Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPW Las Gallinas Freitas Pkwy Impr.CITY of Agenda Item No: 4.a
Meeting Date: March 21, 2016
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Department: Public Works
Prepared by: Kevin McGowan (JS) City Manager Approval:
Assistant Director of Public Works
File No.: 18.01.73
o c.�W:S0l1krMIYIWMMMI0gIMM'y1►YY01IMMOMIlenIu19;1133AOldIBiel 0
SUBJECT: A) A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
AND APPROVING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING
PROGRAM FOR THE FREITAS AND LAS GALLINAS INTERSECTION
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 11171;
B) A RESOLUTION ADOPTING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR
CONSTRUCTION OF THE FREITAS AND LAS GALLINAS INTERSECTION
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 11171; AND AUTHORIZING
THE CITY CLERK TO CALL FOR BIDS
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Hold a public hearing to accept public comment on, and adopt the Resolution adopting the
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program;
2. Adopt the Resolution accepting the Plans and Specifications for the Freitas and Las Gallinas
Intersection Improvement Project.
BACKGROUND: The Manuel T. Freitas/Las Gallinas Avenue intersection currently experiences
excessive traffic delays on several of its approaches. A high volume of vehicle trips from US 101 to
Terra Linda High School, Vallecito Elementary School, Kaiser Hospital Emergency Room, as well as
nearby residential and commercial areas causes the vehicles to back up on westbound Manuel T. Freitas
Parkway. The current geometry of the intersection has inherent problems and needs modifications to
allow better traffic flow. In addition, the current bike lanes on Las Gallinas Avenue terminate south of
the intersection with Manuel T. Freitas Parkway due to current geometric constraints.
Upgrades to the traffic signal system, and improvements to intersection geometry, were recommended in
San Rafael General Plan 2020 (adopted in November 2004). The City has recently developed a plan to
modify this intersection which includes providing sufficient space for bicycle travel through the
intersection, lengthening the left turn pockets to provide additional capacity, removal of existing
pedestrian islands, and adding video detection to the signals. Gallinas Creek traverses the center line of
FOR CITY CLERK ONLY
File No.: 4-1-680
Council Meeting: 03/21/2016
Disposition: Resolutions 14089 / 14090
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 2
Manuel Freitas Parkway at this location. In order to accommodate these improvements, structural
modifications are needed to widen the existing bridge structure in this area.
ANALYSIS: As part of the design of this project WRA Associates developed the environmental
documentation for the project in compliance with CEQA requirements. An Initial Study was prepared to
determine the potential environmental impacts, which found that the proposed project would result in
potentially significant impacts in Biological Resources, Cultural (Archaeological) Resources, Hazards &
Hazardous Materials, Noise, Public Services, and Transportation/Traffic. The project impacts would be
mitigated to a less -than -significant level through implementation of recommended mitigation measures or
through compliance with certain applicable agency requirements, as set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program ("MMRP").
The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, including the MMRP, has been posted on the City of
San Rafael website, and can be accessed for review via the following link:
htti)://www.citvofsanrafael.orp-/nubworks-nroi-freitasaallinas/
A Notice of Public Review and Intent to Adopt the Initial Study/Negative Declaration was published on
January 28, 2016 (see Attachment 3). As the project requires permits/approvals from at least one State
agency, a minimum 30 -day public review period on the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration is
required per CEQA Guidelines Section 15073. The public review period closed on February 26, 2016
and the City received comments on the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. Copies of these
written comments are attached (see Attachment 4). City staff reviewed and prepared responses to the
comments that are specific to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, which are provided in
Attachment 5 of this report.
The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared and made available for public review
in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines and the City of San Rafael Environmental Assessment
Procedures Manual. Therefore, adoption of this document is recommended in order to proceed with
review and action on the project, which is presented in the attached resolution (Attachment 1).
PUBLIC OUTREACH AND NOTICING: Public Outreach included but was not limited to providing
notification of the intent to adopt a mitigated declaration to property owners, residents and business
within 300 feet of Manuel T. Freitas between Las Gallinas and Los Gamos Street. The following actions
were taken to ensure that adequate notification was provided:
• Marin County Public Coordination meeting on October 15, 2014
• Presentation to the Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee (BPAC) on January 15, 2015
• Presentation to the Terra Linda Home Owners Association on January 15, 2015
• Sidewalk Intercept presentation at Northgate Mall on Saturday January 24, 2015
• Sidewalk Intercept presentation at Northgate Mall on Tuesday February 10, 2015
• Presentation to the Santa Margarita and North San Rafael Neighborhood Association and North
San Rafael Coalition of residents on March 18, 2015
FISCAL IMPACT: The General Plan 2020 specifically identified this project in Policy C-6, Exhibit 21.
Items 4 (Freitas/Las Gallinas), 23 (Install Traffic Monitoring Sensors and Camera Systems), and 25
(Implement Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan) all relate to the work proposed for this project. It is
therefore appropriate to utilize the Traffic Mitigation Fund for this project.
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Pa2e: 3
Funding Source
[Funding Source
Traffic Mitigation Funds, #246
(FY15/16)
Traffic Mitigation Funds, #246
(FY15/16)
Total Available Funds
Expenses
Amount
Note(s)
$2,386,355.11
$115,000 Construction funds for improvements at Los
Gamos Drive
$2,501,355.11
Category -Eden Expense Code Amount Note(s)
Design -01 $252,282.00 CSW/Stuber-Stroeh (WRA Associates, Sub -
consultant)
Miscellaneous -07 $12,718.00 Document reproduction, community outreach
documentation, etc. (assume 5%)
Traffic Signal Equipment -07 $24,355.11
Construction -02 $2,212,000.00 Estimated construction cost
Total Expenses $2,501,355.11
OPTIONS:
1. The Council may approve the attached Resolutions as presented;
2. The Council may decline to approve the attached Resolutions, in which case the intersection
improvements project will not go forward;
3. The Council may defer action and request staff to provide further information or modifications at
a future Council meeting.
ACTION REQUIRED:
1. Open the public hearing and accept public comment on the Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; then adopt the Resolution
adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
for the Freitas and Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement Project;
2. Adopt the Resolution accepting the Plans and Specifications for the Freitas and Las Gallinas
Intersection Improvement Project, and authorizing the City Clerk to call for bids.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approving the Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program, with Exhibit A
2. Resolution accepting the Plans and Specifications for the Freitas and Las Gallinas Intersection
Improvement Project, and authorizing the City Clerk to call for bids
3. Public Hearing Notice
4. Correspondence received to date
5. Memorandum -Response to Comments on Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, February
29, 2016
RESOLUTION NO. 14089
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL
ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING
A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR
THE FREITAS AND LAS GALLINAS INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 11171
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 13821 on October 6, 2014,
authorizing the Director of Public Works to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with
CSW/Stuber-Stroeh Engineering Group, Inc. for design services for a project to make
improvements to the intersection of Manuel T. Freitas Parkway/Las Gallinas Avenue, City
Project No. 11171 (the "Project"); and
WHEREAS, the Bicycle Pedestrian Master Plan 2011 Update specifically lists
pedestrian related improvements at the intersection of Manual T. Freitas Parkway/Los Gamos
Drive; and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 13908 on April 20, 2015,
authorizing an amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with CSW/Stuber-Stroeh
Engineering Group, Inc. to expand the scope of services to include design services for the
intersection of Manuel T. Freitas Parkway/Los Gamos Drive as part of the Project; and
WHEREAS, the plans, specifications, and estimate were completed for the Project's
proposed intersection improvements and, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) Guidelines, it was determined that, for purposes of CEQA, the improvements are
defined as a "project" subject to environmental review; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15063, an Initial Study was prepared
to determine the potential environmental impacts of the Project; and
WHEREAS, in preparing the Initial Study, an offer of tribal consultation was made to
the local Native American Tribe (Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria) consistent with Public
Resources Code Sections 21080.3 and 21080.3.2 (AB 52); and
WHEREAS, on November 24, 2015, the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria
responded to the offer of consultation requesting specific mitigation measures that require
cultural monitoring during project construction and the Initial Study has incorporated this
request; and
1
WHEREAS, as demonstrated in the preparation of the Initial Study, the proposed Project
would result in a number of potentially significant environmental impacts for which mitigation is
recommended to reduce these impacts to a less -than -significant level; and
WHEREAS, consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15070, the Initial Study supports
and recommends the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15073, on January 28, 2015, the City
published a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, including a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program ("MMRP"), was made available for a 30 -day public review period. Comments received
on the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration were reviewed and responses have been
provided by the City, and are presented in a memorandum to the City Council (dated February
29, 2016), which is on file with the City Clerk; and
WHEREAS, on March 21, 2016, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to
review and consider the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and MMRP, considered all
oral and written public testimony and the written report of the Public Works and Community
Development Departments; and
WHEREAS, the custodian of documents, which constitute the record of proceedings
upon which this decision is based, is the City Clerk.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of San
Rafael hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approves the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program as presented in Exhibit "A" for the Freitas and Las Gallinas
Intersection Improvement Project, City Project No. 11171, based on the following findings:
1. The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with
CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the provisions of the City of San Rafael
Environmental Assessment Procedures Manual. Further, in preparing the Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, the City followed the steps and procedures
required by Public Resources Code Sections 21080.3 and 21080.3.2 (AB 52) by offering
and completing tribal consultation with the local Native American Tribe (Federated
Indians of Graton Rancheria). As a result of this consultation, mitigation measures
required to address potential archaeological resources have been incorporated into the
Mitigated Negative Declaration.
