project consists of the phased conversion of a vacant two-story, 34,819 square-foot office building in Downtown Vallejo with associated interior/exterior on-site and right-of-way improvements allowing for the operation of a new public Charter high school with an enrollment of up to 400 students.

A. PLANNING DIVISION

Staff Contact: Erwin Ordoñez, Planning Consultant (707) 648 -4326 [email protected]

Pre-Building Permit:

1. The applicant shall submit a numbered list to the Planning Division with a written response regarding how each condition of project approval contained in this report will be satisfied.

The list should be submitted to the project planner , who will coordinate the development of the project. The approved COA will be included in the permit set after the cover sheet with each condition listed and how the applicant will address each condition in writing.

2. The site plan, floor plans, building elevations, and any additional information or representations, whether oral or written, indicating the proposed manner of operation submitted with an application or submitted during the approval process are deemed conditions of approval. Applicant guarantees, warrants, and ensures compliance with the plans and conditions in all respects.

3. The Applicant shall apply for and receive a Temporary Use Permit from the Planning Division for any temporary office or construction trailer.

During Construction

1. Construction activities shall be managed in compliance with the following requirements:
a. Site Watering. During the project's construction, all portions of the site shall be watered as necessary to reduce emissions of dust and other particulate matter, and all stockpiles shall be covered.
b. Maintenance. Streets and sidewalks shall be made dirt-free at the completion of construction.
c. Noise. All construction and transport equipment shall be muffled in accordance with state and federal laws.
d. Emissions. Construction and transport equipment shall be operated to minimize exhaust emissions. During construction, trucks and equipment should be running only when necessary.
e. Water Run-off. All water run-off from construction sites shall be controlled. During construction, trucks and equipment should be running only when necessary and shall comply with Chapter 12.41 of the Vallejo Municipal Code.

2. No person shall make, or cause to suffer, or permit to be made upon any public property, public right-of-way, or private property any excessive noise, annoying noise, amplified sound or vibrations that are physically annoying to reasonable persons of normal sensitivity or that are so harsh or so prolonged or unnatural or unusual in their use, time or place as to cause or contribute to the unnecessary and unreasonable discomfort of any persons of normal sensitivity located at the lot line of the property from which these noises emanate or that interfere with the peace and comfort of residents or their guests, or th e operators or customers in places of business in the vicinity, or that may detrimentally or adversely affect such residences or places of business. (VMC Section 16.502.09 (C))

3. Construction, demolition, and related loading/unloading activities that may generate noise shall be limited to 7 a.m. and 6 p.m. Monday- Friday, Saturday 9 am- 6 pm and Sundays and holidays not allowed. (VMC Section 16.502.09 (D))

4. The fencing for construction sites shall not be installed until a building permit or grading permit has been issued and shall be removed before final inspection. In the event that the building permits expire before the construction is completed, the Planning and Development Services Director may issue a temporary use permit under Chapter 16.339, Temporary Uses, to allow the fencing to remain for a longer period of time. (VMC Section

16.505.08 (B))

Pre-Building Final

1. Prior to the first final building inspection, the landscape architect shall provide a completed Certificate of Completion and a Certificate of Installation , according to the Landscape Documentation by VMC Chapter 16.71: Water Efficient Landscape Requirements. The documentation shall include the following:
a. Irrigation Scheduling (VMC §16.71.050)
b. Schedule of Landscape and Irrigation Maintenance (VMC §16.71.051) c. Landscape Irrigation Audit Report (VMC §16.71.052)
d. Soil Management Report (VMC §16.71.045)

2. Prior to first final building inspection, the Applicant shall install landscaping and irrigation per approved plans. The landscape architect shall verify in writing that the landscaping and irrigation have been installed per the approved landscape plans concerning size, health, number and species of plants, and the overall design concept.

Landscaping

1. Maintenance Required. All landscaping shall be maintained in a healthy and always thriving condition, in compliance with the approved landscape plan. Irrigation systems and their components shall be fully functional and consistent with the original approved design or upgraded to reflect current best practices for water efficiency. Regular maintenance shall include but is not limited to:
a. Adjusting, checking, and repairing irrigation equipment; resetting automatic controllers; aerating and de -thatching turf areas; adding/replenishing fertilizer, mulch, and soil amendments; insect control; the replacement of dead or diseased plants; pruning; watering; and weeding all landscaped areas. b. The trimming of vegetation is necessary to maintain the effective functioning of solar energy facilities and passive solar design features installed both on-site and on adjacent properties.
c. Pruning, cultivating, weeding, fertilizing, replacing plants, and regularly watering. d. Pruning or removal of overgrown vegetation, cultivated or uncultivated, that may harbor rats, vermin, or other nuisances or otherwise be detrimental to neighboring properties.
e. The removal of dead, decayed, diseased, or hazardous trees, weeds , and debris that create an unsightly appearance and may be dangerous to public safety and welfare or detrimental to neighboring properties or property values. Compliance shall be by removal, replacement, or maintenance.
f. Landscaping (trees, shrubs, ground cover, turf, etc.) which, due to accident, damage, disease, lack of maintenance, or other cause, fails to show a healthy appearance and growth, shall be replaced. Replacement plants shall conform to all standards that gov ern the original planting installation, approved landscaping plan, or the director's approval. (VMC Section 16.504.08 (D))

2. Accumulation of leaves, twigs, bark, and other similar materials shall be removed regularly. Planting areas shall be always kept free of weeds. (VMC §16.504.08 (C))

Lighting

1. Lighting shall be designed, located, and installed to be directed downward or toward structures, be shielded or fully shielded. It shall be well-maintained to prevent glare, light trespass (unwanted light on adjacent lots and public rights-of-way), and light pollution to the maximum extent feasible. No permanently installed lighting shall blink, flash, or be of unusually high intensity or brightness, as determined by the Planning and Development Services Director. (VMC §16.506.04 (B))

General Requirements

1. A final decision on an application for any discretionary approval subject to appeal shall become effective after the expiration of ten calendar days following the date of action unless an appeal is filed. No building permit or business license shall be iss ued until the 11th day following the action date. If a different termination date is fixed at the time of granting, or if actual construction or alteration has begun under valid building permits, the ten days may be waived. (VMC §16.602.11)

2. The review authority, in the granting of any permit, may specify a time consistent with the purposes of the use and necessary to safeguard the public safety, health, and welfare, within which the proposed use must be undertaken and actively and continuously pursued.

If no time period is specified, any permit granted under the Zoning Code shall automatically expire within two years of the effective date (which is March 18, 2024) (VMC §16.602.12 (A)). All Planning permits associated with this approval shall expire on March 18, 2026, unless exercised or extended.

3. If a permit is granted in conjunction with approval of new construction, issuance of a building permit shall constitute exercise of rights; provided, however, that, unless otherwise specified as a condition of project approval, the permit shall expire if:
i. The Building Permit expires.
ii. Final inspection is not completed, or certificate of occupancy issued within the time specified as a condition of project approval.
iii. The rights granted under the permit are not exercised within one year following the earliest to occur of the following: issuance of a certificate of occupancy; or if no certificate of occupancy is required, the last required final inspection for the new construction. (VMC §16.602.11 (B))

4. The Planning and Development Services Director may approve a one -year extension of any permit or approval granted for a residential or non-residential project under the Zoning Code upon receipt of a written application and fees received fifteen calendar da ys (November 6, 2025) before the expiration date with the required fee prior to expiration of the permit. (VMC §16.602.11 (C.1))

5. No change in the use or structure for which a permit or other approval has been issued is permitted unless the permit is modified as provided for in the Zoning Code. For this chapter, the modification of a permit may include minor modification of a develop ment review approval that is in substantial compliance as determined by the Planning and Development Services Director. (VMC §16.602.11 (D))

6. Applications for changes to an approved permit must be filed and processed in compliance with the requirements in VMC Section 16.602.02, Application Forms and Fees, and shall be subject to a fee established by the Master Fee Schedule. a. Minor Modifications. The Planning and Development Services Director may approve minor changes to approved plans that are consistent with the original findings and conditions approved by the hearing body and would not intensify any potentially detrimental effects of the project.
b. Major Modifications. A request for changes in conditions of approval of a discretionary permit or a change in an approved site plan or building plan that would affect the findings adopted as a basis for project approval shall be treated as a new application, except that the Planning and Development Services Director may approve changes that she determines to be minor. (VMC §16.602.11 (E))

7. A request for major changes to an approved site plan or building plan that will not affect the findings adopted as a basis for project approval but are still considered substantial shall be forwarded to the original review authority for the discretionary permit for review and approval. (VMC §16.602.11 (F))

8. For new developments, utilities including, but not limited to, all electrical, telephone, cable television, fiber -optic cable, gas, water, sewer, irrigation/recycled water, and similar distribution lines providing direct service to a project shall be installed underground within the site. The Planning and Development Services Director may waive this requirement upon determining that underground installation is infeasible, or the electrical line is otherwise exempt from an under-grounding requirement. (VMC §16.501.10)

9. The Applicant shall obtain an inspection from the Planning Division before the final building inspection. All inspections require a minimum of 24-hour notice. Occupancy permits shall not be granted until all construction and landscaping are completed and finalized by the approved plans and required conditions of approval or a bond has been posted to cover all costs of the unfinished work as agreed to by the Planning and Development Services Director.

10. Applicant shall indemnify, hold harmless, and defend City, its officers, officials, directors, employees, agents, volunteers and affiliates and each of them from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, damages, costs, expenses, actual attorney’s fees, applicant’s fees, expert fees, losses or liability, in law or in equity, of every kind and nature whatsoever arising out of o r in connection with Applicant’s operations, or any subcontractor’s operations, to be performed under this agreement for Applicant’s or subcontractor’s tort negligence including active or passive, or strict negligence, including but not limited to personal injury including, but not limited to bodily injury, emotional injury, sickness or disease, or death to persons and/or damage to property of anyone, including loss of use thereof, caused or alleged to be caused by any act or omission of Applicant, or any subcontractor, or anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them or anyone for the full period of time allowed by the law, regardless to any limitation by insurance, with the exception of the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City. No mod ification of the project, any application, permit, certification, condition, environmental determination, other approval, change in applicable laws and regulations, or change in processing methods shall alter the Applicant’s indemnity obligation.

Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA)

The following conditions of approval implement recommendations from the Transportation Impact Analysis prepared for this project.

1. Prior to the issuance of any permits, the Applicant shall prepare and submit for approval to the City’s Traffic Engineering Division, a proposed Parking and Circulation Plan, which will describe in detail : proposed hours, days of operation, staffing, permanent and temporary signage, methods of dissemination/distribution of information, enforcement mechanisms, and proposed operational procedures for implementing the pedestrian, bicycles and vehicular circula tion/parking noted in the plan.

At least two copies of the approved plan shall be provided to the City Traffic Engineering and Planning Divisions to be retained as a Public Record and to ensure future enforcement of the Major Use Permit Conditions of Approval. Violations of City approved Conditions of Approvals may result in future Use Permit revocation actions.

The required plan shall:
a. Direct parents/guardians to the Georgia Street loading/unloading zone when dropping off or picking up their students.
b. Require that staff, students, and visitors will be responsible for paying for their parking spots in the City-owned and publicly available parking within the surrounding area.
c. Identify vehicles regularly parked in the schools loading zone that need to be ticketed and towed by the City and a mechanism to regularly share this information with Vallejo Police Department and Public Works
d. Detail how (School) Staff will be stationed at unique locations at the loading zones and meet vehicles at the curb to help direct drivers entering/exiting the loading areas.

At least six staff members should be stationed on Georgia Street and three on Sacramento Street. At least one staff member should be stationed at the southwest corner of Georgia Street/Sacramento Street to ensure vehicles are not blocking the intersection.
e. Detail the schedule for staff to be stationed at the loading zones at least one hour before the first morning bell and stay approximately 10 minutes after the start of school.

In the afternoon, staff should be stationed at the loading zones at least 10 minutes before the last afternoon bell and stay approximately five minutes after the queues have dissipated.
f. Require parent’s vehicles to pull forward in the loading zones as far as possible to allow for the maximum number of vehicles to drop-off/pick-up their student(s). g. Require parents/guardians to stay in their vehicles at all times while students exit/enter via the right side of the vehicles when greeted by the staff member. h. Include a written drop-off and pick-up procedure with supporting graphics that can be communicated with the students’ parents/guardians via handouts and shared electronically through the school’s website.

2. Prior to the issuance of any permits, the Applicant shall amend plans submitted for Building Permit Plan Check approval to show bicycle parking facilities to accommodate at least 38 bicycle parking spaces and the required bicycle parking shall be available for use prior to issuance of Final Inspection approvals or the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.

3. Prior to issuance of Final Inspection approvals or the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy the applicant(s), at their shall cost, shall permanently install in a manner consistent with City standards, City approved signs along both proposed loading zones (Georgia Street and Sacramento Street) which note the following: "No parking from 7 to 9 AM and 3 to 5 PM on weekdays - violators will be towed".

4. Prior to issuance of Final Inspection approvals or the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy the applicant(s), at their shall cost, shall permanently paint the curbs white in both loading and unloading zones in a manner consistent with City and State standards.

5. Prior to issuance of Final Inspection approvals or the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant(s), at their shall cost, shall permanently install in a manner consistent with City standards, Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) compliant R10-7 “DO NOT BLOCK INTERSECTION” signs on all four approaches to the Santa Clara Stre et/Georgia Street and Sacramento Street/Georgia Street intersections. Signs shall be mast arm mounted if possible with existing equipment (street mounted/installed if not possible on the existing signal mast arms).

6. Prior to issuance of Final Inspection approvals or the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy the applicant(s), at their cost, shall permanently install or cause to be installed in a manner consistent with City standards, all the improvements noted within the public rights-of-way as depicted in the approved development plans including all regulatory sig ns. The applicant(s) are responsible for obtaining any additional approvals and paying for any additional fees associated with these improvements.

Historical/Cultural Resources Best Practice for Excavation The following conditions of approval implement recommendations from the Historic/Cultural Resources background documentation prepared for this project.

1. The applicant shall immediately notify the City Building and Planning Divisions upon the discovery of any historic, cultural, or archaeological discovery that results from the construction or excavation activities occurring on the project site.

2. If a unique archaeological resource is discovered, reasonable efforts shall be made by the applicant to permit any or all of these resources to be preserved in place or left in an undisturbed state. Examples of appropriate treatment, in no order of preference, may include, but are not limited to, the following:
a) Planning construction to avoid archaeological sites. b) Deeding archaeological sites into permanent conservation easements. c) Capping or covering archaeological sites with a layer of soil before building on the sites.
d) Planning parks, greenspace, or other open space to incorporate archaeological sites.

3. To the extent that unique archaeological resources are discovered and preservation in place is not feasible, an archeologist would determine an appropriate treatment plan, which could include excavation. Retention of a qualified archeologist for this pur pose shall be made at the applicant’s expense with the approval of the City.

4. In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, the applicant shall immediately notify the City and there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains until the coroner of the county in which the human remains are discovered has determined, in accordance with Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 27460) of Part 3 of Division 2 of Title 3 of the Government Code, that the remains are not subject to the provisions of Section 27491 of the Government Code or any other related provisions of law concerning investigation of the circumstances, manner and cause of any death, and the recommendations concerning the treatment and disposition of the human remains have been made to the person responsible for the excavation, or to his or her authorized representative, in the manner provided in Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code. The coroner shall make his or her determination within two working days from the time the person responsible for the excavation, or his or her authorized representative, notifies the coroner of the discovery or recognition of the human remains.

If the coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his or her authority and if the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American, or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission.

5. Upon the discovery of the Native American remains, the applicant/landowner shall ensure that the immediate vicinity, according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or practices, where the Native American human remains are located, is not damaged or disturbed by further development activity until the landowner has discussed and conferred, as prescribed in State Law, with the most likely descendants regarding their recommendations, if applicable, taking into account the possibility of multiple human remains. The landowner shall discuss and confer with the descendants all reasonable options regarding the descendants’ preferences for treatment.

B. BUILDING DIVISION
Staff Contact: Steve Arnold, Building Official, (707) 648-4387 [email protected]

1. Plans and permits are required for building, mechanical, plumbing and electrical work per California Code of Regulations, Title 24 and applicable City Ordinance in effect at the time of completed Building Permit application date and required fees shall be paid at time of application.

2. 2022 California Code of Regulations will apply to this project if permit application(s) are received before end of 2025. After December 31, 2025, the 2025 California Code of Regulations will apply.

3. Accessibility is required for this project per CBC 11B; See 11b-209.2 and 11B-503 for Passenger drop off and loading zone requirements.

4. Prior to the issuance of permits, please refer to Section 32020 of the Education Code for Fire/Police/Ambulance access requirements at fences or gates.

5. Vertical access is required for Phase 2 second floor education area. Please clarify your intent with Building Division staff prior to applying for permits for Phase 2. A possible exception for second floor office space less than 3000 square feet and not open to the public per 11B..206.2.3 EXC 1.2 (info only)

C. VALLEJO FLOOD & WASTEWATER DISTRICT (VFWD)
Staff Contact: Alan Mitchell, P.E., Contract Plan Check, (530) 681-0553 [email protected]

1. Provide sewer analysis for VFWD approval, prior to issuance of Building Permit.

2. A complete District Pre-Treatment Questionnaire (PTQ) is required, describing the nature of proposed food service. Here is a link for the PTQ that can also be located on the VFWD’s website.