N
2. As prescribed by CEQA Guidelines Section 15073, a public review period of a minimum
of 30 days was observed for public comment (30 -days observed commencing on January
28, 2016 and closing on February 26, 2016). Comments received during the public
review period have been reviewed and responses to these comments have been provided
and are presented in a Memorandum to the City Council from the City, dated February
29, 2016, which is on file with the City Clerk.
3. The Mitigated Negative Declaration has been presented to the City Council who has
reviewed and considered the information in the Initial Study for adopting a Mitigated
Negative Declaration. Further, the City Council finds that the Initial Study is adequate
and complete to support the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration.
4. The City Council has exercised its independent judgment in evaluating the Initial Study
and has considered the comments received during the public review period and public
hearing. Based on this review, the City Council has determined that a) there is no
substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant impact on the environment;
and b) revisions have been made to the Project or have been included in the Project as
conditions of approval which reduce the potentially significant impacts related to
biological resources, cultural resources, hazards and hazardous materials, noise, Public
Services, and Transportation/Traffic for which mitigation measures are required; and c)
result in either no environmental impacts or impacts that are deemed to be less -than -
significant in other topic areas listed in the Initial Study Checklist.
5. A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared to ensure
implementation of and compliance with all measures required to mitigate all impacts to a
less -than -significant level.
I, ESTHER C. BEIRNE, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the
foregoing resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the
Council of said City held on the 21 st day of March, 2016, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Bushey, Colin, Gamblin and Mayor Phillips
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: McCullough
File No.: 18.01.73
ESTHER C. BEIRNE, City Clerk
3
Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
for the
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Las Gallinas Avenue
Intersection Improvements Project
SAN RAFAEL, MARIN COUNTY
CALIFORNIA
Prepared For:
City of San Rafael
Department of Public Works
111 Morphew Street
San Rafael, California 94901
WRA Contact:
Geoff Reilly
reilly@wra-ca.com
Date:
January 2016
7
o1wra
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
2169-G East Francisco Blvd , San Rafael, CA 94901 (415) 454-8868 tel (415) 454-0129 fax info@wra-co.com www.wra-co.com
Table of Contents
Background.......................................................................................................................... 1
1. Project Title: ................................................................................................................ 1
2. Lead Agency and Project Applicant: ............................................................................ 1
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: ........................................................................... 1
4. Project Location: .......................................................................................................... 1
5. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: ........................................................................... 1
6. Description of Project: .................................................................................................. 1
7. Project BMPs.................................................................................................................19
8. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval May Be Required: ........................................ 20
Initial Study Checklist........................................................................................................ 22
I.
AESTHETICS.............................................................................................................23
II.
AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY RESOURCES....................................................24
III.
AIR QUALITY.............................................................................................................25
IV.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES......................................................................................28
V.
CULTURAL RESOURCES.........................................................................................33
VI.
GEOLOGY AND SOILS..............................................................................................36
VII.
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.............................................................................38
VIII.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS..............................................................39
IX.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY......................................................................42
X.
LAND USE AND PLANNING......................................................................................44
XI.
MINERAL RESOURCES............................................................................................47
XII.
NOISE........................................................................................................................48
XIII.
POPULATION AND HOUSING..................................................................................54
XIV.
PUBLIC SERVICES...................................................................................................54
XV.
RECREATION............................................................................................................56
XVI.
TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC...................................................................................57
XVII.
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.....................................................................60
XVIII.
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.........................................................62
Checklist Information Sources......................................................................................... 64
SettingReferences............................................................................................................. 65
ReportPreparation............................................................................................................. 67
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM .............................................. 69
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael i
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.
Location Map
5
Figure 2.
Project Aerial and Site Plan
7
Figure 3.
Views of the Project Site
9
Figure 4.
Views of the Project Site
10
Figure 5.
Views of Surrounding Land Uses
11
Figure 6.
Project Site Plan (1 of 5)
13
Figure 7.
Project Site Plan (2 of 5)
14
Figure 8.
Project Site Plan (3 of 5)
15
Figure 9.
Project Site Plan (4 of 5)
16
Figure 10.
Project Site Plan (5 of 5)
17
Figure 11. Gallinas Creek
31
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Construction Equipment Noise Generation 51
Appendices
Appendix A — Biological Reconnaissance Memorandum
Appendix B — Traffic -Multimodal Assessment Memorandum
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael ii
City of San Rafael
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
BACKGROUND
1. Project Title:
2. Lead Agency and Project Applicant:
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
4. Project Location:
5. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Las Gallinas
Avenue Intersection Improvements Project
City of San Rafael
Department of Public Works
111 Morphew Street
San Rafael, California 94901
Jeff Stutsman, P.E., Assistant Civil Engineer
Tel: (415) 485-3342
Email: Jeffrev.stutsmantcbcitvofsanrafael.orq
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Las Gallinas
Avenue Intersection in the City of San Rafael,
Marin County, California (see Figures 1-4)
The project site is located at the Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Las Gallinas Avenue
intersection in the City of San Rafael. Existing land uses near the project site consist of single-
family residential homes, recreational uses (i.e., Arbor Park Parquette), commercial retail uses
(i.e., Safeway shopping center) and commercial office uses. Gallinas Creek, a concrete -lined
channel in the project area, flows through the center of the project site. Figures 5 through 7
provide photographs of the project site and surrounding land uses.
The existing land use designations in the project vicinity are as follows:
North of the Project Site:
Residential — Low Density, 2-6.5 units/acre
South of the Proiect Site:
Residential — Low Density, 2-6.5 units/acre
Park: Arbor Park
West of Proiect Site:
Residential — Low Density, 2-6.5 units/acre
East of the Proiect Site
General Commercial, 15-32 units/acre
6. Description of Project:
The Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Las Gallinas Avenue intersection currently experiences
excessive delay from several of its approaches. The high number of vehicle trips from U.S. 101
to Terra Linda High School, Vallecito Elementary School, Kaiser Hospital Emergency Room, as
well as nearby residential and commercial areas causes the queue on westbound Manuel T.
Freitas Parkway to extend beyond the available turn pocket for much of the day. In addition,
due to the current geometry of the intersection, the eastbound and westbound protected left turn
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 1
phases are unable to operate simultaneously and must utilize a lead/lag operation further
adding to delay and intersection congestion.
The City recently installed Class II bicycle lanes on Las Gallinas Avenue. These lanes
terminate 180 feet south of the intersection with Freitas Parkway and start up again
approximately 220 feet north of the intersection, resulting in a 400 -foot gap on this heavily
travelled bike route. In addition, the Class II bike lanes on Freitas Parkway end approximately
400 feet west of the intersection with Las Gallinas Avenue.
Project constraints include lead -lag left turns from Freitas Parkway, small queue in the left turn
lane on westbound Freitas Parkway, and unsafe pedestrian island medians. The large island
adjacent to westbound Freitas Parkway contains multiple utility cabinets and utility poles and the
island allows right turn movements onto Las Gallinas Avenue at potential high speeds.
The project will improve vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian circulation safety of the intersection
with the proposed improvements described below. Additionally, adding bike lanes and replacing
the traffic signal system to accommodate a new geometric configuration will help improve the
multiple modal transit during peak traffic periods during school and weekend events. See
Figure 1 for a location map and Figure 2 for an aerial view of the project site and vicinity.
Figures 3-6 show the existing conditions of the project site. Figures 6-11 show the proposed
improvements within the project site.
Project Description
As illustrated in Figures 6-10, to improve safety and operation of the intersection, proposed
project improvements include:
• Increasing the left turn queue on westbound Freitas Parkway;
• Allowing a simultaneous left turn phase from Freitas Parkway to northbound and
southbound Las Gallinas Avenue by expanding the intersection by approximately 30 feet
over Gallinas Creek on each side of Las Gallinas Avenue;
• Providing new American Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant ramps at all entries to the
intersection and connecting the island adjacent to westbound Freitas Parkway;
• Providing new pathways along eastbound Freitas Parkway and the island adjacent to
westbound Freitas Parkway;
• Providing bicycle lanes along Las Gallinas Avenue and Freitas Parkway;
• Removing pedestrian "Pork chop" islands;
• Upgrading the traffic signal system and signage;
• Improving intersection geometry;
• Extending right and left turn pocket on eastbound Freitas Parkway;
• Improvements to curb ramps on Los Gamos Street;
• Paving and storm drain improvements on Las Gallinas Avenue and Freitas Parkway;
and
• Increasing the pervious area by 530 square feet by shortening the crossing distance at
Los Gamos Street and installing new curb ramps.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 2
Construction
Construction of the proposed project would last for approximately 10 weeks. All improvements
will be made within existing City right-of-way. At least one week prior to the commencement of
work, the Contractor will provide project information signs to notify drivers of the upcoming
project and potential traffic delays; in addition, the City will provide notice to school, bus service
providers, emergency services and local businesses. Construction equipment would be those
that area commonly used for minor excavation, grinding and paving, retaining, and bridge
installation.
Staging
The City of San Rafael construction contract specifications will contractually require the
construction Contractor to locate the construction staging area on-site. The specifications for
this staging area will include, at the minimum, the following requirements:
• The staging area will be included in the Contractor's Stormwater Pollution Prevent Plan
(SWPPP).
• The staging area will not be located in an environmentally or culturally sensitive area
and/or impact water resources (rivers, streams, bays, inlet, lakes, drainage sloughs).
• The staging area will not be located in a regulatory floodway or within the base floodplain
(100 -year).
• The staging area will not affect access to properties or roadways.
Parking
Construction of the proposed project will not require the use of any on -street parking, as there is
none within the project site. The proposed project does not add any new parking on-site.
Traffic
Lane closure and traffic control will conform to the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
Devices (CAMUTCD), and City standard specifications. The Contractor will install advance
warning signs to alert pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists of the work zone and lane closures.
Advance warning signs may be reflective signs, changeable message boards, cones, and
barricades. Street traffic will allow for movement through intersections. Flagging and other
means of traffic control will be required to allow for the safe movement of traffic through the
work zone. The Contractor will provide flaggers to temporarily hold traffic for staging equipment
or construction. The work will be limited to 7:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday,
unless otherwise approved in writing by the Director of Public Works. Night work for possible
paving, rock wheeling, and signal switch overs may occur between the hours of 8:00 P.M. and
5:00 A.M. Work shall be performed in a manner that is least disruptive to the public. Lane
closures will be confined to 9:00 A.M. to 3:00 P.M., unless otherwise approved in writing by the
Director of Public Works.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 3
Utilities
The island adjacent to westbound Freitas Parkway currently has a joint utility pole for overhead
utility lines. Utility boxes located on this island would remain in place with implementation of the
project. The proposed project would alter existing stormwater drainage facilities within the
project site. Improvements include replacing of storm drains, drainage pipes, and curbs and
gutters. Several bio -retention facilities are proposed throughout the project site. AT&T is
responsible for relocating their facilities across Las Gallinas Avenue.
Tree Loss
The project has been designed to avoid tree loss and tree trimming to the maximum degree
possible. Standard avoidance and minimization measures would be implemented to ensure the
project complies with all applicable City regulations regarding tree removal, and the Migratory
Bird Treaty Act (MBTA).
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 4
N�
C% �t
II
Las Rados
��Salvador
kn°c �.
ltnab F .
01/1 W �.
�dla1 L° sy
c,a�ado Rd Terra Heath, °
Linda �1
$amboo ref Pa rk 11�?/P JC1 00
Figure 1. Project Site Location Map N
WEE mlyff
IwAlkwra
S
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Las Gallinas Avenue
Intersection Improvements Map Prepared Date: 9/30/2015
Map Prepared By: fhourigan
Marin County, California Base Source:ESRI/National Geographic
Data Source(s): WRA
Path: LWcad 2000 Files\24000\24189\GIS\ArcMap\Fig1_LocMap_20141217.mxd
- sJE�,y�
F�e\taSPky
y
.. `. r37
r.rr L
c
J\
c _
,
Ctp,�
Professio,/al
r` N _
E
C
Project Site
O�
1
{'
Q�.C2
t
W
The Mall At
Z3
71
a Northgate
Esmeyer O,,
;:r
L
Mt Olivet '
undaL�
J
Cemetery
1�r•
�alSa
�Dr
O�
�1•
a tiJh,n �a�
o �,•.
-
C
rev°n
ae
��
G0\de'6
dye
Figure 1. Project Site Location Map N
WEE mlyff
IwAlkwra
S
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Las Gallinas Avenue
Intersection Improvements Map Prepared Date: 9/30/2015
Map Prepared By: fhourigan
Marin County, California Base Source:ESRI/National Geographic
Data Source(s): WRA
Path: LWcad 2000 Files\24000\24189\GIS\ArcMap\Fig1_LocMap_20141217.mxd
This page intentionally left blank.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 6
r
. 1 �
6--i
►000�•i0� f a y
♦♦ddddd•♦
♦dd♦♦ddd♦
♦♦ddddd♦
♦0
.0
♦1d♦
- ♦♦ddddd
t add ♦ ♦ ♦ •
�
R
- T
♦ddddd♦
ldddddddd♦
.
ddddddddda
♦♦♦ddddd♦
♦♦♦ddddd♦
.❖.❖.❖.❖.•.
.........<
........:.
�
Addddddddsi v•
- + ddddd♦-
♦dddddd
•••••••••♦•••`` y
♦dddddd�
iiiiiii•�
..•.o❖.o❖
',
♦�
t
S}'
t*hi-K '
♦0
.0
♦1d♦
♦dds..�
y1dNs
-'
, ds•j
S}'
t*hi-K '
w
♦dd•d♦
�dddddd��
♦d.ddd♦
♦ddds.d.
'O.00i•OOOi•...
�
Addddddddsi v•
4
P.
VA.
�/ ♦ddddd•♦ ( 4k
♦ddddd•
is
♦dddd♦
�, • , � •iiiii•DOii<. Oi•O••i
�.�. - ♦ddd♦♦ddd♦ ♦dddd♦
� •' �� � ;, '� •000000000•:. .•:b0000000•
>. � o❖.o❖.•.o❖.❖...o❖.o•.o•.000•
_� -,� \\� �w r � • •T. ddddddddd,•,.,ddddd,•,d,•,dddd -�
♦dddddddddddddddddd♦
- -� � •. ♦dddddddddddddddddd♦
�� ♦ ti • ' �'� \'.. � �i / � . �� � ; • •••ii'i�i'i iiii'iii�iiii••
� \ i � \. T• ♦dddddddddddd♦ y
\� � // --{fi ddddddddddddd
` \ ♦ddddddddd.
., \I ♦ddddd♦
NN
This page intentionally left blank.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 8
F.
ai
c
m
Q
c�
7-0
U)
m
J
E
O
4
U)
O
m
a)
C
Y
O
O
a)
U)
U
m
O
L
Q
O
m
M
3
m
F.
cl i ~
m a)
L
C:
� c�
F.
I
6
7
C
a)
>
Q
N
t0
/�
V
J
E
O
L
++
i
cn
Y
O
O
O
U
(D
O
L
0-
a)
4H
O
\Q_
3
m
ai
c
m
Q
m
V
U)
m
J
E
O
4
U)
O
m
N
C
Y
O
O
O
U)
U
O
.O
L
Q
O
m
M
3
m
F.
m a)
L
C:
� c�
m
73
c
a�
Q
co
c
�a
c�
co
J
E
O
L
7
O
Y
O
O
0)
C
Y
O
0
3
T
3
a�
F.
14
6
73
C:
D
c
m
>
Q
Q
c
�
m
m
J
m
�
J
J
O
_0
m
C
rn
M
O
m
O
L
U
L
i
Q
U
Y
o
"M (0
U
LLa-
>
L6
cv
a) �
>
i L
2i c)
This page intentionally left blank.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 12
I S �
TP31 W SS I
GRADING & DRAINAGE KEYNOTES I I GH,\``� T 172 (C17."ONFO , 6$ f
I C1].64 p TC 1]]] � I
T O TP 17.28 ' • TC 17.6] '
OO NEW CASE "A" CURB RAMP PER REVISED STANDARD PLAN A88A. SEE DETAIL 15 ON •` fCON ORM) 4171
1
SHE ETC6.0. I I ( > /(CONFO PROTECT IN PLACE EXISTING JOINT POLE. I LIMIT OF WORK NI
I = D off
OPROTECT IN PLACE EXISTING UTILITY STRUCTURE AND ADJUST TO FINISH GRADE
AS NEEDED. ql m !p m
ONEW TYPE "A" CURB AND GUTTER PER MARIN COUNTY UCS DWG. NO. 105. SEE I MI i c1 tZ i I
DETAIL 7 ON SHEET C6.0. , I I I j ' h o
rc 1Ss7
I'V O 2 I CONFORM A
O 2' WIDE CURB CUT, SEE DETAIL 16 ON SHEET C6.0. I C8.2 I "A
©NEW CULVERT BRIDGE BELOW SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS, SEE STRUCTURAL I L 16 ,I TC 17.69 I�
PLANS I I I I oil
NEW WALL, SEE STRUCTURAL PLANS.4 W
I
O DENOTES RETAINED WALL HEIGHT AND SIDE I I "rP FO Q t 10
`CONFO )
TC 17.MI 4i
ONEW TYPE "E" CURB PER MARIN COUNTY UCS DWG. NO. 105. SEE DETAIL 8 ON I I 31847 (a
SHEET C6.0 FOR MODIFICATIONS. I ( .-FIN Q -T
I �JJ?
ONEW CASE "F" CURB RAMP, SEE DETAIL 15 ON SHEET 06.0 TC 1 .4 _ _ _ _ _ _ J� I I J1 ? CONFORM
O 14 ( '1T
10 NEW CASE "C" CURB RAMP, SEE DETAIL 15 ON SHEET C6.0 - �' TC, 1g 4y (Lp) Q b •J CONFORM
Cr
11 (J b Q l; CONFORM (71'P)
11 NEW TYPE "C" CATCH BASIN PER MARIN COUNTY UCS 235 NEW Dmf _ - ( e J
24MX DIPERUCS 280 TC 1].19
OCOVER EXISTING SIDE OPENING ON INLET AND RAISE GRADE TO MATCH EX. BACK TG 16.70 -5 T 318.43 H (0
12 OF CURB AND TOP OF TREATMENT BASIN 8' INV OU71338 B 15 ( NFORM ; Q 3 UMITOF WORK
O CONN]LF B"SD�1%MIN
ECT NEW STORM DRAIN PIPE TO EXISTING STORM DRAIN STRUCTURE Cq,q TC 1 '.37
13
.03wra
I
FI ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
I
Manuel T. Freitas
Parkway and
Las Gallinas Avenue
Intersection
Improvements
2
STORM DRAIN PIPE INVERT IN TO MATCH INVERT OUT. - - n
O
STER TREATMENT P A 14 CONNECT NEW CATCH BASIN TO EXISTING STORM PIPE. CONTRACTOR TO MATCH BO
-OM E- =1800 13 I , TC 1x.35 ._
14 EXISTING STORM PIPE MATERIAL AND INVERT AND EXTEND OR CUT AS NEEDED. (SEE SHEETc80) 'Tc ifi.ss C6.2 11
,/ (CONF82 I .ITC 1].28( ' Q .