4. Pay applicable VFWD fees (plan review, connection, inspection) before approval by VFWD and issuance of Building Permit.

5. VFWD inspection will be required prior to Building Permit sign-off.

6. Verify depth of existing sewer main, prior to starting construction. Notify VFWD if greater than 10'.

7. Prior to occupancy/final building inspection, provide a standard VFWD cleanout at the right-of-way/easement line per District standards and a two-way cleanout at the building per the U.P.C. This applies to all laterals.

8. New 2-way cleanout is shown under the bike racks, so please confirm the bike racks are moveable for access to cleanout.

9. See VFWD Detail SS-2, Table 1, which shows new lower lateral shall be SDR26 PVC.

10. Confirm separation between existing W and proposed lower sewer lateral. Notify Vallejo PW Water Division to confirm acceptable.

11. Provide sewer analysis before VFWD approval.

12. Pay applicable VFWD fees before approval.

D. SOLANO COUNTY TRANSIT
Staff Contact: Patricia Carr, General Services Manager,[email protected]

1. The drop-off behind the building MUST be controlled by the school. Carpools queues cannot block access to the private roadway or access to the parking spaces.

E. VALLEJO FIRE DEPARTMENT

Fire Prevention Plan Review
Project Description: CHANGE IN USE; Preliminary Review to Establish a Public Charter School (E Occupancy) from an Existing Building — 34,819 sq. ft. of Tenant Improvement — 22,959 E Occupancy and 11,860 of B Occupancy

The project plans have been reviewed with the information supplied. Subsequent plan submittals for review may be subject to additional requirements. Field inspections that discover fire/life safety issues may require additional revisions or alterations. Permits expire 1 year from issuance. The Fire Department recommends a fire safety inspection should occur to review the building for Fire and Building Code compliance.

Fire Code Requirements

FIRE ACCESS

2. The building electrical service disconnecting means shall be installed in a readily accessible location either outside the building or nearest the point of entrance of the service conductors. The disconnecting means shall be accessible to emergency personnel, either directly or by a remote actuating device without requiring transit of the building interior.

3. A Knox Box (key box) mounted no higher than 5 feet above the finished floor containing appropriate keys for emergency Fire Department access shall be provided. The minimium size box is the 3200 series with a hinged door. The tamper kit is not required, box color may be any of the Knox options. It takes approximately 2 weeks for delivery. For more information call the Fire Prevention Division at (707) 658-4565 or visit www.knoxbox.com

4. Keys for the Knox Box entry system required by the Fire Department shall be attached to durable tags with permanent marking identifying the door(s) or lock(s) that the key functions with. i.e. "MASTER" or "MECHANICAL ROOM",

5. Approved address numbers shall be placed on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Said numbers shall clearly contrast with their background. The characters shall be a minimum of 4" high with a 1/2" stroke. The size of the building and distance or location of the address numbers from the roadway may necessitate larger numbers. A building directory sign is required at the main entrance. All buildings require identification numbers or letters.

6. Rooms or areas containing controls for HVAC systems, electrical panels, automatic fire extinguishing systems, fire alarm equipment or other detection, suppression or control elements shall be identified with appropriate signs.

FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS

8. Smoke detection/dampers for HVAC systems shall be required as set forth in the Mechanical Code. Areas served by a single or multiple units exceeding 2,000 CFM shall have detectors installed and supervised by the fire alarm system. Detectors shall not trip a general alarm. Detectors shall be selfrestoring or a readily accessible manual reset shall be installed.

9. The minimum fire-extinguisher requirement shall be one 2A-10BC rated portable unit in such locations so that maximum floor -travel distance does not exceed 75 to the nearest extinguisher from any portion of the building with a maximum of 3,000 square feet o f floor area surveyed. Plan submittal shall include the proposed location of extinguishers. Final location shall be approved in the field by the Fire Department.

10. All fire extinguishers shall be mounted in a conspicuous and readily accessible location either on a bracket or within an approved storage cabinet. Fire extinguishers shall be mounted so the top of the unit is 3 feet to 5 feet off the finished floor. If the extinguisher is not readily visible, a sign shall be located directly above the extinguisher. The sign shall be legible and of a contrasting color with its background.

11. An automatic fire sprinkler system is required for the proposed E Occupancy tenant improvement building. Please submit 2 sets of plans and calculations to the Fire Marshal's Office and obtain permit prior to installation. Please note the density of the system must be compatible with the occupancy classification and designed in accordance with NFPA 13.

12. A manual and automatic fire alarm system that initiates the occupant notification signal utilizing an emergency voice/alarm communication system meeting the requirements of the Fire Code and NFPA 72 is required. When automatic sprinkler systems or smoke de tectors are installed, such systems or detectors shall be connected to the building fire alarm system. Please submit 2 sets of fire alarm plans and obtain permit from the Fire Prevention Bureau prior to installation. Please include listed device selections cut sheets.

13. A underground fire service main is required. A separate permit from the Fire Prevention Division is required. Please submit 2 sets of plans for the underground fire service main for review by the Fire Official prior to installation.

14. This project shall comply with the California Fire Code regarding fire flow requirements, including Appendix B. Fire flow calculations shall be designed by a fire protection engineer or C-16 licensed contractor.

15. Fire hydrants must be installed and approved by the fire department prior to combustible construction. Fire hydrants shall be spaced a maximum of 300 feet apart.

Please indicate on the plans the location of all existing and proposed Fire hydrants.

16. Approved impact protection shall be installed as necessary to protect hydrants from vehicular damage.

17. The contractor shall be responsible for painting of hydrants, verifying street valves are fully opened and the placement of blue reflective dots prior to requesting a final inspection. Maintenance, inspection and testing of private hydrants are the responsibility of the property owner. Private hydrants shall be painted red.

18. Kitchen. Provide an approved automatic fire extinguishing system to protect all cooking equipment. A permit is required from the Fire Marshal's office for fixed fire extinguishing systems. Please submit 2 sets of plans for review and approval. Design and system calculations shall be prepared by a licensed C-16 Contractor.

19. Activation of the (kitchen) fixed fire extinguishing system shall activate the building fire alarm.

MEANS OF EGRESS

20. An exit corridor is required and shall be a minimum of 44 inches wide and have a fire resistive rating of 1 hour.

21. All buildings shall comply with the California Building Code, Chapter 10 Means of Egress requirements. Including but not limited to; exit signs, exit doors, exit hardware and exit illumination.

22. Provide an approved exit sign over all required exit doors.

23. Means of egress illumination shall be provided and maintained at any time the building is occupied. The means of egress shall be illuminated of not less than 1 foot candle power and shall be approved by the Fire Prevention Division prior to sign-off of the final inspection.

24. Emergency exit lighting shall be provided at or near all exits and as designated by the Fire Marshal. Final exit lighting shall be approved by the Fire Marshal prior to sign-off of the final inspection.

25. All emergency lighting, exit sign lights shall have two separate sources of power as required by the California Building Code.

26. Locking devices on exit doors shall conform to the California Building Code. Only one lock or latch requiring one motion/operation to open/unlock is required. No double keyed dead-bolts are permitted on exit doors.

27. Maintain the width of the exit system; tables, chairs, storage systems and other devices shall not obstruct the means of egress along the path of exit travel based on the cumulative occupant load served. Maintain clear access to all exits.

28. Provide panic hardware on all required exits. All exit doors shall open in the exit direction of travel. A, E, 1 2 and 1 2.1 Occupancies only.

MISC. REQUIREMENTS

29. All interior finishes, decorative material and furnishings shall meet the flammability, smoke and combustibility requirements of the Fire Code.

30. All roof material shall be rated class 'A" or better.

31. Provide "Roof Access" sign at roof ladder location.

32. Post an occupant load sign in a conspicuous place near the main exit from all rooms designated as "Assembly Areas". The sign shall read as follows; Maximum Occupants:

General
Dining
(calculations shall be provided by the Architect)

33. Provide a 1-hour fire separation between the B and A & E occupancies as required by the 2019 California Building Code.

34. The Emergency Plan including fire drill procedures shall be submitted to the Fire Marshal for review prior to final occupancy.

VFD & CSFM Fire Drill Requirements for Schools
CFC 403.5 Group E occupancies. An approved fire safety and evacuation plan in accordance with Section 404 shall be prepared and maintained for Group E occupancies and for buildings containing both a Group E occupancy and an atrium.

Group E occupancies shall comply with Sections 403.5.1 thr ough 403.5.4. [California Code of Regulations, Title 19, Division 1, S3.13(a)(1)] Fire Drills. (Group E Occupancies)
(a) Group E Occupancies.
(1) General. Every person and public officer managing, controlling, or in charge of any public, private, or parochial school shall cause the fire alarm signal to be sounded upon the discovery of fire. Every person and public officer managing, controlling, or in charge of any public, private, or parochial school, other than a two-year community college, shall cause the fire alarm signal to be sounded not less than once every calendar month at the elementary and intermediate levels, and not less than twice yearly at the secondary level, in the manner prescribed in California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, Section 907. A fire drill shall be held at the secondary level not less than twice every school year.
403.5.1 Group E Occupancies. Every person and public officer managing, controlling, or in charge of any public, private, or parochial school, other than a two-year community college, shall cause the fire alarm signal to be sounded not less than once every calendar month at the elementary and intermediate levels, and not less than twice yearly

at the secondary level in the manner prescribed in Section 907. A fire drill shall be held at the secondary level not less than twice every school year. 403.5.1.1 Emergency Pre-Fire Planning. Each school principal, district superintendent or day nursery manager shall, in cooperation with the enforcing agency, prepare procedures to be followed in case of fire or other emergency. They should include the following:

1. Posting of the telephone number of the fire department in the office and/or at the main switchboard.

2. Assignment of a responsible person to call the fire department upon notification of any fire or activation of the alarm system for any reason other than fire drills.

3. Posting in a conspicuous place in each classroom or assembly area a plan showing paths of travel to evacuate the room in case of emergency and including an alternate route.

4. Posting in each classroom instructions to be followed by the teacher. These should include:
a. 4.1. Maintaining of order during evacuation.
b. 4.2. Removal of roll call book and calling of roll when designated evacuation area is reached.
403.5.2 First emergency evacuation drill. The first emergency evacuation drill of each school year shall be conducted within 10 days of the beginning of classes. 403.5.3 Time of day. Emergency evacuation drills shall be conducted at different hours of the day or evening, during the changing of classes, when the school is at assembly, during the recess or gymnastic periods, or during other times to avoid distinction between drills and actual fires.
403.5.4 Assembly points. Outdoor assembly areas shall be designated and shall be located a safe distance from the building being evacuated to avoid interference with fire department operations. The assembly areas shall be arranged to keep each class separate to provide accountability of all individuals.

35. A final inspection from the Fire Prevention Division is required.

Requests for field inspection shall be made a minimum of 24 hours in advance by calling the Fire Prevention Division at (707) 648 -4565, Monday through Friday 9:00AM to 3:00PM. If you have any questions regarding these requirements, please feel fre e to contact this office at (707) 648-4565.

Kinyon + Kim
Architects, Inc.
1801 Oakland Blvd., Suite 320
Walnut Creek, CA. 94596
925.934.1160
F: 925.934.8132
The information, plans, designs, notes and arrangements shown on this drawing are confidential and may not be reproduced in whole or in part without the expressed written permission of Kinyon + Kim Architects, Inc. Drawings noted as Preliminary, Schematic and/or Conceptual contain information that is conceptual and subject to change. The architect makes no claim as to the accuracy of conceptual information or of information supplied by others.

Kinyon + Kim Architects, Inc., 2022c
Project #: Drawn by: Checked by:

Vallejo High School
Tenant Improvements
251 Georgia Street
Vallejo, CA 94590
APN: 0055-170-390
09/26/2023
MUP1
220118 Author Checker
PROJECT DESCRIPTION :

THE PROPOSED PUBLIC CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL WILL PROVIDE
A VALUABLE HIGH SCHOOL IN THE DOWNTOWN VALLEJO AREA.

THE EXISTING BUILDING LOCATED AT 241-255 GEORGIA STREET WILL ACCOMMODATE A MAXIMUM OF 400 STUDENTS AND 35
STAFF. THE BUILDING IS A PARTIAL TWO-STORY BUILDING WITH A COMBINED TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF 34,819 SQUARE
FEET.

THE TENANT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT WILL BE PHASED AS
FUNDS BECOME AVAILABLE TO UPGRADE THE BUILDING. THE

FIRST PHASE PERMIT WILL INCLUDE THE FULL GROUND FLOOR

WITH TWO SUITES IDENTIFIED AS DEDUCTIVE ALTERNATES IF THE BIDS COME IN TOO HIGH. THE SECOND PHASE WILL INCLUDE

THE SECOND FLOOR AND ANY WORK THAT WAS NOT
COMPLETED ON THE FIRST FLOOR IN PHASE I.

THE PROGRAM FOR THE GROUND FLOOR INCLUDES 13

CLASSROOMS, A LIBRARY ALCOVE, MULTI-PURPOSE ROOM,
SERVING KITCHEN, 4 OFFICES, RESTROOMS, AND STORAGE
AREAS. THE SECOND FLOOR WILL ACCOMMODATE 5

ADDITIONAL CLASSROOMS, STORAGE, RESTROOMS, A
CONFERENCE ROOM AND 4 PRIVATE OFFICES.

THE MAIN VISITOR ENTRANCE WILL BE LOCATED ON GEORGIA

STREET AND THE STUDENT ENTRANCE WILL BE AT THE BACK OF
THE BUILDING AT LOT G. STUDENTS WILL ACCESS THE BUILDING

FROM AN ADA COMPLIANT RAMP OFF SACRAMENTO STREET
THAT WILL LEAD TO A GATED, FENCED WALKWAY. THE

SECOND FLOOR WILL HAVE ACCESS OFF THE WEST END OF

THE BUILDING WITH A NEW ELEVATOR AND COMPLIANT ENTRY
STAIRS.

PROJECT NUMBER:

APN: 0055-170-390
TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: III-B
SEPARATION WALLS: AS APPLICABLE
OCCUPANCY GROUP: E OCCUPANCY
TABULATIONS:

TOTAL LOT AREA = 0.704 ACRE (PARCEL 1 @ 0.620 + PARCEL
2 @ 0.034 + PARCEL 3 @ 0.025 + PARCEL 4 @ 0.025)
GROSS BUILDING AREA: 34,819 S.F.
22,990 S.F. GROUND FLOOR
11,860 S.F. SECOND FLOOR.

PROJECT DATA:

ZONING: DMX (DOWNTOWN MIXED-USE)
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS:

REQUIRED EXISTING
FRONT SETBACK: 00 00
SIDE SETBACK: 00 00
REAR SETBACK: 00 00
BUILDING HEIGHT: 102 FT. 34 FT.

BICYCLE PARKING (VMC 16.508.12 & TABLE 16.508-D):

SCHOOLS - 2 SHORT-TERM SPACES PER CLASSROOM OR 6% OF
STUDENT CAPACITY PLUS STAFF.
18 CLASSROOMS * 2 = 36 BICYCLE SPACES

PROJECT TEAM

VICINITY MAP

SITE LOCATION
APPLICANT:

ELITE PUBLIC SCHOOLS
100 WHITNEY AVENUE
VALLEJO, CA 94589
(707) 652-3142
CONTACT: DR. RAMONA BISHOP
OWNER:

BRYAN BAYLES
51 RED CYPRESS CT
DANVILLE, CA 94506
ARCHITECT:

KINYON + KIM ARCHITECTS, INC.
1801 OAKLAND BLVD., SUITE 320
WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596
(925) 934-1160
CONTACT: DAVID KIM, AIA
CIVIL:

ATLAS CIVIL DESIGN
872 HIGUERA STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
(760) 718-8010
CONTACT: A.J. WHITAKER, PE
PROJECT MANAGEMENT:

JO ANN KOPLIN
[email protected]
(310) 717-4323

PROPOSED ELITE PUBLIC SCHOOLS - VALLEJO
241-255 Georgia Street
Vallejo, CA

MAJOR USE PERMIT (PLANNING SUBMITTAL)

MUP SUBMITTAL SHEET INDEX
MUP1 MUP SUBMITTAL COVER SHEET
MUP2 FIRE DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
MUP3 SITE CONTEXT PHOTOS
MUP4 PRELIM SITE LAYOUT
MUP4.1 PRELIM DEMO SITE LAYOUT
MUP5 PHASE 1 PRELIM DEMO GROUND
FLOOR
MUP6 PHASE 1 PRELIM GROUND FLOOR
MUP7 PHASE 2 PRELIM GROUND FLOOR
MUP8 PHASE 2 PRELIM DEMO SECOND
FLOOR
MUP9 PHASE 2 PRELIM SECOND FLOOR
MUP10 PHASE 2 PRELIM ROOF PLAN
MUP11 PRELIM MASTER GROUND FLOOR
MUP12 PRELIM MASTER SECOND FLOOR
MUP13 PRELIM EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
1 of 6 TITLE SHEET
2 of 6 DEMOLITION AND SITE IMPROVEMENT

PLAN - A
3 of 6 DEMOLITION AND SITE IMPROVEMENT

PLAN - B
4 of 6 UTILITY PLAN
5 of 6 OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENT PLAN
6 of 6 DETAILS
L1 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN
TOTAL PARCEL AREA (PARCELS 1, 2 & 3): 30,666 S.F.