15 RELOCATED WATER BOX RM1v _- � I (C NO FOR �
LIMITOFWORK ��---- 318.98 TC17.330 .
16 SIDEWALK UNDERDRAIN PER UCS STD. 145,20 FEET ON CENTER. - - _ _ TC 18.06 -1 TGT 1
(INFORM) I\ \ --�( �\ \I CM) STC 17135 I 3 1
� i(
---- MAN ___-- _.
I t7 , ''/ NFORM) _ _ I t.tY 4
_ TP 31 ].91 TC 1].4](LP) \ } CS^�- 1P 1].2= -TPN*-
P 51606 \• 0:0.4%'. FS 17.13 F
NEW AC PAVEMENT AND SAWCUT LIMITS SEE PLANS FOR EXTENTS.
U E L T. F R E I T A S o TG 1]60 - - / NFORM) (CONFORM) �� \ .. ,,
.. PARKWAY WESTBOUND (CONFORM) F �1 __ �� - ----� G O s17.27 I `
NEW PEDESTRIAN WALK PER MARIN COUNTY UCS DWG. NO. 105 TYPE "A" OR TYPE (WESTBOUND) TP in 24
p
B• SEE DETAIL 2 ON SHEET CO 0, WIDTH VARIES C6.2 TP 317.50 I TP 31731 . a
(CONFORM) (CONFORM) SAWCIfrAND . •.
(CONFORM) CONFORM(,YP.) -
-
_ _r
(
N
12 TP318.
.a+.-a+a ----___________________________ P z
----«--�----------�--tee-.+-as.-s+..-s.aaaaaa-.--a�a E OF RM) NFO M)
04.4 NFORM) �
\ I
- y(CO17.n FM 4
(CONFORM (CONFORM) (CONFORM)
8 ( ^
tW 15.64 tW 14.58_`__ C6V.2 10
tw 17.49 C6.2 15.70 I Z Io C6.2 0 TP 17 09 ` j
tw 16.02 5 _
_ .� _ • _ i.a _ _ "7 - NFO ) )
.��TP 1885 _ '(-FORM)
31�T.OSOR
11 P 16 96 M
_ ______ TP1734 o} 03A - _ - - `
16.26 � /
.. 0]% m - TP 1].21 TP 17.08 Iw 17. I -
� Q I . (LP) CONFORM)
1'
N� I
TP1]]1 a __ _ ____ .. 04^ � -••• •______ 1w 1635 _ - (LOON _ I
a.a FORM)
1T TC 18:9] I T �
JZ
TP311.49 TP31]49 chi TP S1T93 _ _Ofi% o/y'�TC 1]00 �'_J__
C 16 91
z _
TP 317:/8.
(CONFORM) (CONFORM) (CONFORM) I.d (CONFORM) 14 TP 1]02 (LP) ---- _ TP 17.28 09%. TP 1�].fi3,I' J ONFORMTAND I STC 1].OB
��- 7 TP 317.47 Im mP.)) I •-•
4
TP 318.01 TP 31]93 TP 31]]3 TP 311 ]3 TP 317.20 (CONFORM) TP 31]. � • 7 11 -•-•
(CONFORM) (CONFORM) (CONFORM) (CONFORM) (CONFORM) 7 (CONFORM
+I2? +Ia� +IIa" SAWCUT ANDD v - q
TC18.22 1� 1� yN l{ I L• SLF 18"SD�19o811N.
n 1 1 13 a CONFORM (TYP) TP31826 'J 0`\ 4••
(CONFORM) 1� _ s OUTFALL INV. 135
F- RW RW RW RW C18. ________R `__________ N_______ __J_ ____________�_ _(coNFo ) TP 31809 ••�•-.
(CONFORM) ATP 518.35
TC 18.09
C0162W ALR (CONFORM) _ -
m O w.__
17.66 FO
-RW C6.2 , CONFORM) TP 18.32 (CO FORM TP 18.37 C
F518.2] - al MN Im (CONFORM) r
F41RM) •• �\\\�\ 11 \\ , TC 17.8] ONFOI W 2 C4A LIMIT OF WORK
----------- P3180]
••.• TP 1882
(CONFORM) RM) (CONFORM TAW P M�NA
_ \ FS 19.08 �+�' r ---- --- _S FS 18 ]2 TP31860 CONFO W AR EL %
1.,
FS 19.00 I I'I (CONFORM) _ ,r Y FRE .t
LIMITOF WORK•.. ��' -_ 1 WS- "A T ITA S.• - t..•
FS 19.38 ( F31880 I ITC 19.44 WABDUIV-
I • �-� FS 19.2/ 1... 519.08 _______ ____ ____ ___ , i TC 19fi iTC 19.28 �j I
' 0
I
•• .* .. ) . •. STP
/(CONFORM) I TP 318.]4 11 I CONFORM \ •••-- FS 1928 \ I , Y (CONFORM) I 1 --- - _ _
Ii � \ FS 19A8 I ( TC 1923 ' NFORM) 13
RA4
- 5 (CONFORj�S)
I � 8 G �_ �kC 19.03 TP 17.]7 20 LF 12"SD@1%MIN T
Z C4.4 CONFOR
:(CONFORM)
CONF J \
(CONFORR M) C44 R/W
I / G t vi
6.�r 4 LU
6 Graphic Scale (in feet) LU
i I LIMIT OF WORK LU p o m LU
RN I
WI
� ZI
IA ; I rIlI MATCHLINE SEE SHEET C4.3
-------------r---------------------------------------__Y------
--------------------------
'�_ �1c I ( I -�-
Path: P:\Projects\24000\24189\Figures\IS_MND
San Rafael, California
Figure 6.
Project Site Plan
(1 of 5)
Date: October 2015
Source: CWS I ST2.
Path: P:\Projects\24000\24189\Figures\IS_MND
// wra
GRADING & DRAINAGE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
\ 4 KEYNOTES
NEW CASE "A" CURB RAMP, SEE DETAIL 15 ON SHEET
/ / \
Graphic Scale In feet PRO
p � � Manuel T. Freitas
PROTECT IN PLACE EXISTING JOINT POLE
PROTECT IN PLACE EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT, ADJUST Parkway a n d
/ TO FINISH GRADE AS NEEDED.
NEW TYPE "A" CURB AND GUTTER, SEE DETAIL 7 O
SHEET C8.0.
,\ \ Las Gallinas Avenue
2' WIDE CURB CUT, SEE DETAIL 18 ON SHEET 08.0.
NEW CULVERT / O
IMPROVEMENTS, IEESTRUC URAL PLANS Intersection
NEW WALL, SEE STRUCTURAL PLANS. Improvements
717. / , \ � DENOTES RETAINED WALL HEIGHT AND SIDE
^ONFORM) / \
NEW MODIFIED TYPE "E" CURB, SEE DETAIL 8 ON SHEET
C6.0.
Off•. TP 1818 \ \ / / \ NEW AC PAVEMENT AND SAWCUT LIMITS. SEE PLANS
.. �\
FOR EXTENTS.San Rafael, California
(CONFORM) TP 1819
TP 1812 _ �+• a` / / NEW PEDESTRIAN WALK. SEE DETAIL 2 ON SHEET 08.0
(CONFORM)
TP 17.57 ;P 1824
(CONFORM) TP 18.15
(CONFORM) '4� •.• /
p Mq TP 1927
TC175a'�RkWUF< colno�RM) �• �'�.• / �\ I
q Y T \ I
(CONFORM) �• ` TP 182
30
TP 18.25` \•• DAYLIGHT(TYP.)-
\
\ \ m/(CONFORM)
TP1],�
\ `�••
,(CON RM) TP 18.24
TP 18.2fi / I
(CONFORM) \• ,, / /
n�TC 1189 •
1].55 � �\ TP 18.19 I
\ \ \ �\a (CONFORM) TP 18.28 •• \ \ / I
\ \ e (CONFORM)
\ \ •. I
^�.(P)`. ;P1828
TC1787H/ I
18.15 ,, \
\ (CONFORM) TP 17"63 I Figure 7.
(CONFORM) I Figure
41, VM
4 \ \ \/� TP 1].52 (00 M) 2/ \\ TP 1].88
/V \ C 1].58 • (CONFORM) \
F� \ 1 TP 17.49 P1].82 \
TC 1148 (CONFORM)TP 1].92 \�\ (CONFORM)
\
Tq (CONFORM) \ \\ TC 17.19 j Project Site Plan
S \ \ - (CONFORM)
TP 17.88 ,, \
pq R \ \ \ (CONFORM) \ I 2 of 5
•1 I.. \ \` . �\ \ LIMIT OF WOR'rY<P) I I ( )
I
q Te \ \ \ I
F \
S
\\ 00\ \ \ NI
\\\ \\ \\ \\ \ I WI
\ \
LU
rWivJ l
LU
\ I
\ \ \ FS 17.17 I
\ \ TC 17.88 ;
\ \ \ \ (CONFORM)
\ \l t
\ \ TPF
(CONFORM)
F,•
\ \ I
I
I
Date: October 2015
Source: CWS I ST2.
V \
U \
H
W \ \
2 \
LU
LULU
LU
Z •♦`
J \
2 \
H
Trnrw
1+00
.;
DAYLIGHT (TYP) ♦%// / ♦♦♦♦♦
•°� .•�/ may°\ / 3� ONIOR.)
••� Soa
°._
................... 2-17.16-
12
\ FS 1fiW
5165
FS 16 .75 TC16.1 (LP) ' 17
rC 1ez9 J� sx
O
SV
/
(CONFORM)'
\ 4 ° , ° 16.32 ��TPa1653 /.
° 9' .' i F� /♦ /
L TC 18.62 (I
♦♦y TC(DEP .)15.95
_TP
P
(CONFORM) 16.81 ; `�
__ TP 51852 �' T 16.20
` \ ♦♦♦\ 10
\ (CONFORM)TP 4.( DAYLIGHT(T1P.)
(CONFORM) (CONFORM) F51fi 32 )• � ♦\ TC 1 .10 . i •
\ 118.39 I •
\ 7 \ (CONFORM) A T.. 16.11
FS 16.31
\ ,-, 1 I LIMIT OF WORK (TYPJ
\ r �� TC (DE .)16.05 -
\ \ I �4 ^` / 11 FS 16.07
I
\ \ 9
, TC( ER) 1&50 �i FS 15.89
w 41?A TC 15.94s
\ J' /�C_`� // ° ♦• FS 15.87
\ \ \ \ �N ,41�� (CONFORM) `�' ° ° \ •..?♦♦� FS 15.W
\ \ \ V Oky
TC
\ \ �/ "JP
\ \ 40 4 .. n �FS 1..
\ \ 515.78
(C � •
(CONFORM) �
\ \ 2
o
\ \
\ \
SAWCUT AND
CONFORM
1,00
\ \
TP 115.08
(CONFORM)
Path: P:\Projects\24000\24189\Figures\IS_MND
TC 15.40 \
♦ (CONFORM)
GRADING & DRAINAGE
KEYNOTES
ONEW
O
C6.0.
OPROTECT
IN PLACE EXISTING JOINT POLE
O
PROTECT IN PLACE EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT, ADJUST
/
ONEW
TYPE "A" CURB AND GUTTER, SEE DETAIL 7 ON
SHEET C6 0.
O2'
WIDE CURB CUT, SEE DETAIL 16 ON SHEET C6.0.
ONEW
CULVERT BRIDGE BELOW SURFACE
IMPROVEMENTS, SEE STRUCTURAL PLANS
O
WALL, SEE STRUCTURAL PLANS.
/
ONEW
MODIFIED TYPE "E" CURB, SEE DETAIL 8 ON SHEET
C6.0.
SHEET C5.0 FOR LOS GAMOS CURB RETURN EAST
OSEE
TOP OF CURB PROFILE
SEE SHEET C5.0 FOR LOS GAMOS CURB RETURN WEST
10
TOP OF CURB PROFILE
CE)
NEW TYPE "C" CATCH BASIN PER MARIN COUNTY UCS,
CONTRACTOR SHALL MATCH FLOWLINE OF EXISTING
PIPE.
12
CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY AND MATCH EXISTING STORM
PIPE SIZE, MATERIAL AND INVERT AND EXTEND TO NEW
STORM STRUCTURE AS NEEDED
73
INSTALL NEW SOD t530 SF
NEW AC PAVEMENT AND SAWCUT LIMITS. SEE PLANS
FOR EXTENTS.
NEW PEDESTRIAN WALK. SEE DETAIL 2 ON SHEET C6.0
TC 16.38
(CONFORM)
/
/
•1i /
/
(CONFORM)'
\ 4 ° , ° 16.32 ��TPa1653 /.
° 9' .' i F� /♦ /
L TC 18.62 (I
♦♦y TC(DEP .)15.95
_TP
P
(CONFORM) 16.81 ; `�
__ TP 51852 �' T 16.20
` \ ♦♦♦\ 10
\ (CONFORM)TP 4.( DAYLIGHT(T1P.)
(CONFORM) (CONFORM) F51fi 32 )• � ♦\ TC 1 .10 . i •
\ 118.39 I •
\ 7 \ (CONFORM) A T.. 16.11
FS 16.31
\ ,-, 1 I LIMIT OF WORK (TYPJ
\ r �� TC (DE .)16.05 -
\ \ I �4 ^` / 11 FS 16.07
I
\ \ 9
, TC( ER) 1&50 �i FS 15.89
w 41?A TC 15.94s
\ J' /�C_`� // ° ♦• FS 15.87
\ \ \ \ �N ,41�� (CONFORM) `�' ° ° \ •..?♦♦� FS 15.W
\ \ \ V Oky
TC
\ \ �/ "JP
\ \ 40 4 .. n �FS 1..
\ \ 515.78
(C � •
(CONFORM) �
\ \ 2
o
\ \
\ \
SAWCUT AND
CONFORM
1,00
\ \
TP 115.08
(CONFORM)
Path: P:\Projects\24000\24189\Figures\IS_MND
TC 15.40 \
♦ (CONFORM)
GRADING & DRAINAGE
KEYNOTES
ONEW
CASE "A" CURB RAMP, SEE DETAIL 15 ON SHEET
C6.0.
OPROTECT
IN PLACE EXISTING JOINT POLE
O
PROTECT IN PLACE EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT, ADJUST
TO FINISH GRADE AS NEEDED
ONEW
TYPE "A" CURB AND GUTTER, SEE DETAIL 7 ON
SHEET C6 0.
O2'
WIDE CURB CUT, SEE DETAIL 16 ON SHEET C6.0.
ONEW
CULVERT BRIDGE BELOW SURFACE
IMPROVEMENTS, SEE STRUCTURAL PLANS
ONEW
7
WALL, SEE STRUCTURAL PLANS.
DENOTES RETAINED WALL HEIGHT AND SIDE
ONEW
MODIFIED TYPE "E" CURB, SEE DETAIL 8 ON SHEET
C6.0.
SHEET C5.0 FOR LOS GAMOS CURB RETURN EAST
OSEE
TOP OF CURB PROFILE
SEE SHEET C5.0 FOR LOS GAMOS CURB RETURN WEST
10
TOP OF CURB PROFILE
CE)
NEW TYPE "C" CATCH BASIN PER MARIN COUNTY UCS,
CONTRACTOR SHALL MATCH FLOWLINE OF EXISTING
PIPE.
12
CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY AND MATCH EXISTING STORM
PIPE SIZE, MATERIAL AND INVERT AND EXTEND TO NEW
STORM STRUCTURE AS NEEDED
73
INSTALL NEW SOD t530 SF
NEW AC PAVEMENT AND SAWCUT LIMITS. SEE PLANS
FOR EXTENTS.
NEW PEDESTRIAN WALK. SEE DETAIL 2 ON SHEET C6.0
(P
Graphic Scale (in feet)
03wra
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
Manuel T. Freitas
Parkway and
Las Gallinas Avenue
Intersection
Improvements
San Rafael, California
Figure 8.
Project Site Plan
(3 of 5)
Date: October 2015
Source: CWS I ST2.
GRADING & DRAINAGE
KEYNOTES
ONEW
CASE "A" CURB RAMP, SEE DETAIL 15 ON SHEET
C6.0.
O
PROTECT IN PLACE EXISTING JOINT POLE
OPROTECT
IN PLACE EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT, ADJUST
TO FINISH GRADE AS NEEDED.
ONEW
TYPE "A" CURB AND GUTTER, SEE DETAIL 7 ON
SHEET C6.0.
O2'
WIDE CURB CUT, SEE DETAIL 16 ON SHEET C6 0.
CULVERT BRIDGE BELOW SURFACE
ONEW
IMPROVEMENTS, SEE STRUCTURAL PLANS
7
CE)
NEW WALL, SEE STRUCTURAL PLANS.
DENOTES RETAINED WALL HEIGHT AND SIDE
©NEW
MODIFIED TYPE "E" CURB, SEE DETAIL 8 ON SHEET
C6.0.
;i
NEW AC PAVEMENT AND SAWCUT LIMITS. SEE PLANS
i
FOR EXTENTS.
NEW PEDESTRIAN WALK. SEE DETAIL 2 ON SHEET C6.0
Path: P:\Projects\24000\24189\Figures\IS_MND
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
Manuel T. Freitas
Parkway and
Las Gallinas Avenue
Intersection
Improvements
San Rafael, California
Figure 9.
Project Site Plan
(4 of 5)
Date: October 2015
Source: CWS I ST2.
CNE ADA RAMPS
EG 18.27 EO 16.77
TO 16.85 (CONFORM (CONFORM)- SAWCUT/CONFORM
C'P)
TO 16.96
T _ EG 1].22
C 1].16
-- _ -_ •. TP 16.6] FS 16.66 .(CONFORM)
TP 16.
LIMIT • 'TP 13.16 TO 1].25
OF FS 16.75
WORK
TP 41.04 ,
- FS 7.28
-11.02 + STC1
FS 17,38
TP 1].83 TPS'
T]
EG 17.68
\\ (CONFORM)
_ 18.15 `SAWC'TICONFORM
EG 1828 -- EG (NP')
(CONFORM)
(CONFORM)
CBRIDGE (WEST)
Path: P:\Projects\24000\24189\Figures\IS_MND
;I
:I
•I o
♦♦♦�LIMITOFWORK 7 &
F31].03/ ry�..