EXISTING & PROPOSED LANDSCAPE AREA: 1,425 S.F. (0.046 %)

EXHIBIT A
Kinyon + Kim
Architects, Inc.
1801 Oakland Blvd., Suite 320
Walnut Creek, CA. 94596
925.934.1160
F: 925.934.8132
The information, plans, designs, notes and arrangements shown on this drawing are confidential and may not be reproduced in whole or in part without the expressed written permission of Kinyon + Kim Architects, Inc. Drawings noted as Preliminary, Schematic and/or Conceptual contain information that is conceptual and subject to change. The architect makes no claim as to the accuracy of conceptual information or of information supplied by others.

Kinyon + Kim Architects, Inc., 2022c
Project #: Drawn by: Checked by:

Vallejo High School
Tenant Improvements
251 Georgia Street
Vallejo, CA 94590
APN: 0055-170-390
09/26/2023
MUP2
220118 Author Checker

EXHIBIT AFIRE DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
Kinyon + Kim
Architects, Inc.
1801 Oakland Blvd., Suite 320
Walnut Creek, CA. 94596
925.934.1160
F: 925.934.8132
The information, plans, designs, notes and arrangements shown on this drawing are confidential and may not be reproduced in whole or in part without the expressed written permission of Kinyon + Kim Architects, Inc. Drawings noted as Preliminary, Schematic and/or Conceptual contain information that is conceptual and subject to change. The architect makes no claim as to the accuracy of conceptual information or of information supplied by others.

Kinyon + Kim Architects, Inc., 2022c
Project #: Drawn by: Checked by:

Vallejo High School
Tenant Improvements
251 Georgia Street
Vallejo, CA 94590
APN: 0055-170-390
09/26/2023
MUP3
220118 Author Checker

VIEW FROM GEORGIA STREET

NORTHEAST CORNER

VIEW FROM GEORGIA STREET

NORTHWEST CORNER

VIEW FROM SACRAMENTO STREET

SOUTHEAST CORNER

VIEW FROM SOUTH

NORTH VIEW OF GEORGIA STREET

WEST VIEW

EAST VIEW OF SACRAMENTO ST

WEST VIEW

EXHIBIT A

PROPOSED ELITE

HIGH SCHOOL

EXISTING GROSS
BUILDING AREA: 34,819 S.F.
22,959 S.F. GROUND FLOOR
11,860 S.F. SECOND FLOOR.
400 MAX. STUDENT CAPACITY

DOWNTOWN PARKING LOT G
SCHOOL

ENTRY/EXIT
SCHOOL
ENTRY
SCHOOL

ENTRY/EXIT
SCHOOL

ENTRY/EXIT
EXIT
ONLY
EXIT
ONLY
PARCEL 1
PARCEL 2
PARCEL 3

EXISTING SIDEWALK

TO REMAIN EXISTING SIDEWALK

TO REMAIN

EXISTING SIDEWALK

TO REMAIN
PARCEL 4 EASEMENT

VALLEJO CITY
APN: 0055-170-530

VALLEJO CITY
APN: 0055-170-220

VALLEJO CITY
APN: 0055-170-170

EXISTING SIDEWALK

TO REMAIN

EXISTING SIDEWALK TO REMAIN
(N) PATHWAY

TO MEET ACCESSIBILITY

WROUGHT IRON

FENCING WITH GATES

OUTDOOR AREA OUTDOOR AREA
L
L
L
22' - 0"5' - 0"20' - 5"6' - 0 1/16"
4 BICYCLE SPACES
PER RACK. TOTAL OF
9 RACKS = 36 SPACES
BICYCLE RACKS, TYP. BICYCLE RACKS, TYP.
11' - 0"
8' - 0"
5' - 0"
6' - 0"18' - 0"5' - 0"18' - 6"

TRASH ROOM

ROLL UP DOOR

SACRAMENTO STREET

WROUGHT IRON

FENCING WITH GATES

GEORGIA STREET

WROUGHT IRON FENCING WITH GATES

LOADING AND UNLOADING STUDENTS
MONDAY - FRIDAY: 8:00 AM TO 9:00 AM (MORNING)
MONDAY - FRIDAY: 3:00 PM TO 4:00 PM (AFTERNOON)
WEDNESDAY: 1:00 PM TO 2:00 PM (EARLY DISMISSAL)

FOOD DELIVERY
MONDAY - FRIDAY: 8:00 AM TO 9:00 AM (MORNING)
MONDAY - FRIDAY: 11:00 AM TO 1:00 PM (AFTERNOON)

AT OTHER TIMES

QUEUE LANE - PARALLEL PARKING

ACCESSIBLE DROP OFF AREA
40' - 0"
9' - 0"

QUEUE LANE - PARALLEL PARKING AT OTHER TIMES

NO PARKING FOR LOADING & UNLOADING
9' - 0"

PROVIDE SIGNAGE

NO PARKING DURING

NON SCHOOL HOURS
PROVIDE SIGNAGE:

NO PARKING DURING

NON SCHOOL HOURS

VALLEJO CITY
APN: 0055-170-270

SOLTRANS
APN: 0055-170-540

GEORGIA ST GEORGIA ST

YORK ST

SACRAMENTO ST SACRAMENTO ST

MARIN ST
ELITE

PUBLIC HS

VIRGINA ST
ROUTE
ROUTE
LOT G2 - APN:
0055-170-530
SOLTRANS - APN:
0055-170-540
LOT K
Kinyon + Kim
Architects, Inc.
1801 Oakland Blvd., Suite 320
Walnut Creek, CA. 94596
925.934.1160
F: 925.934.8132
The information, plans, designs, notes and arrangements shown on this drawing are confidential and may not be reproduced in whole or in part without the expressed written permission of Kinyon + Kim Architects, Inc. Drawings noted as Preliminary, Schematic and/or Conceptual contain information that is conceptual and subject to change. The architect makes no claim as to the accuracy of conceptual information or of information supplied by others.

Kinyon + Kim Architects, Inc., 2022c
Project #: Drawn by: Checked by:

Vallejo High School
Tenant Improvements
251 Georgia Street
Vallejo, CA 94590
APN: 0055-170-390
09/26/2023
MUP4
220118 dek dek
1/16" = 1'-0"
PRELIM SITE LAYOUT 0' 16'8' 32 FEET4'
ELITE Public
Schools

EXHIBIT A

PARKING MAP

PROPOSED ELITE

HIGH SCHOOL

EXISTING GROSS
BUILDING AREA: 34,819 S.F.
22,959 S.F. GROUND FLOOR
11,860 S.F. SECOND FLOOR.
400 MAX. STUDENT CAPACITY

DOWNTOWN PARKING LOT G
SCHOOL

ENTRY/EXIT
SCHOOL
ENTRY
SCHOOL

ENTRY/EXIT
SCHOOL

ENTRY/EXIT
EXIT
ONLY
EXIT
ONLY
PARCEL 1
PARCEL 2
PARCEL 3

EXISTING SIDEWALK

TO REMAIN EXISTING SIDEWALK

TO REMAIN

EXISTING SIDEWALK

TO REMAIN
PARCEL 4 EASEMENT

VALLEJO CITY
APN: 0055-170-530

VALLEJO CITY
APN: 0055-170-220

VALLEJO CITY
APN: 0055-170-170

EXISTING SIDEWALK

TO REMAIN

EXISTING SIDEWALK TO REMAIN
(N) PATHWAY

TO MEET ACCESSIBILITY

WROUGHT IRON

FENCING WITH GATES

OUTDOOR AREA OUTDOOR AREA
L
L
L
4 BICYCLE SPACES
PER RACK. TOTAL OF
9 RACKS = 36 SPACES
BICYCLE RACKS, TYP. BICYCLE RACKS, TYP.

TRASH ROOM

ROLL UP DOOR

SACRAMENTO STREET

WROUGHT IRON

FENCING WITH GATES

GEORGIA STREET

WROUGHT IRON FENCING WITH GATES

SOLTRANS
APN: 0055-170-540

DEMO LEGEND

DEMOLISHED WALL

EXISTING WALL TO REMAIN
(E) STOREFRONT / DOOR TO BE

REMOVED
Kinyon + Kim
Architects, Inc.
1801 Oakland Blvd., Suite 320
Walnut Creek, CA. 94596
925.934.1160
F: 925.934.8132
The information, plans, designs, notes and arrangements shown on this drawing are confidential and may not be reproduced in whole or in part without the expressed written permission of Kinyon + Kim Architects, Inc. Drawings noted as Preliminary, Schematic and/or Conceptual contain information that is conceptual and subject to change. The architect makes no claim as to the accuracy of conceptual information or of information supplied by others.

Kinyon + Kim Architects, Inc., 2022c
Project #: Drawn by: Checked by:

Vallejo High School
Tenant Improvements
251 Georgia Street
Vallejo, CA 94590
APN: 0055-170-390
09/26/2023
MUP4.1
220118 Author Checker
1/16" = 1'-0"

PRELIM DEMO SITE LAYOUT

EXHIBIT A
0' 16'8' 32 FEET4'
UP UP
UP

WALL LEGEND

DEMOLISHED WALL

EXISTING WALL TO REMAIN
(E) STOREFRONT / DOOR TO BE

REMOVED
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
A A
B B
C C
D D
E E
F F
G G
H H
RAMP
UP
RAMP
RAMP
RAMP
RAMP
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL. (E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL. (E) COL.(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.(E) COL.
(E) COL.(E) COL.
(E) COL. (E) COL.
(E) COL. (E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.

B.8B.6
A.8 A.8
B.7
E.8 E.8
F.4 F.4
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.

Kinyon + Kim Architects, Inc., 2022c
Project #: Drawn by: Checked by:

Vallejo High School
Tenant Improvements
251 Georgia Street
Vallejo, CA 94590
APN: 0055-170-390
09/26/2023
MUP5
220118 Author Checker
0' 8'4' 16 FEET2'
1/8" = 1'-0"
PHASE 1 EXISTING DEMO

PRELIM GROUND FLOOR
EXISTING FIXTURES TO BE REMOVED - PHASE 1
Type Count
HAND SINK 10
KITCHEN SINK 6
WALL HUNG URINAL 2
WATER CLOSET 14

EXHIBIT A
UP
DN
DN
DN
DN
UP
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
A A
B B
C C
D D
E E
F F
G G
H H

GEORGIA STREET

SACRAMENTO STREET
(E) 7' - 2 1/2"
20 ATHLETIC
108 REGULAR
SUITE #101
56' - 0"
SUITE #104
35' - 8"
SUITE #103
31' - 7 1/2"
SUITE #105
39' - 2 1/2"

STUDENT
ENTRY

OUTDOOR EATING OUTDOOR EATING
RAMP

STUDENT
ENTRY
RAMP
RAMP
RAMP
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL. (E) COL.
(E) COL.(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
103 SF
MDF104
93 SF
ELECT.105
136 SF
WOMENS110
127 SF
MENS111
835 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #3103
1292 SF
HALLWAY100
651 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #2102
370 SF
LIBRARY106
718 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #4108
586 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #1101
1292 SF
HALLWAY100
312 SF
ADMIN109
101 SF
STORAGE113
69 SF
SHOWER #1204
70 SF
SHOWER #2206
123 SF
BOYS
RESTROOM205
124 SF
WOMENS207
321 SF
BOYS LOCKERS203
279 SF
GIRLS LOCKERS208
174 SF
MAIN ENTRY201
990 SF
PE SPACE #1202
191 SF
PE STORAGE211
172 SF
OFFICE #2302 104 SF
OFFICE #1301
149 SF
RECEPTION303
108 SF
OFFICE #3304
66 SF
RESTROOM305
738 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #6306
781 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #5307
247 SF
TRASH AREA308
419 SF
SERVERY402
203 SF
STORAGE403
66 SF
RESTROOM404
591 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #7501
584 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #8502
970 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #9503
596 SF
ART LAB506
180 SF
MENS505
SUITE #102
31' - 5 1/4"
38 SF
FIRE RISER407
1003 SF
HALLWAY500
3292 SF

CAFETERIA/
MPR401
115 SF
ELECT.405
320 SF
HALLWAY300
(PHASE 1)(PHASE 1)
75' - 11 1/4"
117' - 4 3/4"
695 SF
PE SPACE #2210
421 SF
HALLWAY209
20 ATHLETIC
72 REGULAR

ROLL UP DOOR

ACCESSIBLE LIFT

FOR SECOND
FLOOR
201 SF
WOMENS504
135 SF
STORAGE507
FUTURE

ELEVATOR
FUTURE

MACHINE
ROOM
597 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #3107 117 SF
STORAGE115
106 SF
STORAGE114
650 SF
HALLWAY309
(PHASE 1) (PHASE 1)
UP
117 SF
JANITOR112
B.8B.6
A.8 A.8
B.7
E.8 E.8
F.4 F.4
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.

PHASE 1
PHASE 2
0' 8'4' 16 FEET2'
Kinyon + Kim
Architects, Inc.
1801 Oakland Blvd., Suite 320
Walnut Creek, CA. 94596
925.934.1160
F: 925.934.8132
The information, plans, designs, notes and arrangements shown on this drawing are confidential and may not be reproduced in whole or in part without the expressed written permission of Kinyon + Kim Architects, Inc. Drawings noted as Preliminary, Schematic and/or Conceptual contain information that is conceptual and subject to change. The architect makes no claim as to the accuracy of conceptual information or of information supplied by others.

Kinyon + Kim Architects, Inc., 2022c
Project #: Drawn by: Checked by:

Vallejo High School
Tenant Improvements
251 Georgia Street
Vallejo, CA 94590
APN: 0055-170-390
09/26/2023
MUP6
220118 Author Checker
1/8" = 1'-0"
PHASE 1 PRELIM FLOOR PLAN

EXHIBIT A

PHASE LEGEND
DN
DN
DN
DN
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
A A
B B
C C
D D
E E
F F
G G
H H
20 ATHLETIC
72 REGULAR
SUITE #101
56' - 0"
SUITE #102
31' - 5"
SUITE #104
35' - 8"
SUITE #103
31' - 7 1/2"
SUITE #105
39' - 2 1/2"

STUDENT
ENTRY

STUDENT
ENTRY
RAMP

RAMPRAMP
RAMP
RAMP
(E) COL.
(E) COL. (E) COL.
(E) COL.(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL. (E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL. (E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
586 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #1101
651 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #2102
597 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #4107
370 SF
LIBRARY106
312 SF
ADMIN109
101 SF
STORAGE113
49 SF
MDI104
93 SF
ELECT.105
191 SF
PE STORAGE211
695 SF
PE SPACE #2210
321 SF
BOYS LOCKERS203
279 SF
GIRLS LOCKERS208
123 SF
MENS205
124 SF
WOMENS207
70 SF
SHOWER #2206
69 SF
SHOWER #1204
250 SF
TRASH AREA308
781 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #7307
738 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #6306
172 SF
OFFICE302 97 SF
OFFICE301
108 SF
OFFICE304
66 SF
RESTROOM305
149 SF
RECEPTION303
174 SF
MAIN ENTRY201
320 SF
HALLWAY300
3292 SF

CAFETERIA/
MPR401
419 SF
SERVERY402 203 SF
STOR.403
115 SF
GAS405
66 SF
RESTROOM404
596 SF
ART LAB506
201 SF
WOMENS504
970 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #10503
584 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #9502
591 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #8501
136 SF
WOMENS110
127 SF
MENS111
1003 SF
HALLWAY500
823 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #3103
(PHASE 2)
421 SF
HALLWAY209
990 SF
PE SPACE #1202
20 ATHLETIC
108 REGULAR

ACCESSIBLE LIFT

FOR SECOND
FLOOR
718 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #5108
117 SF
STORAGE115
106 SF
STORAGE114
180 SF
MENS505
75 SF
MECH. ROOM508
123 SF
ELEVATOR509
135 SF
STORAGE507
117 SF
JANITOR112
UP
B.8B.6
A.8 A.8
B.7
E.8 E.8
F.4 F.4
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.

PHASE 1
PHASE 2
Kinyon + Kim
Architects, Inc.
1801 Oakland Blvd., Suite 320
Walnut Creek, CA. 94596
925.934.1160
F: 925.934.8132
The information, plans, designs, notes and arrangements shown on this drawing are confidential and may not be reproduced in whole or in part without the expressed written permission of Kinyon + Kim Architects, Inc. Drawings noted as Preliminary, Schematic and/or Conceptual contain information that is conceptual and subject to change. The architect makes no claim as to the accuracy of conceptual information or of information supplied by others.

Kinyon + Kim Architects, Inc., 2022c
Project #: Drawn by: Checked by:

Vallejo High School
Tenant Improvements
251 Georgia Street
Vallejo, CA 94590
APN: 0055-170-390
09/26/2023
MUP7
220118 IDA DEK
1/8" = 1'-0"
PHASE 2 PRELIM GROUND
FLOOR 0' 8'4' 16 FEET2'

EXHIBIT A

PHASE LEGEND
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
A A
B B
C C
D D
E E
F F
G G
H H
DN.

DN.

UP
(E) COL.
(E) COL.(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.(E) COL.
(E) COL.(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.

OPEN TO BELOW
DN.

B.8B.6
A.8 A.8
B.7
E.8 E.8
F.4 F.4
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.