♦. i FS 1].1W"'FS16 ° a77 TP±16.%
°, \ •♦♦ a' (CONFORM)
FS 7.01 T (DEP.) 16.63
\ , c.�TO(DER)18
1 F5172Q X317.14 ° Tp*"" ].26
1 1].28
7 6� (CONFORM)
gfl
/ 1, TO 1].29 !
_
�TO 1].5]
1.0% ! (CONFORM)
TO(DEP)16,95 > �+
__---------- F1.32
(CONFORM) (CONFORM)
CONFORM)
(�wcryp) r/CONFORM
(TTP.)
CNW CORNER
(CONFORM -'----
TP 1].13
T 1].46
CBRIDGE (EAST)
FS 16AO
TO 162 S1633
(CONFO
TP 315.93 FS 16.333
F318.30
(CONFORM)
LT e
� of •e
c F316.31
L'11 73
(CONFORM) 50
aTC 1 2] FS 18.
4.6q 1a__ a
FS 16.0
TP 116.08 \` FS 18.48
(CONFORM) '(76
0518.55 °
TO (D )1605 ° ° 1
TP 118.35 =�h �F316.88 O
(CONFORM) T
`TC (DER))16.09
\41N°TC 16.54
TP±16.39
(CONFORM)
TP±16.52 TC 18.11 __-`-
U
(CONFORM)
TP±16.46 TP±16.82
NEWTEL. ONDUITSCONNECTEDTO ( (CONFORM)
11TING(I OTHERS) SAWCUT/CONFORM(N .)
(4) 4' TEL CONDUITS (BY OTHERS)
ONE CORNER
TO 18 02
-- 7--\
................F518.21
♦ FS18n ,
LIMIT OF WORK J ♦♦♦ FS 18.
\ 1F.
t
CSW CORNER
TO(DEP.)17. 9
TC (DEP. 17.]2
TO 1 .26
C 18.32
, Is
(CONFORM)
TP 31].14
(CONFORM)
CEAST ADA RAMPS
(BV OTHERS)
CSE CORNER
03wra
ENVIRONMEI AL CONSULTANTS
Manuel T. Freitas
Parkway and
Las Gallinas Avenue
Intersection
Improvements
San Rafael, California
Figure 10.
Project Site Plan
(5 of 5)
Date: October 2015
Source: CWS I ST2.
F
nl
Oq%
TEL
CONDUITS
CON
(BV OTHERS)
/
IMIT OF WORK
I-
-
TP.
TO 18 67
TC 18.52
EG 18. �'
TO 18 83
(CONFORM)
(CON RM) -_,
Uf7CONF0
__
.
P.)
EG 1838
- ---
(CONFOR
EG 18.3]
(CONFORM)
CBRIDGE (EAST)
FS 16AO
TO 162 S1633
(CONFO
TP 315.93 FS 16.333
F318.30
(CONFORM)
LT e
� of •e
c F316.31
L'11 73
(CONFORM) 50
aTC 1 2] FS 18.
4.6q 1a__ a
FS 16.0
TP 116.08 \` FS 18.48
(CONFORM) '(76
0518.55 °
TO (D )1605 ° ° 1
TP 118.35 =�h �F316.88 O
(CONFORM) T
`TC (DER))16.09
\41N°TC 16.54
TP±16.39
(CONFORM)
TP±16.52 TC 18.11 __-`-
U
(CONFORM)
TP±16.46 TP±16.82
NEWTEL. ONDUITSCONNECTEDTO ( (CONFORM)
11TING(I OTHERS) SAWCUT/CONFORM(N .)
(4) 4' TEL CONDUITS (BY OTHERS)
ONE CORNER
TO 18 02
-- 7--\
................F518.21
♦ FS18n ,
LIMIT OF WORK J ♦♦♦ FS 18.
\ 1F.
t
CSW CORNER
TO(DEP.)17. 9
TC (DEP. 17.]2
TO 1 .26
C 18.32
, Is
(CONFORM)
TP 31].14
(CONFORM)
CEAST ADA RAMPS
(BV OTHERS)
CSE CORNER
03wra
ENVIRONMEI AL CONSULTANTS
Manuel T. Freitas
Parkway and
Las Gallinas Avenue
Intersection
Improvements
San Rafael, California
Figure 10.
Project Site Plan
(5 of 5)
Date: October 2015
Source: CWS I ST2.
This page intentionally left blank.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 18
7. Project BMPs.
It is anticipated that construction of the proposed project would require approximately ten
weeks. Project construction would occur from approximately 7:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., Monday
through Friday.
The construction contractor will be responsible for complying with all terms of the contract
specifications and drawings. Measures to be identified in the contract specifications and
drawings include, but are not limited to:
• Identify locations of other existing underground utilities in the proposed alignment and
take necessary precautions to avoid damaging the utilities or interfering with their
service.
• Minimize discharge of materials in storm water in accordance with the Regional Water
Quality Control Board's (RWQCB) Storm Water Management and Discharge Rules and
Regulations.
• Use traffic cones, signs, lighted barricades, lights, and flagmen as described and
specified in the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, current edition, California
Supplement, Part 6 Temporary Traffic Control to provide for public safety and
convenience during construction.
• Maintain convenient access to driveways and streets near the work area unless
otherwise approved by the City in advance.
• Lane closure or traffic detours on City streets require prior approval of the City. Any
excavation that would be required would be covered by contract.
• Cover, fence, and guard, as appropriate, open excavation and ditches across roadways
in such a manner as to permit safe traffic flow during hours when no work is being
performed and to prevent accidents from people or animals falling into the trenches.
• Restore street/surface improvements to pre -disturbance conditions or better.
The contractor will also implement measures during construction to maintain safety, minimize
impacts from hazardous materials spills, maintain emergency access, protect water quality,
cultural and biological resources, and prevent fires, including:
• Follow all safety and health requirements set forth by the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration.
• Hazardous materials will not be stored or used, such as for equipment maintenance,
where they could affect nearby properties, or where they might enter the storm drain
system.
• All spills of oil and other hazardous materials will be immediately cleaned up and
contained. Any hazardous materials cleaned up or used on-site will be properly
disposed of at an approved disposal facility.
• The City or its contractor will notify and coordinate with law enforcement and emergency
service providers prior to the start of construction to ensure minimal disruption to service
during construction.
• Detours will be readily available at all times to allow emergency vehicles access around
the work area.
• Prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to limit erosion and protect
water quality surrounding the project site.
The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) recommends basic construction
measures to ensure minimal impacts on regional air quality. The contractor will be responsible
for implementing the following basic measures during construction:
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 19
• All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas) will be
watered two times per day.
• All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site will be covered.
• All visible mud or dirt track -out onto adjacent public roads will be removed using wet
power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is
prohibited.
• All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved will be completed as soon as
possible.
• Idling times will be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or
reducing the maximum idling time to five minutes (as required by the California airborne
toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations).
• Clear signage will be provided for construction workers at all access points.
• All construction equipment will be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with
manufacturer's specifications, and all equipment will be checked by a certified visible
emissions evaluator.
• A publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the lead
agency regarding any dust complaints will be posted in or near the project site. The
contact person will respond to complaints and take corrective action within 48 hours.
The Air District's phone number will also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable
regulations.
8. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval May Be Required:
The information contained in this Initial Study will be used by the City of San Rafael (the
California Environmental Quality Act [CEQA] Lead Agency) as it considers whether or not to
approve the proposed project. If the project is approved, the Initial Study, as well as the
associated Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) would be used by the City and
responsible and trustee agencies in conjunction with various approvals and permits. These
actions include, but may not be limited to, the following approvals by the agencies indicated:
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)
• Section 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement
Regional Water Qualitv Control Board (RWQCB)
• Clean Water Act, Section 401 Waste Discharge Report
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 20
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving
at least one impact that is potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated, as indicated
by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics
Agricultural Resources
Air Quality
X Biological Resources
X Cultural Resources
Geology and Soils
X Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology and Water Quality
Land Use/Planning
Mineral Resources
X Noise
Population and Housing
X Public Services
Recreation
X Transportation/Traffic
Utilities
X Mandatory Findings of
Significance
Determination
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
❑ I find that the project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will
not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or
agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that the project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the project MAY have a "Potentially significant impact' or "potentially significant
unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately
analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached
sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the
effects that remain to be addressed.
❑ I find that although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all
potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or
NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or
mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or
mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Signature Date:
Name and Title: Dean Allison, Public Works Director
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 21
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
This section describes the existing environmental conditions in and near the project area and
evaluates environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. The environmental
checklist, as recommended in the CEQA Guidelines (Appendix G), was used to identify
environmental impacts that could occur if the proposed project is implemented. The right-hand
column in the checklist lists the source(s) for the answer to each question. The cited sources
are identified at the end of this section.
Each of the environmental categories was fully evaluated, and one of the following four
determinations was made for each checklist question:
■ "No Impact" means that no impact to the resource would occur as a result of
implementing the project.
■ "Less than Significant Impact" means that implementation of the project would not
result in a substantial and/or adverse change to the resource, and no mitigation
measures are required.
■ "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated" means that the incorporation of
one or more mitigation measures is necessary to reduce the impact from potentially
significant to less than significant.
■ "Potentially Significant Impact" means that there is either substantial evidence that a
project -related effect may be significant, or, due to a lack of existing information, could
have the potential to be significant.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 22
Environmental Setting
The project site is not located along any designated or eligible scenic highways and is not
visible from designated portions of 1-101 or SR -37, which are the nearest designated scenic
highways located more than six miles north of the project site (California Department of
Transportation, 2012). The project site is not within a City -designated scenic road, corridor or
scenic vista. Existing land uses adjacent to the project site consist of various residential
properties, a park, and commercial uses near the intersection. These uses have direct views of
the proposed project site. The other primary viewer group in the project area is motorists using
the roads in and near the project site. Views are limited to the road corridor and immediately
adjacent uses because the nearby buildings form barriers that prevent more distant views.