WALL LEGEND

DEMOLISHED WALL

EXISTING WALL TO REMAIN
(E) STOREFRONT / DOOR TO BE

Kinyon + Kim Architects, Inc., 2022c
Project #: Drawn by: Checked by:

Vallejo High School
Tenant Improvements
251 Georgia Street
Vallejo, CA 94590
APN: 0055-170-390
09/26/2023
MUP8
220118 Author Checker
1/8" = 1'-0"
PHASE 2 EXISTING DEMO
PRELIM SECOND FLOOR 0' 8'4' 16 FEET2'
EXISTING FIXTURES TO BE REMOVED - PHASE 2
Type Count
HAND SINK 10
KITCHEN SINK 3
WALL HUNG URINAL 1
WATER CLOSET 12

EXHIBIT A
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
A A
B B
C C
D D
E E
F F
G G
H H
DN.

DN.

UP
ADA
LIFT
DN.
(E) COL.
(E) COL. (E) COL. (E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL. (E) COL. (E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL. (E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(PHASE 2)
(PHASE 2)
1093 SF
STORAGE602
702 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #12601
627 SF
STEM LAB #1612
597 SF
STEM LAB #2610
742 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #14604
77 SF
JANITOR620
79 SF
STORAGE613
104 SF
STORAGE611
586 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #16609
669 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #15608
1213 SF

OPEN ADMIN
SPACE619
855 SF

OPEN ADMIN
SPACE612
238 SF

TEACHERS
LOUNGE613
87 SF
RESTROOM614
92 SF
RESTROOM615 186 SF
OFFICE616
1176 SF

OPEN ADMIN
SPACE617
125 SF
OFFICE618
439 SF
HALLWAY614
608 SF
HALLWAY 2600
64 SF
ELEVATOR607

OPEN TO BELOW
110 SF
IT621
206 SF
WOMENS605
205 SF
MENS606(E) COL.
(E) COL.

DN.

B.8B.6
A.8 A.8
B.7
E.8 E.8
F.4 F.4
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.

Kinyon + Kim Architects, Inc., 2022c
Project #: Drawn by: Checked by:

Vallejo High School
Tenant Improvements
251 Georgia Street
Vallejo, CA 94590
APN: 0055-170-390
09/26/2023
MUP9
220118 Author Checker
0' 8'4' 16 FEET2'

EXHIBIT A
1/8" = 1'-0"
PRELIM PHASE 2 SECOND
FLOOR

PHASE LEGEND
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
A A
B B
C C
D D
E E
F F
G G
H H
1/2" / 1'-0" 1/2" / 1'-0"
1/4" / 1'-0"
(E) COL.
(E) ROOF HATCH TO REMAIN
(E) ROOF HATCH TO REMAIN
AC-3
AC-10
AC-2
AC-11
EF-5
EF-1
AC-5
AC-12
AC-13
AC-8
AC-1
AC-4
AC-14
AC-15
AC-6AC-7 EF-3
EF-2
EF-4
AC-9
B.8B.6
A.8 A.8
B.7
E.8 E.8
F.4 F.4

ROOF LEGEND

EXISTING TO BE

REMOVED

EXISTING TO REMAIN

NEW UNITS TO BE

INSTALLED

EXISTING UNITS TO BE

REMOVED

NEW TO BE INSTALLED
Kinyon + Kim
Architects, Inc.
1801 Oakland Blvd., Suite 320
Walnut Creek, CA. 94596
925.934.1160
F: 925.934.8132
The information, plans, designs, notes and arrangements shown on this drawing are confidential and may not be reproduced in whole or in part without the expressed written permission of Kinyon + Kim Architects, Inc. Drawings noted as Preliminary, Schematic and/or Conceptual contain information that is conceptual and subject to change. The architect makes no claim as to the accuracy of conceptual information or of information supplied by others.

Kinyon + Kim Architects, Inc., 2022c
Project #: Drawn by: Checked by:

Vallejo High School
Tenant Improvements
251 Georgia Street
Vallejo, CA 94590
APN: 0055-170-390
09/26/2023
MUP10
220118 IDA DEK
0' 8'4' 16 FEET2'
1/8" = 1'-0"

PRELIM ROOF PLAN

EXHIBIT A
DN
DN
DN
DN
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
A A
B B
C C
D D
E E
F F
G G
H H

STUDENT
ENTRY

STUDENT
ENTRY
SUITE #101
56' - 0"
SUITE #102
31' - 5"
SUITE #104
35' - 8"
SUITE #103
31' - 7 1/2"
SUITE #105
39' - 2 1/2"
20 ATHLETIC
108 REGULAR
20 ATHLETIC
72 REGULAR
RAMP
RAMP
RAMP
RAMP
RAMP(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.(E) COL.
(E) COL. (E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL. (E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
36' - 4 1/4"51' - 0 1/4"21' - 0"
31' - 5 1/4"
6' - 11 3/4"
22' - 6"
93 SF
ELECT.105
586 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #1101
651 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #2102
370 SF
LIBRARY106
597 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #4107
312 SF
ADMIN109
136 SF
WOMENS110
127 SF
MENS111
117 SF
JANITOR112
990 SF
PE SPACE #1202
321 SF
BOYS LOCKERS203
279 SF
GIRLS LOCKERS208
123 SF
MENS205
124 SF
WOMENS207
69 SF
SHOWER #1204
70 SF
SHOWER #2206
191 SF
PE STORAGE211
738 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #6306
781 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #7307
250 SF
TRASH AREA308
108 SF
OFFICE304 66 SF
RESTROOM305
149 SF
RECEPTION303
172 SF
OFFICE302
97 SF
OFFICE301
419 SF
SERVERY402
203 SF
STOR.403
115 SF
GAS405
61 SF
RESTROOM404
3279 SF

CAFETERIA/
MPR401
996 SF
HALLWAY500
591 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #8501
584 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #9502
970 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #10503
38 SF
FIRE RISER407
75' - 11 1/4"
(PHASE 1)(PHASE 1)
36' - 1 1/4"
695 SF
PE SPACE #2210
421 SF
HALLWAY209
32' - 10"32' - 9 1/4"
24' - 10"29' - 10"12' - 10 13/16"
24' - 0 5/8"
26' - 4 5/16"
23' - 11 1/16"
19' - 11 1/16"
19' - 11 1/16"
21' - 9 7/8"

ROLL UP DOOR
49 SF
MDF104

TEACHING WALL

TEACHING WALL
201 SF
WOMENS504
180 SF
MENS505
120 SF
ELEVATOR509
50 SF
MECH. ROOM508
718 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #5108
117 SF
STORAGE113
106 SF
STORAGE114
823 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #3103

ACCESSIBLE LIFT

FOR SECOND
FLOOR
(PHASE 1) (PHASE 1)
(PHASE 2)
37' - 11 1/8"
23' - 1 3/8"
31' - 11 3/4"33' - 7 1/8"
596 SF
Room506 134 SF
STORAGE507
UP
UP
101 SF
STORAGE113
B.8B.6
A.8 A.8
B.7
E.8 E.8
F.4 F.4
(E) COL. (E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.

Kinyon + Kim Architects, Inc., 2022c
Project #: Drawn by: Checked by:

Vallejo High School
Tenant Improvements
251 Georgia Street
Vallejo, CA 94590
APN: 0055-170-390
09/26/2023
MUP11
220118 Author Checker
1/8" = 1'-0"

PRELIM MASTER GROUND
FLOOR 0' 8'4' 16 FEET2'
1 PLUMBING FIXTURES - GROUND FLOOR
TYPE
COUNT

EXISTING NEW
3 COMP SINK -

BI-LEVEL WATER FOUNTAIN & FILLING
SATION 1-
6FLOOR DRAIN -
14 HAND SINK10
1 HAND SINK HS-31-
SHOWER 2 -
32URINALS
WATER CLOSET 1314
-6KITCHEN SINK
1 DIFFERENCE
1 6
4 1
2 1
-1
-6

EXHIBIT A

PE PROGRAM SPACE
CAFETERIA 3,270 SF
PE SPACE #1 989 SF
PE SPACE #2 694 SF
BOYS LOCKERS 321 SF
SHOWERS #1 69 SF
MENS 123 SF
SHOWERS #2 70 SF
WOMENS 124 SF
GIRLS LOCKERS 278 SF
HALLWAY 420 SF
PE STORAGE 200 SF
LEARNING SPACE #1 712 SF
LEARNING SPACE #2 768 SF
LEARNING SPACE #3 908 SF
LEARNING SPACE #4 597 SF
LEARNING SPACE #5 717 SF
TOTAL 10,260 SF

PHASE LEGEND
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
A A
B B
C C
D D
E E
F F
G G
H H
DN.

DN.

UP
ADA
LIFT
DN.
(E) COL.
(E) COL. (E) COL. (E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL. (E) COL. (E) COL.
(E) COL. (E) COL.
(E) COL. (E) COL. (E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
702 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #12601
1093 SF
STORAGE602
742 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #14604627 SF
STEM LAB #1612
595 SF
STEM LAB #2610
586 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #16609
669 SF

LEARNING
SPACE #15608
205 SF
MENS606
206 SF
WOMENS605
1213 SF

OPEN ADMIN
SPACE619
855 SF

OPEN ADMIN
SPACE612
238 SF

TEACHERS
LOUNGE613
87 SF
RESTROOM614
92 SF
RESTROOM615 186 SF
OFFICE616
125 SF
OFFICE618
1176 SF

OPEN ADMIN
SPACE617
(PHASE 2)
(PHASE 2)
64 SF
ELEVATOR607
608 SF
HALLWAY 2600
439 SF
HALLWAY614
77 SF
JANITOR620

OPEN TO BELOW
104 SF
STORAGE611
79 SF
STORAGE613
110 SF
IT621
B.8B.6
A.8 A.8
B.7
E.8 E.8
F.4 F.4
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.
(E) COL.

Kinyon + Kim Architects, Inc., 2022c
Project #: Drawn by: Checked by:

Vallejo High School
Tenant Improvements
251 Georgia Street
Vallejo, CA 94590
APN: 0055-170-390
09/26/2023
MUP12
220118 Author Checker
1/8" = 1'-0"

PRELIM MASTER SECOND
FLOOR 0' 8'4' 16 FEET2'

PLUMBING FIXTURES - SECOND FLOOR
TYPE
COUNT

EXISTING NEW
2FLOOR DRAIN -
6 HAND SINK10
11URINALS
WATER CLOSET 712
33KITCHEN SINK

DIFFERENCE
2 -4
-
-5
-

EXHIBIT A

PHASE LEGEND
SUITE 105 LEVEL
0'-0"
+100.00'
(E) 2ND FLR.
12' - 6"
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
± 33' - 9"
± 28' - 6"

NEW EXTERIOR LIGHT
FIXTURES, TYP.

KNOX BOX AT (E) BUILDING KNOX BOX AT (E) BUILDING KNOX BOX AT FENCEKNOX BOX AT (E) BUILDING

A B C D E F G H
NEW EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURES, TYP. KNOX BOX AT FENCEKNOX BOX AT (E) BUILDING, TYP.

B.8A.8 B.7 E.8 F.4
SUITE 105 LEVEL
0'-0"
+100.00'
(E) 2ND FLR.
12' - 6"

ABCDEFGH
± 28' - 6"

NEW EXTERIOR LIGHT
FIXTURES, TYP.

KNOX BOX AT (E) BUILDING
SUITE 105 LEVEL
0'-6"
+100.50'
B.6 A.8E.8F.4
(E) 2ND FLR.
12' - 6"
1234567891011
MUP13
5 NEW EXTERIOR LIGHT
FIXTURES, TYP.
4' - 5"
KNOX BOX AT FENCEKNOX BOX AT (E) BUILDING, TYP. KNOX BOX AT FENCE KNOX BOX AT (E) BUILDING KNOX BOX AT FENCE KNOX BOX AT (E)

BUILDING

KNOX BOX AT (E) BUILDING
SUITE 105 LEVEL
0'-6"
+100.50'
6 FOOT HIGH WROUGHT IRON PAINTED BLACK WITH 6

INCH TALL FINAL, WELDED TO PICKETS
VERTICAL PICKETS: 3/4" SQUARE, 16 GA. TUBING @

3.75 INCHES O.C.
3 HORIZONTAL RAILS: 1.5" x 1/8" THICK PUNCHED
CHANNEL. PICKETS, RAILS AND POSTS TO BE WELDED.

POSTS: 2" X 2" 14 GA. POSTS
6' - 0"

KEYED LOCKABLE LATCH SET
3 FEET WIDE GATE WHERE OCCURS AT NORTH SIDE
ONLY, SEE SITE PLAN. CLOSING HINGES WITH

LOCKABLE LATCH SET
Kinyon + Kim
Architects, Inc.
1801 Oakland Blvd., Suite 320
Walnut Creek, CA. 94596
925.934.1160
F: 925.934.8132
The information, plans, designs, notes and arrangements shown on this drawing are confidential and may not be reproduced in whole or in part without the expressed written permission of Kinyon + Kim Architects, Inc. Drawings noted as Preliminary, Schematic and/or Conceptual contain information that is conceptual and subject to change. The architect makes no claim as to the accuracy of conceptual information or of information supplied by others.

Kinyon + Kim Architects, Inc., 2022c
Project #: Drawn by: Checked by:

Vallejo High School
Tenant Improvements
251 Georgia Street
Vallejo, CA 94590
APN: 0055-170-390
09/26/2023
MUP13
220118 Author Checker
1/8" = 1'-0"

PRELIM GEORGIA STREET

ELEVATION NORTH
1/8" = 1'-0"

PRELIM EAST ELEVATION
0' 8'4' 16 FEET2'
0' 8'4' 16 FEET2'
1/8" = 1'-0"

PRELIM WEST ELEVATION
1/8" = 1'-0"

PRELIM SOUTH ELEVATION
0' 8'4' 16 FEET2'
0' 8'4' 16 FEET2'
3/8" = 1'-0"MUP13
5 FENCE ELEVATION

EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURES

EXHIBIT A

GENERAL ACCESSIBILITY NOTESPROJECT INFORMATION

SHEET INDEX
CODE

ENGINEER'S NOTE
GEORGIA ST. VALLEJO

ADA IMPROVEMENT PLAN
241-255 GEORGIA STREET
CITY OF VALLEJO, CA 94590
APN: 0055-170-390

NOTE TO CONTRACTOR
LEGEND

OWNER/DEVELOPER

BRYAN BAYLES

ENGINEER
ATLAS CIVIL DESIGN, INC.

SITE ADDRESS

ARCHITECT
KINYON + KIM ARCHITECTS, INC.
335
PL
335
335
335
CL

BASIS OF BEARINGS

ABBREVIATIONS

TITLE SHEET

SCOPE OF WORK
www.AtlasCivilDesign.com
Civil Engineering Site Optimization
DesignCivilCivil Design Tel: 1-213-810-8470
San Diego Orange County Los Angeles San Luis Obispo Monterey

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONBYREVISIONSDATE
SHEET
OF

GEORGIA STREET - SCHOOL ADA
241-255 GEORGIA STREET

CITY OF VALLEJO, COUNTY OF SOLANO
6 Underground Service Alert
of Southern California

CITY OF

VALLEJO

SOLANO AVE

GEORGIA ST

SACRAMENTO ST

FLORIDA ST

SONOMA BLVD
29 SCALE: NOT TO SCALE

VICINITY MAP
5TH ST

BENICIA RD

STEFFAN ST

LEMON ST

MAIN ST

YORK ST

CAPITOL ST

CURTOLA PKWY

MARIN ST ALAMEDA ST

MONTEREY ST

PROJECT SITE
780
80 NAPA RIVER

BENCHMARK INFORMATION
1 29 30
30 31
31 31
32 33
33 33
34 34
35 35
37 37
38 R⅊
⅊
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
A
P
R P
P
P
R
R
29 30
30 31
31 31
32 33
33 33
34 34
35 35
37 37
38 2
3 3
5 4
7 DEMOLITION NOTES

CONSTRUCTION NOTES
www.AtlasCivilDesign.com
Civil Engineering Site Optimization
DesignCivilCivil Design Tel: 1-213-810-8470
San Diego Orange County Los Angeles San Luis Obispo Monterey

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONBYREVISIONSDATE
SHEET
OF

GEORGIA STREET - SCHOOL ADA
241-255 GEORGIA STREET

CITY OF VALLEJO, COUNTY OF SOLANO
6 Underground Service Alert
of Southern California

THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AS SHOWN HEREON HAVE

BEEN LOCATED FROM OBSERVED FIELD SURVEY

EVIDENCE AND EXISTING DRAWINGS, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING: PLANS PROVIDED BY THE
CLIENT, UTILITY COMPANIES, AND MUNICIPAL AGENCIES.

THE SURVEYOR MAKES NO GUARANTEES THAT THE

UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN COMPRISE ALL SUCH

UTILITIES IN THE AREA, EITHER IN SERVICE OR
ABANDONED. THE SURVEYOR FURTHER DOES NOT

WARRANT THAT THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN

ARE IN THE EXACT LOCATION INDICATED ALTHOUGH HE

DOES NOT CERTIFY THAT THEY ARE LOCATED AS

ACCURATELY AS POSSIBLE FROM INFORMATION
AVAILABLE. THE SURVEYOR HAS NOT PHYSICALLY
LOCATED THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES.

UTILITY NOTE

DEMOLITION PLAN
AREA 1

DEMOLITION LEGEND
2 DEMOLITION & IMPROVEMENT PLAN - A

IMPROVEMENT PLAN
AREA 1
0 10' 20' 30'
SCALE: 1"= 10'
0 10' 20' 30'
SCALE: 1"= 10'
MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 5 MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 5

26 27
27 28
28 29
30 33
3129

GEORGIA STREET
(PUBLIC R.O.W.)

OH ELEC
26 27
27 28
28 29
30 33
3129

GEORGIA STREET
(PUBLIC R.O.W.)

OH ELEC
4 56
7 2
8 7

DEMOLITION NOTES

CONSTRUCTION NOTES
www.AtlasCivilDesign.com
Civil Engineering Site Optimization
DesignCivilCivil Design Tel: 1-213-810-8470
San Diego Orange County Los Angeles San Luis Obispo Monterey

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONBYREVISIONSDATE
SHEET
OF

GEORGIA STREET - SCHOOL ADA
241-255 GEORGIA STREET

CITY OF VALLEJO, COUNTY OF SOLANO
6 Underground Service Alert
of Southern California

THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AS SHOWN HEREON HAVE

BEEN LOCATED FROM OBSERVED FIELD SURVEY

EVIDENCE AND EXISTING DRAWINGS, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING: PLANS PROVIDED BY THE
CLIENT, UTILITY COMPANIES, AND MUNICIPAL AGENCIES.

THE SURVEYOR MAKES NO GUARANTEES THAT THE

UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN COMPRISE ALL SUCH

UTILITIES IN THE AREA, EITHER IN SERVICE OR
ABANDONED. THE SURVEYOR FURTHER DOES NOT

WARRANT THAT THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN

ARE IN THE EXACT LOCATION INDICATED ALTHOUGH HE

DOES NOT CERTIFY THAT THEY ARE LOCATED AS

ACCURATELY AS POSSIBLE FROM INFORMATION
AVAILABLE. THE SURVEYOR HAS NOT PHYSICALLY
LOCATED THE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES.

UTILITY NOTE DEMOLITION PLAN
AREA 2
3 DEMOLITION & IMPROVEMENT PLAN - B

IMPROVEMENT PLAN
AREA 2
0 10' 20' 30'
SCALE: 1"= 10'
0 10' 20' 30'
SCALE: 1"= 10'

DEMOLITION LEGEND
MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 5
MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 5

5.18 OH ELEC

GEORGIA STREET
(PUBLIC R.O.W.)

SACRAMENTO STREET
(PUBLIC R.O.W.)

WATER CONSTRUCTION NOTES SEWER CONSTRUCTION NOTES FIRE CONSTRUCTION NOTES www.AtlasCivilDesign.com
Civil Engineering Site Optimization
DesignCivilCivil Design Tel: 1-213-810-8470
San Diego Orange County Los Angeles San Luis Obispo Monterey

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONBYREVISIONSDATE
SHEET
OF

GEORGIA STREET - SCHOOL ADA
241-255 GEORGIA STREET

CITY OF VALLEJO, COUNTY OF SOLANO
6 Underground Service Alert
of Southern California
4 UTILITY PLAN

DEMOLITION NOTES

OFF-SITE CONSTRUCTION NOTES
33 34
34 35
36 36
36 37
3738
STOP

OH ELEC
P
P P P
P
R R
R R
R
R
R
P
A
PS S
S
S
SS
R
R
33 34
34 35
36 36
36 37
3738
STOP

OH ELEC
1 SACRAMENTO STREET
(PUBLIC R.O.W.)
1 2
3 3
4 4
4 5
6 6 6
6 6 6 6 6 6
2 7
www.AtlasCivilDesign.com
Civil Engineering Site Optimization
DesignCivilCivil Design Tel: 1-213-810-8470
San Diego Orange County Los Angeles San Luis Obispo Monterey

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONBYREVISIONSDATE
SHEET
OF

GEORGIA STREET - SCHOOL ADA
241-255 GEORGIA STREET

CITY OF VALLEJO, COUNTY OF SOLANO
6 Underground Service Alert
of Southern California

UTILITY NOTE

DEMOLITION PLAN DEMOLITION LEGEND
5 OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENT PLANIMPROVEMENT PLAN
0 10' 20' 30'
SCALE: 1"= 10'
0 10' 20' 30'
SCALE: 1"= 10'
MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 2 MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 3
MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 2 MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 3

DETAILS
www.AtlasCivilDesign.com
Civil Engineering Site Optimization
DesignCivilCivil Design Tel: 1-213-810-8470
San Diego Orange County Los Angeles San Luis Obispo Monterey

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONBYREVISIONSDATE
SHEET
OF

GEORGIA STREET - SCHOOL ADA
241-255 GEORGIA STREET

CITY OF VALLEJO, COUNTY OF SOLANO
66 Final
Transportation Impact Analysis
Prepared for:

City of Vallejo
Elite Charter
School Project
100 Pringle Avenue
Suite 600
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
February 2024
Prepared by

FINAL
Elite Charter School
Transportation Impact Analysis

Prepared for:

City of Vallejo

February 2024

WC23-3967

Table of Contents
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ i

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

1.1 Purpose ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Project Description ............................................................................................................................................................... 1

2. Analysis Approach ..................................................................................................................... 4

2.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 4

2.2 Level of Service (LOS) Analysis ........................................................................................................................................ 7

3. Existing Conditions ................................................................................................................. 10

3.1 Existing Transportation System .....................................................................................................................................10

3.2 Intersection Operations ....................................................................................................................................................16

4. Project Characteristics ............................................................................................................ 20

4.1 Trip Generation ....................................................................................................................................................................20

4.2 Trip Distribution and Assignment ................................................................................................................................21

5. Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Assessment ........................................................................... 24

5.1 City of Vallejo VMT Screening Criteria .......................................................................................................................24

5.2 VMT Screening Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................24

6. Project Opening Year Traffic Conditions .............................................................................. 25

6.1 Project Opening Year Forecasts ....................................................................................................................................25

6.2 Analysis of Project Opening Year Conditions ..........................................................................................................25

7. Cumulative Traffic Conditions ............................................................................................... 30

7.1 Cumulative Traffic Forecasts ...........................................................................................................................................30

7.2 Analysis of Cumulative Conditions ..............................................................................................................................30

8. Site Plan Review ...................................................................................................................... 35

8.1 Vehicle Access and Circulation ......................................................................................................................................35

8.2 Pedestrian Access and Circulation ...............................................................................................................................35

8.3 Bicycle Access and Circulation .......................................................................................................................................36

8.4 Emergency Vehicle Access ..............................................................................................................................................36

8.5 Transit Access .......................................................................................................................................................................36

8.6 Parking ....................................................................................................................................................................................37

8.7 Site Loading and Unloading Zones .............................................................................................................................38

Appendices
Appendix A: Data Collection
Appendix B: LOS Calculations
Appendix C: Signal Warrants
Appendix D: Vehicle Queues

List of Figures
Figure 1: Project Site and Study Locations ................................................................................................................................. 2 Figure 2: Project Site Plan ................................................................................................................................................................. 3 Figure 3: Existing Transit Routes .................................................................................................................................................. 12 Figure 4: Existing and Planned Bicycle Facilities.................................................................................................................... 15 Figure 5: Existing Peak Hour Intersection Control, Volumes, and Lane Configuration ......................................... 17 Figure 6: Project Trip Distribution ............................................................................................................................................... 22 Figure 7: Project Trip Assignment ............................................................................................................................................... 23 Figure 8: Project Opening Year Peak Hour Intersection Control, Volumes, and Lane Configuration .............. 26 Figure 9: Project Opening Year Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Control, Volumes, and Lane Configuration ............................................................................................................................................................. 27 Figure 10: Cumulative Peak Hour Intersection Control, Volumes, and Lane Configuration ................................ 31 Figure 11: Cumulative Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Control, Volumes, and Lane Configuration ....... 32 Figure 12: Pick-Up and Drop-Off Vehicle Queuing ............................................................................................................. 41

List of Tables
Table 1: Intersection LOS and Average Control Delay (seconds/vehicle) ...................................................................... 8 Table 2: Existing Conditions LOS Results Summary ............................................................................................................. 18 Table 3: Existing Conditions 95th Percentile Queue Summary ......................................................................................... 19 Table 4: Project Trip Generation Summary ............................................................................................................................. 20 Table 5: Project Opening Year and Project Opening Year Plus Project Conditions LOS Results Summary .. 28 Table 6: Opening Year Plus Project Conditions 95th Percentile Queue Summary ................................................... 29 Table 7: Cumulative and Cumulative Plus Project Conditions LOS Results Summary ........................................... 33 Table 8: Cumulative Plus Project Conditions 95th Percentile Queue Summary ........................................................ 34 Table 9: Existing Parking Lot Occupancy ................................................................................................................................. 37 Table 10: Total Number of Vehicles Dropping-Off and Picking-Up per Loading Zone ........................................ 39

Elite Charter School Transportation Impact Analysis
February 2024
i
Executive Summary
This report presents the transportation impact analysis (TIA) prepared for the Elite Charter School Project (Project) in the City of Vallejo, California. This TIA includes a vehicle miles traveled (VMT) analysis, level of service (LOS) assessment, and site plan review and recommendations.

Project Description
The Project is located on a parcel at 241/255 Georgia Street, just north of the Vallejo Transit Center. The Project includes the relocation of an existing charter school that houses 400 students and 35 staff members occupying an existing 2-story, 34,819 square-foot commercial building on a 27,000 square-foot site with no existing off-street parking, but adjacent to City-owned parking lots.

VMT Analysis
The Project’s effect on vehicle miles traveled was evaluated based on guidelines from the City of Vallejo’s CEQA Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (Revised October 2020) and may be used for California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) purposes. Consistent with the City’s guidelines, the Project is not expected to have a VMT-related transportation impact because it is within a Transit Priority Area and is local-serving in nature, and is therefore screened out of additional VMT analysis.

LOS Analysis
Level of service analysis is no longer required under Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) and CEQA. However, to ensure consistency with the City’s General Plan, the Project’s effect on intersection operations was evaluated at eight study intersections. Under Opening Year and Cumulative conditions, the Project does not cause any study intersection to degrade to unacceptable conditions, based on the City’s level of service policies. Therefore, the Project is not required to provide intersection improvements under Opening Year Plus Project and Cumulative Plus Project conditions.

Site Plan Review
A detailed site plan review was conducted, and recommendations identified to improve site access and circulation for vehicles, pedestrians, bicycles, and transit. A comparison of the proposed parking supply versus ITE parking demand and City code requirements for school projects indicate that the proposed vehicle parking supply would meet demand; however, two more bicycle parking spaces are required. The loading and unloading zones for the Project were also evaluated: although the morning drop-off period would not cause adverse effects, afternoon pick-up along Sacramento Street may cause queuing into the Georgia Street/Sacramento Street intersection. Therefore, it is recommended that the school provide a parking plan in which parents/guardians are initially directed to the Georgia Street loading/unloading zone when dropping off or picking up their student. Other recommendations to improve pick-up and drop-off operations are also provided.

Elite Charter School Transportation Impact Analysis
February 2024
1 1. Introduction
This report documents the transportation impact analysis prepared for the Elite Charter School Project located in the City of Vallejo, California. The TIA includes level of service analysis, a vehicle miles traveled assessment, and site plan review and recommendations.

1.1 Purpose
The purpose of this document is to summarize the effects of the Project on the local transportation network. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines were updated in 2020 per Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) to require the use of VMT to evaluate a project’s environmental effect on the transportation system. The passage of SB 743 eliminates automobile delay, LOS, and other similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion as a basis for determining a project’s impacts to the transportation system.

However, lead agencies may elect to utilize LOS for informational purposes or non-CEQA analysis.

The analysis was prepared based on the City of Vallejo’s CEQA Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (Revised October 2020) and the Traffic Impact Analysis/Study Guidelines which includes methodology and guidelines for a VMT and LOS analysis, respectively. The LOS analysis can also be used to support indirect CEQA impact analysis of traffic generation (air pollution, noise, stormwater runoff, etc.). The City will continue to address congestion, as necessary, but will not rely on traffic LOS analysis as a direct impact within the context of CEQA documentation. This report summarizes the Project’s effect on VMT for CEQA purposes and LOS analysis for informational/non-CEQA analysis to ensure General Plan consistency.

1.2 Project Description
The 2.4-acre Project site is located at 241/255 Georgia Street in the City of Vallejo, bounded by the Vallejo Housing Authority to the north, Vallejo Transit Center to the south, Santa Clara Street to the west, and Sacramento Street to the east, as shown in Figure 1. An existing 2-story, 34,819 square-foot commercial building currently occupies the 27,000 square-foot site; the Project proposes to relocate an existing charter high school that houses 400 students and 35 staff members. The Project proposes the implementation of loading and unloading zones along Georgia Street and Sacramento Street. The existing parallel on-street parking on Georgia Street will remain the same, however, no parking will be allowed during drop-off and pick-up periods before and after school. The 16 existing angled parking spaces on Sacramento Street will be removed and replaced with 7 parallel parking spaces to allow for loading and unloading during drop-off and pick-up periods. Parking will also be allowed on Sacramento Street outside of the drop-off and pick-up periods. The Project site plan is shown on Figure 2.

Sacram
ento St
Ohio St
Butte St
Trinity St
Santa Clara St
M
arin St
Branciforte St
Maxwell Aly Maxwell Aly
Capitol St Capitol St
Hudson Aly
National Aly
Indian Aly
York St
Virginia St
Jeffrey Aly
Maine St
M
arin St
Sutter St
Overland Aly
Carolina St
Kissel Aly
National Aly
Everett Aly
Sutter St
Napa St
Georgia St
Mare Island Way
Florida St
Curtola Pkwy
Mare Island WayMare Island Way
Sonoma BlvdSonoma Blvd
Sonoma BlvdSonoma Blvd
Sonoma BlvdSonoma Blvd
Vallejo
Mare Island
29 29
Napa River
Vallejo
Transit
Center
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
WC23-3967_1_StudyArea
Project Site and Study Locations
Figure 1
Project Site Study Intersection
#
























 

















 







 












 
 


 
 


















 

 






 

 








     
  







  

   




WC23-3967_2_SitePlan
Project Site Plan
Figure 2
Site Plan Source: Kinyon + Kim Architects, Inc., 09/26/2023.

Elite Charter School Transportation Impact Analysis
February 2024
4 2. Analysis Approach
This section describes the assumptions and methodologies utilized in the vehicle miles traveled analysis and level of service analysis.

2.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis
The California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines were updated in 2020 per Senate Bill 743 to remove level of service from CEQA analysis and require the use of vehicle miles traveled to evaluate a project’s environmental impact on the transportation system. VMT measures the amount of driving generated by a project and thereby its effects on the environment from those miles traveled. SB 743 changes the focus of transportation impact analysis in CEQA from measuring impacts on drivers to measuring the environmental impact of driving.

The relevant CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Transportation Section checklist questions are as follows:

Would the project
a. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? c. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? d. Result in inadequate emergency access?
Criterion B is the formal implementation of the SB 743 requirement to analyze VMT as part of the CEQA Transportation section. Under SB 743, congestion-related project effects (such as those measured by LOS or similar metrics) are deemed an unsuitable basis on which to determine a significant environmental effect. The relevant subsection of CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3(b) for the project reads as follows:
(1) Land Use Projects. Vehicle miles traveled exceeding an applicable threshold of significance may indicate a significant impact. Generally, projects within one half-mile of either an existing major transit stop or a stop along an existing high-quality transit corridor should be presumed to cause a less than significant transportation impact. Projects that decrease vehicle miles traveled in the project area compared to existing conditions should be presumed to have a less than significant transportation impact.

(4) Methodology. A lead agency has discretion to choose the most appropriate methodology to evaluate a project’s VMT, including whether to express the change in absolute terms, per capita, per household, or in any other measure. A lead agency may use models to estimate a project’s vehicle miles traveled and may revise those estimates to reflect professional judgment based on substantial evidence. Any assumptions used to estimate vehicle miles traveled and any revisions to model outputs should be documented and explained in the environmental document prepared for the

Elite Charter School Transportation Impact Analysis
February 2024
5 project. The standard of adequacy in Section 15151 shall apply to the analysis described in this section.

The City of Vallejo, exercising its discretion as lead agency, has the ability to select the methodology and CEQA significance criteria for use in the CEQA Transportation section. The City of Vallejo formally adopted locally applicable CEQA metrics, methodology, and significance criteria in July 2020, published in the City of Vallejo’s CEQA Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (Revised October 2020) and summarized in the section below.

2.1.1 Analysis Methodology
The City of Vallejo CEQA Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines state that VMT analysis should be prepared using the Solano-Napa Activity Based Travel Demand Model (SNABM) available at the time of analysis. The guidelines were prepared using the latest model updated in September 2018. Models are frequently updated over time to reflect new information, and the use of the latest available models in the CEQA analysis of a project is encouraged as CEQA analyses should use the latest and best data available (Cleveland National Forest Foundation vs. San Diego Associations of Governments, 2017) .

2.1.1.1 VMT Screening Methodology
The City of Vallejo’s CEQA Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (Revised October 2020) provide for a three step VMT screening process, as follows:

1. Step 1 – Transit Priority Area (TPA) Screening – Projects located within a TPA may be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary.

2. Step 2 – Low VMT Area Screening – Residential and office projects located within a low-VMT generating area of the City (i.e., lower than citywide average levels, based on the significance thresholds in this document) may be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary.

3. Step 3 – Project Type Screening – Local-serving retail projects less than 50,000 square feet in size and other local-serving community uses with users drawn primarily from within the city limits may be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary.

Projects not screened through the steps above should complete a VMT analysis using the SNABM travel demand model to determine if they have a significant VMT impact.

2.1.1.2 VMT Analysis Methodology
Projects not screened through the three steps in Section 2.1.1.1 should complete a VMT analysis using the latest Solano-Napa Activity Based Travel Demand model available. VMT calculations should be prepared for the following scenarios:
• Existing No Project: Project-generated VMT metrics from travel model estimates for the Existing condition based on the Solano-Napa Activity Based Travel Demand model without the Project.

Elite Charter School Transportation Impact Analysis
February 2024
6 • Existing Plus Project: Project-generated VMT metrics from travel model estimates for the Existing condition based on the Solano-Napa Activity Based Travel Demand model with the Project added to the transportation analysis zone.
• Cumulative No Project: Project effect on VMT metrics from travel model estimates for the Future year 2040 condition based on the Solano-Napa Activity Based Travel Demand model without the Project.
• Cumulative Plus Project: Project effect on VMT metrics from travel model estimates for the Future year 2040 condition based on the Solano-Napa Activity Based Travel Demand model with the Project added to the transportation analysis zone.

2.1.2 Thresholds of Significance
Impacts are identified based on a project’s VMT compared to a percentage of a baseline value of VMT.

The model VMT metric estimates are key in setting baseline values to be used in CEQA thresholds. It is noted, however, that the “base year” thresholds rely on a rolling baseline—that is, the base year baseline metric value should be reconsidered on a project-by-project basis when each project’s Notice of Preparation is released.

The thresholds in the City of Vallejo’s CEQA Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines are stratified by project type and include the following thresholds for use in CEQA VMT analyses:

A project would result in a significant impact if:
• Threshold 1: Project-Generated VMT (Residential and Office/Industrial Projects) – Baseline:

Project-generated Residential Tour VMT per resident (for residential projects), Home-Based-Work Tour VMT per employee (for office/industrial projects) or Total VMT per service population (for mixed-use projects) is no higher than the baseline citywide Residential Tour VMT per resident, Home-Based-Work Tour VMT per employee, or Total VMT per service population. • Threshold 2: Project Generated VMT (Residential and Office/Industrial Projects) – Cumulative: Project-generated Residential Tour VMT per resident (for residential projects), Home-Based-Work Tour VMT per employee (for office/industrial projects), or Total VMT per service population (for mixed-use projects) is no higher than the cumulative citywide Residential Tour VMT per resident, Home-Based-Work Tour VMT per employee, or Total VMT per service population. This threshold does not apply if it can be demonstrated that VMT rates are declining at the time of the analysis.
• Threshold 3: Project’s Effect on VMT (Residential and Office/Industrial Projects) – Cumulative: The Project reduces or has no effect on the citywide total VMT under cumulative conditions.
• Threshold 4: Project-Generated VMT and Project’s Effect on VMT (Other Project Types) :

VMT thresholds for other project types, such as institutional, would be developed using considerations unique to the individual project. Projects that are not expected to generate VMT

Elite Charter School Transportation Impact Analysis
February 2024
7 above a relevant baseline level and/or are not expected to increase VMT in the cumulative condition would be considered to have a less than significant impact with respect to VMT.

Based on the proposed Project description, Threshold 4 for Other Project Types would apply. Projects that result in a significant impact under Baseline conditions or Cumulative conditions are required to identify mitigation measures. Projects that are unable to mitigate the impact to a less than significant impact with implementation of mitigation measures would result in a significant VMT impact.

2.2 Level of Service (LOS) Analysis

2.2.1 Study Locations
Intersections are generally the critical capacity-controlling elements of suburban roadway networks.

Therefore, the operations of critical intersections surrounding the Project site are used as indicators of the adequacy of the vehicular circulation system. The following intersections, also shown on Figure 1, were selected in coordination with City of Vallejo staff as those most likely to be affected by the Project, and thus warrant analysis:

1. Sonoma Boulevard/Florida Street

2. Mare Island Way/Georgia Street

3. Santa Clara Street/Georgia Street

4. Sacramento Street/Georgia Street

5. Sonoma Boulevard/Georgia Street

6. Mare Island Way/Maine Street

7. Maine Street/Sacramento Street

8. Sonoma Boulevard/Curtola Parkway

2.2.2 Data Collection
Weekday AM (7:00 AM to 9:00 AM) and PM (4:00 PM to 6:00 PM) peak period intersection turning movement counts (vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles) were collected in May 2023 on a clear day, when schools were in session. Appendix A includes a summary of the May 2023 weekday count data.

Signal timing data was collected from the City of Vallejo and Caltrans.

2.2.3 Study Scenarios
The following scenarios were evaluated for the weekday AM and PM peak hours:
• Existing – Existing conditions based on traffic counts at the study locations. • Project Opening Year – Existing traffic counts plus traffic from approved projects expected to be developed prior to the opening of the project.
• Project Opening Year Plus Project – Opening year conditions plus traffic expected to be generated by the Project.

Elite Charter School Transportation Impact Analysis
February 2024
8 • Cumulative – Forecasts for the cumulative scenario are based on traffic growth trends as described in the Vallejo General Plan and supplemented by a check of traffic forecasts for the study area in the regional travel demand model.
• Cumulative Plus Project – Cumulative forecasts plus traffic expected to be generated by the Project.

2.2.4 LOS Analysis Methodology
Synchro software, using methodologies from the Highway Capacity Manual, was used to perform this analysis. The analysis results are summarized in vehicle delay in seconds and LOS. LOS is a qualitative description of operations ranging from LOS A, when the roadway facility has excess capacity and vehicles experience little or no delay, to LOS F, where the volume of vehicles exceeds the capacity, resulting in long queues and excessive delays. The study intersections LOS were established based on traffic analysis using the Transportation Research Board (TRB) method in the Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition.

For signalized intersections, LOS is based on the average delay experienced by all vehicles passing through the intersection. This methodology uses various intersection characteristics (such as traffic volumes, lane geometry, and signal phasing) to estimate the delay per vehicle. The delay per vehicle is a portion of the total delay attributed to the signal operations and includes initial deceleration, queue move up time, time stopped, and acceleration.

At unsignalized intersections, operations are defined by the average control delay per vehicle (measured in seconds) for each stop-controlled movement. This incorporates delay associated with deceleration, acceleration, stopping, and moving up in the queue. For all-way stop-controlled intersections, the LOS is represented by the average control delay for the whole intersection. For side-street stop-controlled intersections, the average delay and worst-case approach delay and associated LOS are reported in this study.

The average control delays and LOS designations for signalized and unsignalized intersections are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1: Intersection LOS and Average Control Delay (seconds/vehicle) LOS Signalized Unsignalized
A ≤ 10.0 ≤ 10.0
B 10.1 to 20.0 10.0 – 15.0
C 20.1 to 35.0 15.1 – 25.0
D 35.1 to 55.0 25.1 – 35.0
E 55.1 to 80.0 35.1 – 50.0
F > 80.0 > 50.0
Source: Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition.

Elite Charter School Transportation Impact Analysis
February 2024
9 The City of Vallejo’s General Plan and Traffic Impact Analysis/Study Guidelines were referenced to determine the criteria against which effects should be evaluated as part of this analysis, as described below:

Signalized Intersections – Project-related operational effects on the signalized study intersections in the City of Vallejo do not meet the City’s LOS guidelines if:

1. Project-related traffic causes the level of service rating to deteriorate from LOS D (55 seconds) or better to LOS E or F.

2. Project-related traffic increases the volume-to-capacity ratio by more than 0.0100 for intersections already operating at an unacceptable LOS without the project.

Unsignalized Intersections – Project-related operational effects on unsignalized intersections do not meet the City’s LOS guidelines if:

1. Project generated traffic causes the worst-case movement (or average of all movements for all-way stop-controlled intersections) to deteriorate from LOS D or better to LOS E or F.

2. Project-related traffic increases the volume-to-capacity ratio by more than 0.0100 for intersections already operating at an unacceptable LOS without the project.

Elite Charter School Transportation Impact Analysis
February 2024
10 3. Existing Conditions
This section describes the existing multimodal transportation system in the study area, including the street system, public transit service, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Existing operating conditions at study intersections are also summarized in this section.

3.1 Existing Transportation System

3.1.1 Vehicle Roadway System
Direct vehicular access to the Project site is provided along Georgia Street and Sacramento Street. Local access to the site is provided via Santa Clara Street, Maine Street, Florida Street, Mare Island Way, and Curtola Parkway. Regional access to the Project site is provided via Interstate 80 (I-80), Interstate 780 (I-780), and State Route 29 (SR 29). These facilities are described below.

3.1.1.1 Local Access
Georgia Street is an east-west two-lane roadway that extends from Columbus Parkway in the east to Mare Island Way in the west. Georgia Street provides access to the Project site for local businesses and essential services, as well as access to east Vallejo and I-80. The speed limit is 25 miles per hour and sidewalks are provided on both sides of the street, and parking is prohibited along the roadway.

Sacramento Street is a north-south two-lane roadway that extends from Maine Street in the south to Wilson Avenue to the north. Sacramento Street has direct access to the entrance and parking lot of the Project site and the Vallejo Transit Center. There is a posted speed limit of 25 miles per hour with sidewalks and parking provided on both sides of the street.

Santa Clara Street is a north-south two-lane roadway that extends from Maine Street in the south to Indiana Street to the north. Santa Clara Street has direct access to the entrance and parking lot of the Project site, City Hall, and the Vallejo Transit Center. There is a posted speed limit of 25 miles per hour with sidewalks and parking provided on both sides of the street.

Maine Street is an east-west two-lane roadway that extends from Solano Avenue in the east to Mare Island Way in the west. The posted speed limit is 25 miles per hour with sidewalks and parking present on both sides of the street.

Florida Street is an east-west two-lane roadway that extends from Solano Avenue in the east to Mare Island Way in the west. Florida Street has a speed limit of 25 miles per hour and connects east Vallejo to the Project site and provides access to I-80. Sidewalks and parking are provided on both sides of the street.

Mare Island Way is a north-south four-lane divided roadway that extends from Curtola Parkway in the south to Tennessee Street/Mare Island Causeway in the west. Mare Island Way provides access to services

Elite Charter School Transportation Impact Analysis
February 2024
11 and amenities such as Mare Island, Vallejo Ferry Terminal, the Waterfront, the Vallejo Yacht Club, and open green spaces. The posted speed limit is 35 miles per hour with sidewalks and parking present on both sides of the street.

Curtola Parkway is an east-west four-lane roadway that extends from Lemon Street and I-780 in the east and transitions into Mare Island Way in the west. East of Sonoma Boulevard, Curtola Parkway contains discontinuous median strips. West of Sonoma Boulevard, Curtola Parkway is missing median strips for almost two blocks until the street transitions into Mare Island Way. Curtola Parkway provides access to the I-80/I-780 interchange and Curtola Park & Ride and has a speed limit of 40 miles per hour with sidewalks on both sides of the street.

3.1.1.2 Regional Access
Interstate 80 (I-80) is a north-south freeway extending from San Francisco to the California-Nevada state line via Vallejo, Fairfield, and Sacramento. The facility connects the Project site to the San Francisco Bay Area, Napa Valley, and the Sacramento metropolitan area. Connection to the Project site is available through the Georgia Street interchange.

Interstate 780 (I-780) is an east-west, four-lane freeway extending from Vallejo to Benicia. The facility connects the Project site to the outer east San Francisco Bay region with further connections to the Central Valley. Connections to the Project site are available through the Curtola Parkway interchange.

Sonoma Boulevard/State Route 29 (SR 29) is a north-south four-lane roadway that extends from I-80 in the south and transitions into Napa Valley Highway in the north. Sonoma Boulevard is the main arterial connecting Napa County to the rest of the Bay Area and provides access to many local businesses and attractions. The posted speed limit is 30 miles per hour with sidewalks and parking present on both sides of the street.

3.1.2 Transit Services and Connectivity
Transit service is provided in the Project area by Solano County Transit (SolTrans), which provides regional bus service. The nearest bus stop is directly south of and adjacent to the Project site, located on York Street between Santa Clara Street and Sacramento Street. The stop is located within the Vallejo Transit Center, which provides access to all SolTrans routes and connections to the municipalities within Solano County as well as the El Cerrito Del Norte and Walnut Creek BART Stations. The existing transit routes and stops in the study area are shown on Figure 3.

1 2 3
4 5 6
7A 7B 8
82 Greyhound
R Y
Georgia St
Sacram
ento St
Wilson Ave
Mare Island W
ay
Tennessee St
Florida St
Alam
eda St
Broadway St
Solano Ave
Sonoma BlvdSonoma Blvd
Sonoma BlvdSonoma Blvd
Sutter StSutter St
Napa StNapa St
El Dorado StEl Dorado St
Marin StMarin St
Santa Clara StSanta Clara St
Maine StMaine St
Curtola PkwyCurtola Pkwy Curtola PkwyCurtola Pkwy
Vallejo
Mare Island
29 29
Napa River
Vallejo
Transit
Center
Vallejo
Ferry
Terminal
Vallejo
Transit
Center
Vallejo
Ferry
Terminal
1 1
1 1
1 2
3 3
3 4
4 4
4 5
5 6
6 6
6 7A
7A
7A 7B
7A
7B
7B
7B
7B
7A
8 8
82 82
82 82
R
R
R
R
R
Y
Y
WC23-3967_3_Transit
Existing Transit Routes
Figure 3
Project Site SolTrans Bus Route Bus Stop

Elite Charter School Transportation Impact Analysis
February 2024
13 3.1.3 Bicycle Facilities
Bikeway planning and design in California typically relies on guidelines and design standards established by California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in the Highway Design Manual (Chapter 1000:

Bikeway Planning and Design). Caltrans provides examples for four distinct types of bikeway facilities, as described below and shown in the accompanying figures.

Class I Bikeways (Shared-Use Paths) provide a separate right-of-way and are designated for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians, with vehicle and pedestrian cross-flow minimized. In general, bike paths serve corridors where on-street facilities are not feasible or where sufficient right-of-way exists to allow them to be constructed.

Class II Bikeways (Bicycle Lanes) are dedicated lanes for bicyclists generally adjacent to the outer vehicle travel lanes. These lanes have special lane markings, pavement legends, and signage. Bicycle lanes are typically five feet wide. Adjacent vehicle parking and vehicle/pedestrian cross-flow are permitted.

Elite Charter School Transportation Impact Analysis
February 2024
14 Class III Bikeways (Bicycle Routes) are designated by signs or pavement markings for shared use with pedestrians or motor vehicles but have no separated bike right-of-way or lane striping. Bike routes serve either to a) provide a connection to other bicycle facilities where dedicated facilities are infeasible, or b) designate preferred routes through high-demand corridors.

Class IV Bikeways (cycle tracks or “separated” bikeways) provide a right-of-way designated exclusively for bicycle travel within a roadway and are protected from other vehicle traffic by physical barriers including, but not limited to, grade separation, flexible posts, inflexible vertical barriers such as raise d curbs, or parked cars.

Cyclists may reach the Project site by utilizing the Class II bicycle facilities along Georgia Street from Amador Street to Sonoma Boulevard. Per the City of Vallejo General Plan 2020 Section 6, Class II bicycle facilities are proposed along Sonoma Boulevard, Curtola Parkway, and Marin Street, as well as Class III bicycle facilities along Georgia Street, Sacramento Street, and Maine Street. Existing and proposed bicycle facilities in the study area are displayed on Figure 4.

Georgia St
Sacram
ento St
Wilson Ave
Mare Island W
ay
Tennessee St
Florida St
Alam
eda St
Broadway St
Solano Ave
Sonoma BlvdSonoma Blvd
Sonoma BlvdSonoma Blvd
Sutter StSutter St
Napa StNapa St
El Dorado StEl Dorado St
Marin StMarin St
Santa Clara StSanta Clara St
Maine StMaine St
Curtola PkwyCurtola Pkwy Curtola PkwyCurtola Pkwy
Vallejo
Mare Island
29 29
Napa River
Vallejo
Transit
Center
WC23-3967_4_BikeFac
Existing and Planned Bicycle Facilities
Figure 4
Project Site Existing Planned
Class 1 Multi-Use Path
Class 2 Bicycle Lane
Class 2 Buﬀered Bicycle Lane
Class 3 Bicycle Boulevard
Class 3 Bicycle Route
Class 4 Separated Bikeway

Elite Charter School Transportation Impact Analysis
February 2024
16 3.1.4 Pedestrian Facilities
Pedestrian facilities consist of sidewalks, crosswalks, and pedestrian signals at signalized intersections. The pedestrian environment was evaluated on the connecting roadways that directly serve the Project site and adjacent roadways that connect to transit stops and/or nearby destinations in the greater study area.

Pedestrian connectivity in the vicinity of the Project site is provided by a network of sidewalks and crosswalks that serve the Georgia Street, Sacramento Street, and Santa Clara Street corridors.

Crosswalks are provided to connect existing sidewalks at all study intersections. Pedestrian signals and actuated pushbuttons are also provided at signalized study intersections with crosswalks.

3.2 Intersection Operations
Existing intersection lane configurations and peak hour turning movement volumes, discussed in Section

2.2.2, and presented on Figure 5, were used to calculate the intersection LOS during the weekday AM and PM peak hours. For each study intersection, the 60-minute period with the highest traffic volumes during each two-hour count period was identified as the respective peak hour of traffic. Table 2 presents the existing LOS analysis results using the analysis methodology described in the chapter above. Detailed calculation sheets are provided in Appendix B.

Mono St
G
29 (14)
339 (666)
12 (9)
43 (97)
49 (49)
25 (25)
39 (69)
275 (505)
36 (51)
25 (52)
57 (57)
8 (14)

1. Sonoma Boulevard/Florida Street
16 (32)
587 (579)
9 (14)
12 (31)
4 (20)
5 (15)
3 (5)
429 (425)
39 (51)
36 (111)
11 (16)
14 (20)

2. Mare Island Way/Georgia Street
8 (27)
33 (46)
12 (22)
4 (13)
37 (77)
12 (10)
3 (15)
30 (37)
21 (30)
15 (38)
52 (56)
25 (10)

3. Santa Clara Street/Georgia Street
0 (12)
25 (47)
3 (14)
9 (19)
54 (105)
7 (5) 8 (14)
48 (59)
25 (22)
19 (23)
84 (78)
8 (15)

4. Sacramento Street/Georgia Street
Florida Street
Sonoma Boulevard
Georgia Street
Mare Island Way
Georgia Street
Santa Clara Street
Georgia Street
Sacramento Street
13 (25)
282 (565)
11 (41)
10 (33)
65 (122)
12 (17)
32 (38)
234 (367)
39 (89)
69 (74)
99 (87)
35 (18)

5. Sonoma Boulevard/Georgia Street
2 (2)
606 (515)
36 (28)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
371 (457)
68 (60)
24 (47)
0 (0)
34 (42)

6. Mare Island Way/Maine Street
Georgia Street
Sonoma Boulevard
Maine Street
Mare Island Way
11 (9)
33 (69)
6 (13)
32 (40)
13 (21)
38 (49)

7. Sacramento Street/Maine Street
211 (253)
144 (380)
7 (29)
338 (405)
101 (128)
0 (16)
73 (148)
147 (215)
151 (200)
434 (335)

1. Sonoma Boulevard/Florida Street 2. Mare Island Way/Georgia Street 3. Santa Clara Street/Georgia Street 4. Sacramento Street/Georgia Street Florida Street
Sonoma Boulevard
Georgia Street
Mare Island Way
Georgia Street
Santa Clara Street
Georgia Street
Sacramento Street

5. Sonoma Boulevard/Georgia Street 6. Mare Island Way/Maine Street Georgia Street
Sonoma Boulevard
Maine Street
Mare Island Way

7. Sacramento Street/Maine Street 8. Sonoma Boulevard/Curtola Parkway Maine Street
Sacramento Street
Curtola Parkway
Sonoma Boulevard
STOP
Project Trip Assignment
Figure 7
29 (34)
5 (5)
51 (20)
2 (1)
6 (2)
4 (3)
14 (6)
1 (0)
14 (5)4 (5)
4 (3)
6 (4)
20 (13)
26 (11)
2 (0)
1 (0)
8 (5)0 (2)
0 (2)
0 (5)
0 (9)
4 (2)
28 (18)
22 (9)
22 (8)
1 (0)
58 (27)
9 (5)
23 (21)
13 (8)
11 (15)
9 (15)
8 (4)
27 (11)
20 (7)
35 (11)
9 (6)
14 (6)
1 (0)
1 (0)
4 (3)
0 (1)
2 (0)
15 (9)
1 (0)
19 (13)
7 (3)
9 (2)
0 (2)
0 (1)
11 (8)
11 (7)
6 (3)
11 (3)
CF
C
AC
CF
AC
F
ACF
CF
AC
C
ACF
ACF
C
AF
ACF
ACF
CF
AC
CF
A
AF
A
F
CF
AC
CF
AC
CF
1 (1)
Project Opening Year Peak Hour
Intersection Control, Volumes, and Lane Configuration
Figure 8
30 (20)
340 (670)
20 (10)
50 (100)
50 (50)
30 (30)
40 (70)
280 (510)
40 (60)
30 (60)
60 (60)
10 (20)

1. Sonoma Boulevard/Florida Street
20 (40)
590 (580)
10 (20)
20 (40)
10 (20)
10 (20)
10 (10)
430 (430)
40 (60)
40 (120)
20 (20)
20 (20)

2. Mare Island Way/Georgia Street
10 (30)
40 (50)
20 (30)
10 (20)
40 (80)
20 (10)
10 (20)
30 (40)
30 (30)
20 (40)
60 (70)
30 (10)

3. Santa Clara Street/Georgia Street
0 (20)
30 (50)
10 (20)
10 (20)
70 (110)
10 (10)
10 (20)
50 (60)
30 (30)
20 (30)
90 (80)
10 (20)

4. Sacramento Street/Georgia Street
Florida Street
Sonoma Boulevard
Georgia Street
Mare Island Way
Georgia Street
Santa Clara Street
Georgia Street
Sacramento Street
20 (30)
290 (570)
20 (50)
10 (40)
70 (130)
20 (20)
40 (40)
240 (370)
40 (90)
70 (80)
100 (90)
40 (20)

5. Sonoma Boulevard/Georgia Street
10 (10)
610 (520)
40 (30)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
380 (460)
70 (60)
30 (50)
0 (0)
40 (50)

6. Mare Island Way/Maine Street
Georgia Street
Sonoma Boulevard
Maine Street
Mare Island Way
20 (10)
40 (70)
10 (20)
40 (40)
20 (30)
40 (50)

7. Sacramento Street/Maine Street
220 (260)
150 (380)
10 (30)
340 (410)
110 (130)
10 (20)
80 (150)
150 (220)
160 (200)
440 (340)

8. Sonoma Boulevard/Curtola Parkway
Maine Street
Sacramento Street
Curtola Parkway
Sonoma Boulevard
STOP
ACF
AE
ACF
AE
ACE
AE
ACE
AE
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
ACF
D
ACF
BF
ACE
AE
ACC
AE
B
G
E
ABE
BE
CCF
20 (20) CCF
Project Opening Year Plus Project Peak Hour
Intersection Control, Volumes, and Lane Configuration
Figure 9
30 (20)
369 (704)
25 (15)
50 (100)
50 (50)
30 (30)
40 (70)
331 (530)
40 (60)
30 (60)
62 (61)
16 (22)

1. Sonoma Boulevard/Florida Street
20 (40)
594 (583)
24 (26)
20 (40)
10 (20)
10 (20)
10 (10)
431 (430)
54 (65)
44 (125)
20 (20)
20 (20)

2. Mare Island Way/Georgia Street
14 (33)
46 (54)
40 (43)
10 (20)
66 (91)
22 (10)
10 (20)
31 (40)
38 (35)
20 (40)
60 (72)
30 (10)

3. Santa Clara Street/Georgia Street
0 (22)
30 (55)
10 (29)
14 (22)
98 (128)
32 (19)
10 (20)
72 (68)
30 (30)
21 (30)
90 (80)
68 (47)

4. Sacramento Street/Georgia Street
Florida Street
Sonoma Boulevard
Georgia Street
Mare Island Way
Georgia Street
Santa Clara Street
Georgia Street
Sacramento Street
29 (35)
313 (591)
33 (58)
21 (55)
79 (145)
28 (24)
67 (51)
260 (377)
40 (90)
70 (80)
135 (101)
49 (26)

5. Sonoma Boulevard/Georgia Street
10 (10)
624 (526)
41 (30)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
380 (460)
71 (60)
34 (53)
0 (0)
40 (51)

6. Mare Island Way/Maine Street
Georgia Street
Sonoma Boulevard
Maine Street
Mare Island Way
22 (10)
40 (70)
25 (29)
40 (40)
21 (30)
59 (63)

7. Sacramento Street/Maine Street
227 (263)
159 (382)
10 (30)
340 (412)
110 (131)
10 (20)
91 (158)
161 (227)
166 (203)
451 (343)

8. Sonoma Boulevard/Curtola Parkway
Maine Street
Sacramento Street
Curtola Parkway
Sonoma Boulevard
STOP
ACF
AE
ACF
AE
ACE
AE
ACE
AE
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
ACF
D
ACF
BF
ACE
AE
ACC
AE
B
G
E
ABE
BE
CCF
20 (20) CCF
Cumulative Peak Hour
Intersection Control, Volumes, and Lane Configuration
Figure 10
40 (20)
380 (740)
20 (10)
50 (110)
60 (60)
30 (30)
50 (80)
310 (560)
40 (60)
30 (60)
70 (70)
10 (20)

1. Sonoma Boulevard/Florida Street
20 (40)
740 (730)
20 (20)
20 (40)
10 (30)
10 (20)
10 (10)
540 (540)
50 (70)
40 (130)
20 (20)
20 (30)

2. Mare Island Way/Georgia Street
10 (30)
40 (60)
20 (30)
10 (20)
50 (90)
20 (20)
10 (20)
40 (50)
30 (40)
20 (50)
60 (70)
30 (20)

3. Santa Clara Street/Georgia Street
0 (20)
30 (60)
10 (20)
10 (30)
80 (120)
10 (10)
10 (20)
60 (70)
30 (30)
30 (30)
100 (90)
10 (20)

4. Sacramento Street/Georgia Street
Florida Street
Sonoma Boulevard
Georgia Street
Mare Island Way
Georgia Street
Santa Clara Street
Georgia Street
Sacramento Street
20 (30)
310 (630)
20 (50)
20 (40)
80 (140)
20 (20)
40 (50)
260 (410)
50 (100)
80 (90)
110 (100)
40 (20)

5. Sonoma Boulevard/Georgia Street
10 (10)
760 (650)
50 (40)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
470 (580)
90 (80)
30 (60)
0 (0)
40 (50)

6. Mare Island Way/Maine Street
Georgia Street
Sonoma Boulevard
Maine Street
Mare Island Way
20 (10)
40 (80)
10 (20)
40 (50)
20 (30)
50 (60)

7. Sacramento Street/Maine Street
240 (280)
160 (420)
10 (40)
380 (450)
120 (150)
20 (20)
90 (170)
170 (240)
170 (220)
480 (370)

8. Sonoma Boulevard/Curtola Parkway
Maine Street
Sacramento Street
Curtola Parkway
Sonoma Boulevard
STOP
ACF
AE
ACF
AE
ACE
AE
ACE
AE
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
ACF
D
ACF
BF
ACE
AE
ACC
AE
B
G
E
ABE
BE
CCF
20 (20) CCF
Cumulative Plus Project Peak Hour
Intersection Control, Volumes, and Lane Configuration
Figure 11
40 (20)
409 (774)
25 (15)
50 (110)
60 (60)
30 (30)
50 (80)
361 (580)
40 (60)
30 (60)
72 (71)
16 (22)

1. Sonoma Boulevard/Florida Street
20 (40)
744 (733)
34 (26)
20 (40)
10 (30)
10 (20)
10 (10)
541 (540)
64 (75)
44 (135)
20 (20)
20 (30)

2. Mare Island Way/Georgia Street
14 (33)
46 (64)
40 (43)
10 (20)
76 (101)
22 (20)
10 (20)
41 (50)
38 (45)
20 (50)
60 (72)
30 (20)

3. Santa Clara Street/Georgia Street
0 (22)
30 (65)
10 (29)
14 (32)
108 (138)
32 (19)
10 (20)
82 (78)
30 (30)
31 (30)
100 (90)
68 (47)

4. Sacramento Street/Georgia Street
Florida Street
Sonoma Boulevard
Georgia Street
Mare Island Way
Georgia Street
Santa Clara Street
Georgia Street
Sacramento Street
29 (35)
333 (651)
33 (58)
31 (55)
89 (155)
28 (24)
67 (61)
280 (417)
50 (100)
80 (90)
145 (111)
49 (26)

5. Sonoma Boulevard/Georgia Street
10 (10)
774 (656)
51 (40)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
470 (580)
91 (80)
34 (63)
0 (0)
40 (51)

6. Mare Island Way/Maine Street
Georgia Street
Sonoma Boulevard
Maine Street
Mare Island Way
22 (10)
40 (80)
25 (29)
40 (50)
21 (30)
69 (73)

7. Sacramento Street/Maine Street
247 (283)
169 (422)
10 (40)
380 (452)
120 (151)
20 (20)
101 (178)
181 (247)
176 (223)
491 (373)

8. Sonoma Boulevard/Curtola Parkway
Maine Street
Sacramento Street
Curtola Parkway
Sonoma Boulevard
STOP
ACF
AE
ACF
AE
ACE
AE
ACE
AE
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
ACF
D
ACF
BF
ACE
AE
ACC
AE
B
G
E
ABEF
CCF
BE
CCF
20 (20)
Sacram
ento St
Ohio St
Butte St
Trinity St
Santa Clara St
M
arin St
Branciforte St
Maxwell Aly Maxwell Aly
Capitol St Capitol St
Hudson Aly
National Aly
Indian Aly
York St
Virginia St
Jeffrey Aly
Maine St
M
arin St
Sutter St
Overland Aly
Carolina St
Kissel Aly
National Aly
Everett Aly
Sutter St
Napa St
Georgia St
Mare Island Way
Florida St
Curtola Pkwy
Mare Island WayMare Island Way
Sonoma BlvdSonoma Blvd
Sonoma BlvdSonoma Blvd
Sonoma BlvdSonoma Blvd
Vallejo
Mare Island
29 29
Napa River
Vallejo
Transit
Center
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
WC23-3967_1_StudyArea
Project Site and Study Locations
Figure 1
Project Site Study Intersection
#
WC23-3967_X_Volumes
Project Site Study Intersection
#Signalized IntersectionAM (PM) Peak Hour Traﬃc VolumesXX (YY) Stop SignSTOP

Elite Charter School Transportation Impact Analysis
February 2024
18 Table 2: Existing Conditions LOS Results Summary
Intersection Control¹ Peak
Period2
LOS
Standard
Existing
Delay3 LOS4

1. Sonoma Boulevard & Florida Street Signal AM
PM D 10.1

9.2 B
A

2. Mare Island Way & Georgia Street Signal AM
PM D 11.4

13.4 B
B

3. Santa Clara Street & Georgia Street Signal AM
PM D 5.3

5.8 A
A

4. Sacramento Street & Georgia Street Signal AM
PM D 4.6

5.3 A
A

5. Sonoma Boulevard & Georgia Street Signal AM
PM D 14.4

16.8 B
B

6. Mare Island Way & Maine Street Signal AM
PM D 6.6

6.9 A
A

7. Maine Street & Sacramento Street SSSC AM
PM D 3.2 (9.2)

2.9 (9.6)
A (A)
A (A)

8. Sonoma Boulevard & Curtola Parkway Signal AM
PM D 7.4

8.0 A
A
Notes:

1. Traffic control type (SSSC = Side-Street Stop-Controlled; Signal = Signalized).

2. AM = Weekday morning peak hour, PM = weekday evening peak hour.

3. Whole intersection average delay reported for signalized intersections. Side-street stop-controlled delay presented as Whole Intersection Average Delay (Worst Approach Delay). Delay calculated per HCM 6th Edition methodologies.

4. LOS designation per HCM 6th Edition.

Source: Fehr & Peers, February 2024.

Under Existing Conditions, all intersections operate at LOS B or better during the AM and PM peak hours.

Therefore, all intersections operate at an acceptable LOS under Existing No Project peak hour conditions.

3.2.1 Signal Warrant Analysis
The peak hour signal warrants (Warrant 3A and Warrant 3B) from the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) were used to determine if a traffic signal is warranted at the Maine Street/Sacramento Street intersection. Based on existing volumes, the existing unsignalized intersection of Main Street/Sacramento Street does not meet peak hour signal Warrant 3A and 3B. Detailed calculations are provided in Appendix C.

3.2.2 Vehicle Queues
Although all intersections currently operate within the city’s standards of LOS D or better, there can be periodic vehicle spillback and delays for some individual movements. Table 3 presents the AM and PM peak hour 95th percentile queues for the Santa Clara Street/Georgia Street and Sacramento Street/Georgia

Elite Charter School Transportation Impact Analysis
February 2024
19 Street intersections where vehicles queues may occasionally exceed the vehicle storage length . These queues are indicative of maximum design queues occurring during period of peak traffic. Queue worksheets are provided in Appendix D.

Table 3: Existing Conditions 95th Percentile Queue Summary Intersection Movement Storage Length (ft) AM Peak
Period
PM Peak
Period

3. Santa Clara Street & Georgia Street
EB
WB
NB
SB
775
400
250
675
25 25
25 25
25 25
25 25

4. Sacramento Street & Georgia Street
EB
WB
NB
SB
400
900
600
650
25 25
25 25
50 25
25 25
Notes:

Bold indicates queue potentially extends beyond available storage.

Source: Fehr & Peers, February 2024.

As shown in Table 3, 95th percentile queues at the Santa Clara Street/Georgia Street and Sacramento Street/Georgia Street intersections are currently within the available storage.

Elite Charter School Transportation Impact Analysis
February 2024
20 4. Project Characteristics
This section describes the trip-making characteristics of the Project. The amount of traffic associated with the Project was estimated using a three-step process:

1. Trip Generation – The amount of vehicle traffic entering/exiting the Project site was estimated.

2. Trip Distribution – The direction trips would use to approach and depart the site was projected.

3. Trip Assignment – Trips were then assigned to specific roadway segments and intersection turning movements.

4.1 Trip Generation
Trip generation refers to the process of estimating how much vehicular traffic a project would add to the surrounding roadway system. Project trip generation estimates are typically prepared for a 24 -hour weekday period as well as the one-hour weekday morning and evening commute peak periods, when traffic volumes on adjacent streets are typically the highest. The school is expected to operate between the hours of 9:00 AM and 3:00 PM, four days a week, with early dismissal on Wednesdays at 1:00 PM. For the purposes of Project trip generation, the morning and evening peak hour represent the hour before and after school, respectively, when the school generates the most traffic (AM and PM peak hour of generator). The Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) published weekday daily, morning, and evening trip generation rates in their Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition. This manual is a national compilation of trip generation statistics for land uses of various sizes and types. The assessment makes use of data compiled for the “Private High School” (ITE Code 534) land use. Rates from this reference were used to assess the total number of trips associated with the proposed Project.

Table 4 presents the results of the trip generation analysis performed for the proposed Project. As shown, ITE Trip Generation Manual estimates that the Project will generate 868 daily trips, 276 morning peak hour trips, and 166 evening peak hour trips.

Table 4: Project Trip Generation Summary
Land Use Quantity Daily
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
In Out Total In Out Total
Private High School 400 students 868 172 104 276 64 102 166 Notes:

Trip Generation Calculations:

Daily: T=2.17*X; 50% inbound, 50% outbound
AM Peak Hour: T=0.35*X+135.16; 62% inbound, 38% outbound (AM peak hour of generator) PM Peak Hour: T=0.25*X+65.82; 39% inbound, 61% outbound (PM peak hour of generator) Source: Fehr & Peers, February 2024; Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation, 11th Edition.

Elite Charter School Transportation Impact Analysis
February 2024
21 4.2 Trip Distribution and Assignment
Project trip distribution refers to the directions of approach and departure vehicles take to access and leave the site. Estimates of regional project trip distribution were developed based on existing travel patterns in the area, information from the SNABM travel demand model, and the location of complementary land uses and students’ homes. The resulting trip distribution percentages are shown on Figure 6. The project trip generation, in combination with the expected trip distribution patterns, was used to assign the peak hour vehicle trips to the local roadway network and study intersections. The Project trip assignment is presented on Figure 7.

Georgia St
Sacram
ento St
Wilson Ave
Mare Island W
ay
Tennessee St
Florida St
Alam
eda St
Broadway St
Solano Ave
Sonoma BlvdSonoma Blvd
Sonoma BlvdSonoma Blvd
Sutter StSutter St
Napa StNapa St
El Dorado StEl Dorado St
Marin StMarin St
Santa Clara StSanta Clara St
Maine StMaine St
Curtola PkwyCurtola Pkwy Curtola PkwyCurtola Pkwy
Vallejo
Mare Island
29 29
Napa River
Vallejo
Transit
Center
10% 10% 30%
5%
25%
10%
10%
WC23-3967_6_TripDistro
Project Trip Distribution
Figure 6
Project Site Project Trip DistributionXX%
Mono St
29 (14)
339 (666)
12 (9)
43 (97)
49 (49)
25 (25)
39 (69)
275 (505)
36 (51)
25 (52)
57 (57)
8 (14)

1. Sonoma Boulevard/Florida Street
16 (32)
587 (579)
9 (14)
12 (31)
4 (20)
5 (15)
3 (5)
429 (425)
39 (51)
36 (111)
11 (16)
14 (20)

2. Mare Island Way/Georgia Street
8 (27)
33 (46)
12 (22)
4 (13)
37 (77)
12 (10)
3 (15)
30 (37)
21 (30)
15 (38)
52 (56)
25 (10)

3. Santa Clara Street/Georgia Street
0 (12)
25 (47)
3 (14)
9 (19)
54 (105)
7 (5) 8 (14)
48 (59)
25 (22)
19 (23)
84 (78)
8 (15)

5. Sonoma Boulevard/Georgia Street
2 (2)
606 (515)
36 (28)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
371 (457)
68 (60)
24 (47)
0 (0)
34 (42)

6. Mare Island Way/Maine Street
Georgia Street
Sonoma Boulevard
Maine Street
Mare Island Way
11 (9)
33 (69)
6 (13)
32 (40)
13 (21)
38 (49)

7. Sacramento Street/Maine Street
211 (253)
144 (380)
7 (29)
338 (405)
101 (128)
0 (16)
73 (148)
147 (215)
151 (200)
434 (335)

5. Sonoma Boulevard/Georgia Street 6. Mare Island Way/Maine Street Georgia Street
Sonoma Boulevard
Maine Street
Mare Island Way

7. Sacramento Street/Maine Street 8. Sonoma Boulevard/Curtola Parkway Maine Street
Sacramento Street
Curtola Parkway
Sonoma Boulevard
STOP
Project Trip Assignment
Figure 7
29 (34)
5 (5)
51 (20)
2 (1)
6 (2)
4 (3)
14 (6)
1 (0)
14 (5)4 (5)
4 (3)
6 (4)
20 (13)
26 (11)
2 (0)
1 (0)
8 (5)0 (2)
0 (2)
0 (5)
0 (9)
4 (2)
28 (18)
22 (9)
22 (8)
1 (0)
58 (27)
9 (5)
23 (21)
13 (8)
11 (15)
9 (15)
8 (4)
27 (11)
20 (7)
35 (11)
9 (6)
14 (6)
1 (0)
1 (0)
4 (3)
0 (1)
2 (0)
15 (9)
1 (0)
19 (13)
7 (3)
9 (2)
0 (2)
0 (1)
11 (8)
11 (7)
6 (3)
11 (3)
CF
C
AC
CF
AC
F
ACF
CF
AC
C
ACF
ACF
C
AF
ACF
ACF
CF
AC
CF
A
AF
A
F
CF
AC
CF
AC
CF
Project Opening Year Peak Hour
Intersection Control, Volumes, and Lane Configuration
Figure 8
30 (20)
340 (670)
20 (10)
50 (100)
50 (50)
30 (30)
40 (70)
280 (510)
40 (60)
30 (60)
60 (60)
10 (20)

1. Sonoma Boulevard/Florida Street
20 (40)
590 (580)
10 (20)
20 (40)
10 (20)
10 (20)
10 (10)
430 (430)
40 (60)
40 (120)
20 (20)
20 (20)

2. Mare Island Way/Georgia Street
10 (30)
40 (50)
20 (30)
10 (20)
40 (80)
20 (10)
10 (20)
30 (40)
30 (30)
20 (40)
60 (70)
30 (10)

3. Santa Clara Street/Georgia Street
0 (20)
30 (50)
10 (20)
10 (20)
70 (110)
10 (10)
10 (20)
50 (60)
30 (30)
20 (30)
90 (80)
10 (20)

5. Sonoma Boulevard/Georgia Street
10 (10)
610 (520)
40 (30)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
380 (460)
70 (60)
30 (50)
0 (0)
40 (50)

6. Mare Island Way/Maine Street
Georgia Street
Sonoma Boulevard
Maine Street
Mare Island Way
20 (10)
40 (70)
10 (20)
40 (40)
20 (30)
40 (50)

7. Sacramento Street/Maine Street
220 (260)
150 (380)
10 (30)
340 (410)
110 (130)
10 (20)
80 (150)
150 (220)
160 (200)
440 (340)

8. Sonoma Boulevard/Curtola Parkway
Maine Street
Sacramento Street
Curtola Parkway
Sonoma Boulevard
STOP
ACF
AE
ACF
AE
ACE
AE
ACE
AE
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
ACF
D
ACF
BF
ACE
AE
ACC
AE
B
G
E
ABE
CEF
BE
CCF
Project Opening Year Plus Project Peak Hour
Intersection Control, Volumes, and Lane Configuration
Figure 9
30 (20)
369 (704)
25 (15)
50 (100)
50 (50)
30 (30)
40 (70)
331 (530)
40 (60)
30 (60)
62 (61)
16 (22)

1. Sonoma Boulevard/Florida Street
20 (40)
594 (583)
24 (26)
20 (40)
10 (20)
10 (20)
10 (10)
431 (430)
54 (65)
44 (125)
20 (20)
20 (20)

2. Mare Island Way/Georgia Street
14 (33)
46 (54)
40 (43)
10 (20)
66 (91)
22 (10)
10 (20)
31 (40)
38 (35)
20 (40)
60 (72)
30 (10)

3. Santa Clara Street/Georgia Street
0 (22)
30 (55)
10 (29)
14 (22)
98 (128)
32 (19)
10 (20)
72 (68)
30 (30)
21 (30)
90 (80)
68 (47)

5. Sonoma Boulevard/Georgia Street
10 (10)
624 (526)
41 (30)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
380 (460)
71 (60)
34 (53)
0 (0)
40 (51)

6. Mare Island Way/Maine Street
Georgia Street
Sonoma Boulevard
Maine Street
Mare Island Way
22 (10)
40 (70)
25 (29)
40 (40)
21 (30)
59 (63)

7. Sacramento Street/Maine Street
227 (263)
159 (382)
10 (30)
340 (412)
110 (131)
10 (20)
91 (158)
161 (227)
166 (203)
451 (343)

8. Sonoma Boulevard/Curtola Parkway
Maine Street
Sacramento Street
Curtola Parkway
Sonoma Boulevard
STOP
ACF
AE
ACF
AE
ACE
AE
ACE
AE
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
ACF
D
ACF
BF
ACE
AE
ACC
AE
B
G
E
ABE
CEF
BE
CCF
Cumulative Peak Hour
Intersection Control, Volumes, and Lane Configuration
Figure 10
40 (20)
380 (740)
20 (10)
50 (110)
60 (60)
30 (30)
50 (80)
310 (560)
40 (60)
30 (60)
70 (70)
10 (20)

1. Sonoma Boulevard/Florida Street
20 (40)
740 (730)
20 (20)
20 (40)
10 (30)
10 (20)
10 (10)
540 (540)
50 (70)
40 (130)
20 (20)
20 (30)

2. Mare Island Way/Georgia Street
10 (30)
40 (60)
20 (30)
10 (20)
50 (90)
20 (20)
10 (20)
40 (50)
30 (40)
20 (50)
60 (70)
30 (20)

3. Santa Clara Street/Georgia Street
0 (20)
30 (60)
10 (20)
10 (30)
80 (120)
10 (10)
10 (20)
60 (70)
30 (30)
30 (30)
100 (90)
10 (20)

4. Sacramento Street/Georgia Street
Florida Street
Sonoma Boulevard
Georgia Street
Mare Island Way
Georgia Street
Santa Clara Street
Georgia Street
Sacramento Street
20 (30)
310 (630)
20 (50)
20 (40)
80 (140)
20 (20)
40 (50)
260 (410)
50 (100)
80 (90)
110 (100)
40 (20)

5. Sonoma Boulevard/Georgia Street
10 (10)
760 (650)
50 (40)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
470 (580)
90 (80)
30 (60)
0 (0)
40 (50)

6. Mare Island Way/Maine Street
Georgia Street
Sonoma Boulevard
Maine Street
Mare Island Way
20 (10)
40 (80)
10 (20)
40 (50)
20 (30)
50 (60)

7. Sacramento Street/Maine Street
240 (280)
160 (420)
10 (40)
380 (450)
120 (150)
20 (20)
90 (170)
170 (240)
170 (220)
480 (370)

8. Sonoma Boulevard/Curtola Parkway
Maine Street
Sacramento Street
Curtola Parkway
Sonoma Boulevard
STOP
ACF
AE
ACF
AE
ACE
AE
ACE
AE
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
ACF
D
ACF
BF
ACE
AE
ACC
AE
B
G
E
ABE
CEF
BE
CCF
Cumulative Plus Project Peak Hour
Intersection Control, Volumes, and Lane Configuration
Figure 11
40 (20)
409 (774)
25 (15)
50 (110)
60 (60)
30 (30)
50 (80)
361 (580)
40 (60)
30 (60)
72 (71)
16 (22)

1. Sonoma Boulevard/Florida Street
20 (40)
744 (733)
34 (26)
20 (40)
10 (30)
10 (20)
10 (10)
541 (540)
64 (75)
44 (135)
20 (20)
20 (30)

2. Mare Island Way/Georgia Street
14 (33)
46 (64)
40 (43)
10 (20)
76 (101)
22 (20)
10 (20)
41 (50)
38 (45)
20 (50)
60 (72)
30 (20)

3. Santa Clara Street/Georgia Street
0 (22)
30 (65)
10 (29)
14 (32)
108 (138)
32 (19)
10 (20)
82 (78)
30 (30)
31 (30)
100 (90)
68 (47)

4. Sacramento Street/Georgia Street
Florida Street
Sonoma Boulevard
Georgia Street
Mare Island Way
Georgia Street
Santa Clara Street
Georgia Street
Sacramento Street
29 (35)
333 (651)
33 (58)
31 (55)
89 (155)
28 (24)
67 (61)
280 (417)
50 (100)
80 (90)
145 (111)
49 (26)

5. Sonoma Boulevard/Georgia Street
10 (10)
774 (656)
51 (40)
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
470 (580)
91 (80)
34 (63)
0 (0)
40 (51)

6. Mare Island Way/Maine Street
Georgia Street
Sonoma Boulevard
Maine Street
Mare Island Way
22 (10)
40 (80)
25 (29)
40 (50)
21 (30)
69 (73)

7. Sacramento Street/Maine Street
247 (283)
169 (422)
10 (40)
380 (452)
120 (151)
20 (20)
101 (178)
181 (247)
176 (223)
491 (373)

8. Sonoma Boulevard/Curtola Parkway
Maine Street
Sacramento Street
Curtola Parkway
Sonoma Boulevard
STOP
ACF
AE
ACF
AE
ACE
AE
ACE
AE
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
ACF
D
ACF
BF
ACE
AE
ACC
AE
B
G
E
ABEF
CCF
BE
CCF
Sacram
ento St
Ohio St
Butte St
Trinity St
Santa Clara St
M
arin St
Branciforte St
Maxwell Aly Maxwell Aly
Capitol St Capitol St
Hudson Aly
National Aly
Indian Aly
York St
Virginia St
Jeffrey Aly
Maine St
M
arin St
Sutter St
Overland Aly
Carolina St
Kissel Aly
National Aly
Everett Aly
Sutter St
Napa St
Georgia St
Mare Island Way
Florida St
Curtola Pkwy
Mare Island WayMare Island Way
Sonoma BlvdSonoma Blvd
Sonoma BlvdSonoma Blvd
Sonoma BlvdSonoma Blvd
Vallejo
Mare Island
29 29
Napa River
Vallejo
Transit
Center
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
WC23-3967_1_StudyArea
Project Site and Study Locations
Figure 1
Project Site Study Intersection
#
WC23-3967_X_Volumes
Project Site Study Intersection
#Signalized IntersectionAM (PM) Peak Hour Traﬃc VolumesXX (YY) Stop SignSTOP

Elite Charter School Transportation Impact Analysis
February 2024
24 5. Vehicle Miles Traveled
(VMT) Assessment
This section evaluates the Project’s potential impacts with respect to VMT.

5.1 City of Vallejo VMT Screening Criteria
The City of Vallejo’s CEQA Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (Revised October 2020) provide for a three step VMT screening process, as follows:
• Step 1 – Transit Priority Area (TPA) Screening – Projects located within a TPA may be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. • Step 2 – Low VMT Area Screening – Residential and office projects located within a low-VMT generating area of the City (i.e., lower than citywide average levels, based on the significance thresholds in this document) may be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary.
• Step 3 – Project Type Screening – Local-serving retail projects less than 50,000 square feet in size and other local-serving community uses may be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary.

5.2 VMT Screening Analysis
Steps 1 and 3 of the City of Vallejo’s CEQA Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines apply to the proposed Project. The Project is located within a TPA1, just north of the Vallejo Transit Center, and as a high school, the Project is local-serving2 in nature. Therefore, the Project is presumed not to have a VMT- related transportation impact under the City’s guidelines and is screened out of additional VMT analysis.

The proposed Project satisfies the City-established screening criteria and is presumed to result in a less than significant VMT impact.

1 A TPA is defined as a half mile area around an existing major transit stop or an existing stop along a high-quality transit corridor.
2 “Local-serving” is defined as a project that demonstrates that its users (employees, customers, visitors) would come primarily from within the city limits. The project would therefore not generate new “demand” for the project land uses but would meet at existing demand that would shorten the distance existing residents, employees, customers, or visitors would need to travel.

Elite Charter School Transportation Impact Analysis
February 2024
25 6. Project Opening Year
Traffic Conditions
This chapter discusses opening year traffic conditions with and without the addition of traffic generated by the Project. The Project Opening Year conditions analysis considers approved projects within the study area that are expected to be constructed and occupied in the next year. No roadway improvements were assumed at the study intersections for the analysis of Project Opening Year conditions as none are currently proposed or under consideration.

6.1 Project Opening Year Forecasts
To assess future growth with planned development in the City of Vallejo, several sources of data were reviewed, including the SNABM, and the traffic growth trends as described in Vallejo’s General Plan. Traffic forecasts within the immediate study area were reviewed to ensure that known developments were adequately reflected in the forecasts. Minor adjustments were made to the forecasts to balance traffic volumes between closely spaced intersections in the study area. While there are no nearby approved projects expected to be constructed and occupied in the Project Opening Year timeline, growth rates from the regional model were applied to reflect expected increases in traffic. The resulting Project Opening Year forecasts are presented on Figure 8, which are representative of conditions over the next year. The Project volumes on Figure 7 were added to the Project Opening Year traffic volumes to develop Project Opening Year Plus Project conditions, as presented on Figure 9.

6.2 Analysis of Project Opening Year Conditions
Project Opening Year without and with Project conditions were evaluated using methods described in Chapter 1. The analysis is summarized in Table 5, based on the traffic volumes and lane configurations on Figure 8 and Figure 9. Detailed calculation sheets are provided in Appendix B.