Existing sources of nighttime light in the project area include vehicle headlights, commercial
development lighting, parking lot lights and residential security lighting. Existing sources of
glare are mainly limited to automobile windshields and reflective building materials associated
with residential and commercial uses.
Discussion of Impacts
a, b) No Impact. No scenic vistas exist in or near the project site. Furthermore, there is
no state or locally designated scenic highway, road or corridor within the vicinity of
the project site. The project also would not result in impacts within a state scenic
highway, such as the removal of trees, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings.
C) Less than Significant Impact. There is the potential for temporary impacts to the
existing visual quality of the surrounding area during construction. Temporary visual
impacts resulting from the presence of construction vehicles or ground disturbance
may result during project construction activities. However, construction activities
would be temporary. The permanent development of the site would be consistent
with the existing conditions of the site. Realignment and removal of certain
intersection elements would not substantially alter the aesthetic value of the project
site. No new element of the project would be different from what is to be expected at
an intersection. Impacts would be less than significant.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 23
Less than
Significant
Potentially
with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
I.
AESTHETICS — Would the project:
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
Source
a)
Have a substantial adverse effect on a
❑
❑
❑
®
1,2
scenic vista?
b)
Substantially damage scenic resources,
❑
❑
❑
®
1,2,3
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within
a state scenic highway?
c)
Substantially degrade the existing visual
❑
❑
®
❑
1
character or quality of the site and its
surroundings?
d)
Create a new source of substantial light or
❑
❑
❑
®
1
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
Environmental Setting
The project site is not located along any designated or eligible scenic highways and is not
visible from designated portions of 1-101 or SR -37, which are the nearest designated scenic
highways located more than six miles north of the project site (California Department of
Transportation, 2012). The project site is not within a City -designated scenic road, corridor or
scenic vista. Existing land uses adjacent to the project site consist of various residential
properties, a park, and commercial uses near the intersection. These uses have direct views of
the proposed project site. The other primary viewer group in the project area is motorists using
the roads in and near the project site. Views are limited to the road corridor and immediately
adjacent uses because the nearby buildings form barriers that prevent more distant views.
Existing sources of nighttime light in the project area include vehicle headlights, commercial
development lighting, parking lot lights and residential security lighting. Existing sources of
glare are mainly limited to automobile windshields and reflective building materials associated
with residential and commercial uses.
Discussion of Impacts
a, b) No Impact. No scenic vistas exist in or near the project site. Furthermore, there is
no state or locally designated scenic highway, road or corridor within the vicinity of
the project site. The project also would not result in impacts within a state scenic
highway, such as the removal of trees, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings.
C) Less than Significant Impact. There is the potential for temporary impacts to the
existing visual quality of the surrounding area during construction. Temporary visual
impacts resulting from the presence of construction vehicles or ground disturbance
may result during project construction activities. However, construction activities
would be temporary. The permanent development of the site would be consistent
with the existing conditions of the site. Realignment and removal of certain
intersection elements would not substantially alter the aesthetic value of the project
site. No new element of the project would be different from what is to be expected at
an intersection. Impacts would be less than significant.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 23
d) No Impact. Construction of the proposed project would not create a significant
source of light or glare during daytime. The long-term operation of the project would
not result in the addition of new sources of light and glare. Upon completion of
construction the light and glare conditions at the project site would be nearly identical
to existing conditions. The proposed project would not create a new source of
substantial light or glare which adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.
Environmental Setting
The project site does not contain any farmland or forestry land and is not designated for
agricultural or forestry uses or Prime, Statewide, or Locally Important Farmland (California
Department of Conservation, 2010). The proposed project is located in residential and
commercial areas and follows existing roads. Surrounding land is developed with residential,
educational, and commercial uses.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 24
Less than
Significant
II.
AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY
Potentially
with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
RESOURCES —Would the project:
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact Source
a)
Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
❑
❑
❑
❑ 4
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
b)
Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
❑
❑
❑
❑ 2
use, or a Williamson Act contract?
c)
Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
❑
❑
❑
❑ 2
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in
Public Resources Code section 12220(g)),
timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or
timberland zoned Timberland Production
(as defined by Government Code section
51104(g))?
d)
Result in the loss of forest land or
❑
❑
❑
❑ 1
conversion of forest land to non -forest
use?
e)
Involve other changes in the existing
❑
❑
❑
® 1,4
environment, which, due to their location
or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non -forest
use??
Environmental Setting
The project site does not contain any farmland or forestry land and is not designated for
agricultural or forestry uses or Prime, Statewide, or Locally Important Farmland (California
Department of Conservation, 2010). The proposed project is located in residential and
commercial areas and follows existing roads. Surrounding land is developed with residential,
educational, and commercial uses.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 24
Discussion of Impacts
a -e) No Impact. There are no agricultural or forestry resources within the project site.
There are no Prime, Unique, Statewide or Locally Important farmlands in the area.
The project site is not under a Williamson Act Contract, nor is the project zoned as
forest land or timber production. The project would be confined to existing right-of-
ways and therefore no impacts to agricultural or forestry resources would occur.
III.
AIR QUALITY — Where available, the
significance criteria established by the
applicable air quality management or air
Less than
pollution control district may be relied
Significant
upon to make the following
Potentially
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
determinations. Would the project:
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
Source
a)
Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
❑
❑
®
❑
1,14
the applicable air quality plan?
b)
Violate any air quality standard or
❑
❑
®
❑
1,14
contribute to an existing or projected air
quality violation?
c)
Result in a cumulatively considerable net
❑
❑
®
❑
1,14
increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is non -attainment under
an applicable federal or state ambient air
quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d)
Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
❑
❑
❑
❑
1,14
pollutant concentrations?
e)
Create objectionable odors affecting a
❑
❑
®
❑
1,14
substantial number of people?
Environmental Setting
The project site is in the San Francisco Bay Area air basin, where air quality is monitored and
regulated by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). Ambient concentrations
of key air pollutants have decreased considerably over the course of the last several decades.
Air pollution is generated by anything that burns fuel (including but not limited to cars and trucks,
construction equipment, backup generators, boilers and hot water heaters, barbeques and
broilers, gas-fired cooking ranges and ovens, fireplaces, and wood -burning stoves), almost any
evaporative emissions (including the evaporation of gasoline from service stations and vehicles,
emissions from food as it is cooked, emissions from paints, cleaning solvents, and adhesives,
etc.), and other processes (fugitive dust generated from roadways and construction activities,
etc.).
A sensitive receptor is generally defined as a location where human populations, especially
children, seniors, and sick persons, are located where there is a reasonable expectation of
continuous human exposure to air pollutants. These typically include residences, hospitals, and
schools. The site is surrounded by residential and commercial land uses.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 25
The Bay Area is currently classified as "attainment" or "unclassifiable" with respect to every
National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) except ozone and fine particulate matter
PM2.5), for which it is still classified as "nonattainment." Ozone concentrations in the Bay Area
have also decreased considerably over the last several decades, but NAAQS are required to be
set to be protective of public health "allowing an adequate margin of safety" and have also
become more stringent. Prior to 2008, attaining the ozone NAAQS required that the "design
value"--i.e., the peak 8 -hour average concentration on the 4th -worst day of the year (averaged
over three consecutive years) --be below 0.08 parts per million (ppm); the Bay Area was
classified as "marginal" nonattainment with respect to that standard.' The Bay Area's current
ozone design value (based on 2008-2010 data) is 0.080 ppm,2 but in 2008, the ozone NAAQS
was revised to 0.075 ppm. Therefore, while EPA has not yet finalized its attainment
designations for the 2008 ozone standard, it is proposing to designate the Bay Area as
"marginal nonattainment" (0.076 - 0.086 ppm) with respect to that standard.3
The State of California also has its own ambient air quality standards (CAAQS) which are
equivalent to or more stringent than the NAAQS; the Bay Area is currently classified as
nonattainment with respect to the CAAQS for ozone, particulate matter smaller than 10 microns
(PM,o), and "fine" particulate matter smaller than 2.5 microns (PM2.5)-
Discussion of Impacts
a, b) Less Than Significant Impact. Construction activities would result in short-term
increases in emissions from the use of heavy equipment that generates dust,
exhaust, and tire -wear emissions; soil disturbance; materials used in construction;
and construction traffic. Project construction would produce fugitive dust (PM10 and
PM2.5) during ground disturbance and would generate carbon monoxide, ozone
precursors, and other emissions from vehicle and equipment operation. Best
management practices (BMPs) recommended by BAAQMD and identified above in
the project description would be implemented during construction to minimize fugitive
dust. All roadway improvement activities would take place within existing roads in a
developed community. Construction emissions would be temporary, lasting
approximately ten weeks, and would not have long-term effects on air quality in the
Bay Area. Because of the small area of disturbance, temporary nature of the
emissions, and implementation of construction measures, impacts on air quality
would be less than significant and would comply with the Bay Area 2010 Clean Air
Plan.
C) Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed under items a) b), the project would
result in minor construction -related emissions. It would not result in a cumulatively
considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant. The project would cause short-
term air quality impacts as a result of construction activities; however, it would not
result in long-term or cumulatively considerable increases in air quality pollutant
emissions for which the Bay Area is currently in non -attainment (ozone and
' The Bay Area Air Quality Management reported that the maximum 8 -hour ozone concentration only exceeded
the standard once in 2005 and once in 2007, but exceeded the standard on 12 days in 2006.
2 Lynn Terry (California Air Resources Board Deputy Executive Officer), letter to Deborah Jordan (U.S. EPA
Region 9 Air Division Director), October 12, 2011, available from
http://www. epa.gov/ozonedesignationsl2008standardslrec/letters/09_CA_rec2.pdf.
3 EPA's proposed criterion for the `marginal" classification was proposed in the Federal Register on February 14,
2012.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 26
particulate matter). Implementation of the BMPs included in the project description
would ensure that the temporary increase in air pollutant emissions associated with
construction activities would result in less than significant contributions to cumulative
pollutant levels in the region.
d) Less Than Significant Impact. The primary sensitive receptors in the vicinity are
residents, which may include children, elderly people, or people with respiratory
illnesses. Sensitive receptors located in close proximity to several locations adjacent
to the construction area could be exposed to temporary air pollutants from
construction activities, such as fugitive dust, ozone precursors, and carbon
monoxide. The duration of construction activities would be limited. Basic
construction measures recommended by BAAQMD, listed in the project description,
would be implemented during construction to minimize air pollutants. New
construction equipment has been subject to increasingly stringent emissions
requirements at the Federal level (e.g., 40 CFR 89 and 1039), designated "Tier 1",
"Tier 2", "Tier 3", etc.; older construction equipment is subject to potential retrofit
requirements required by the State of California (13 CCR 2449, 13 CCR 2450-2466,
and 17 CCR 93116). As a result, sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the project
would not be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations, and impacts would be
less than significant.
e) Less Than Significant Impact. Construction activities would involve the use of
gasoline or diesel -powered equipment that emits exhaust fumes and would involve
asphalt paving, which has a distinctive odor during application. Asphalt would
conform to BAAQMD regulations governing asphalt (Regulation 8, Rule 15). These
activities would take place intermittently throughout the workday, and the associated
odors are expected to dissipate within the immediate vicinity of the work area.
Persons near the construction work area may find these odors objectionable.
However, the proposed project would not include uses that have been identified by
BAAQMD as potential sources of objectionable odors, such as restaurants,
manufacturing plants, landfills, and agricultural and industrial operations. The
infrequency of the emissions, rapid dissipation of the exhaust and other odors into
the air, and short-term nature of the construction activities would result in less -than -
significant odor impacts.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 27
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 28
Less than
Significant
IV.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES — Would
Potentially with Less than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
the project:
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Source
a)
Have a substantial adverse effect, either
❑ ® ❑ ❑ 1,5,9
directly or through habitat modifications,
on any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special -status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations,
or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
b)
Have a substantial adverse effect on any
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 1,5,9
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game
or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c)
Have a substantial adverse effect on
❑ ❑ ® ❑ 1,9
federally protected wetlands as defined by
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal
pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
d)
Interfere substantially with the movement
❑ ❑ ❑ ® 1,9
of any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
e)
Conflict with any local policies or
❑ ❑ ® ❑ 1,2,9
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation
policy or ordinance?
f)
Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
❑ ❑ ❑ ® 1
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 28
The following discussion related to biological resources is based on a Biological
Reconnaissance Memorandum prepared by WRA, Inc. and is provided in Appendix A.
Regulatory Setting
Sensitive Biological Communities
Sensitive biological communities include habitats that fulfill special functions or have special
values, such as wetlands, streams, or riparian habitat. These habitats are protected under
federal regulations such as the Clean Water Act; state regulations such as the Porter -Cologne
Act, the CDFW Streambed Alteration Program, and CEQA; or local ordinances or policies such
as city or county tree ordinances, Special Habitat Management Areas, and General Plan
Elements.
Waters of the United States
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) regulates "Waters of the United States" under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Waters of the U.S. are defined in the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) as waters susceptible to use in commerce, including interstate waters and
wetlands, all other waters (intrastate waterbodies, including wetlands), and their tributaries (33
CFR 328.3). Potential wetland areas, according to the three criteria used to delineate wetlands
as defined in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory
1987), are identified by the presence of (1) hydrophytic vegetation, (2) hydric soils, and (3)
wetland hydrology. Areas that are inundated at a sufficient depth and for a sufficient duration to
exclude growth of hydrophytic vegetation are subject to Section 404 jurisdiction as "other
waters" and are often characterized by an ordinary high water mark (OHWM). Other waters, for
example, generally include lakes, rivers, and streams. The placement of fill material into Waters
of the U.S generally requires an individual or nationwide permit from the Corps under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act.
Waters of the State
The term "Waters of the State" is defined by the Porter -Cologne Act as "any surface water or
groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state." The Regional Water
Quality Control Board (RWQCB) protects all waters in its regulatory scope and has special
responsibility for wetlands, riparian areas, and headwaters. These waterbodies have high
resource value, are vulnerable to filling, and are not systematically protected by other programs.
RWQCB jurisdiction includes "isolated" wetlands and waters that may not be regulated by the
Corps under Section 404. Waters of the State are regulated by the RWQCB under the State
Water Quality Certification Program which regulates discharges of fill and dredged material
under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act and the Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act.
Projects that require a Corps permit, or fall under other federal jurisdiction, and have the
potential to impact Waters of the State, are required to comply with the terms of the Water
Quality Certification determination. If a proposed project does not require a federal permit, but
does involve dredge or fill activities that may result in a discharge to Waters of the State, the
RWQCB has the option to regulate the dredge and fill activities under its state authority in the
form of Waste Discharge Requirements.
Other Sensitive Biological Communities
Other sensitive biological communities not discussed above include habitats that fulfill special
functions or have special values. Natural communities considered sensitive are those identified
in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the CDFW; formerly the California
Department of Fish and Game [CDFG]). The CDFW ranks sensitive communities as
"threatened" or "very threatened" and keeps records of their occurrences in its California Natural
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 29
Diversity Database (CNDDB) (CDFW 2013). Sensitive plant communities are also identified by
CDFW (CDFG 2003, 2007, 2009). CNDDB vegetation alliances are ranked 1 through 5 based
on NatureServe's (2010) methodology, with those alliances ranked globally (G) or statewide (S)
as 1 through 3 considered sensitive. Impacts to sensitive natural communities identified in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations or those identified by the CDFW or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) must be considered and evaluated under CEQA (CCR Title 14, Div.
6, Chap. 3, Appendix G). Specific habitats may also be identified as sensitive in city or county
general plans or ordinances.
Environmental Setting
Vegetation Communities
The project site supports only managed landscaped areas that divide impervious paved
roadways and sidewalks. Landscaped areas exist as a barrier between Manuel T. Freitas
Parkway and the interior concrete channel, within the central portion of the project site.
Additionally, landscaped areas occur northeast of the project site intersection, in adjacent
unpaved surfaces to the turnoff from Manuel T. Freitas Parkway to northbound Las Gallinas
Avenue. Landscaped areas contain an array of planted ornamental shrubs and trees as well as
invasive species. Site hydrology is managed via a storm water drainage system that drains into
the concrete channel.
Dominant vegetation includes ornamental species such as juniper (Juniperus sp.), oleander
(Nerium oleander), firethorn (Pyracantha sp.), and crimson bottlebrush (Callistemon citrinus).
Ornamental trees were scattered throughout landscaped areas and include sweetgum
(Liquidambar styraciflua), and coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia). Additionally, the northern -most
landscaped area in the project site includes a redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), Monterey pine
(Pinus radiata), and blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus), with ground cover dominated by English
ivy (Hedera helix).
Aquatic communities within the project site include open waters associated with the concrete
channel of Gallinas Creek, discussed in detail below.
Wetlands and Waters of the U.S.
Wetlands are not present in the project site. However, approximately 0. 19 acre (530 linear feet)
of non -wetland waters were observed within the project site, associated with Gallinas Creek.
The channel of Gallinas Creek is a concrete trapezoidal flood control and storm drainage
channel, comprised of a concrete bed and banks with no natural substrates. It is lined with
ornamental shrubs to provide a visual barrier to surrounding traffic lanes. This perennial
channel is fed by many storm drain outlets of varying sizes along its length and contained water
flowing from the west during the site visit. Las Gallinas Avenue crosses the creek via a box
culvert style bridge that spans and shades a portion of Gallinas Creek. To the east of this
bridge, along the southern bank of the concrete channel, a large culvert feeds additional
stormwater flows into Gallinas Creek.
Because the concrete channel of Gallinas Creek contains an identifiable ordinary high water
mark and carries water from a perennial stream to the San Francisco Bay, the channel was
determined to be potentially jurisdictional under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act based on
current U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) guidance. Waters in the channel within the
project site are not tidal and occur approximately 3.5 river -miles from the San Francisco Bay.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 30
Figure 12. Gallinas Creek
Photograph facing east toward trapezoidal channel Photograph facing east toward concrete flood
of Gallinas Creek, carrying potential waters of the control channel of Gallinas Creek, east of subject
U.S., with subject intersection bridge in distance. intersection, carrying potential waters of the U.S.
Special -Status Plant Species
Sixty-six special -status plant species are known to occur in the vicinity of the project site (CDFW
2014, CNPS 2014). No rare plant species were observed during the site visit. Current
conditions in the project site do not contain suitable habitat for special -status plant species
known to occur in the vicinity, based on the highly disturbed and developed conditions of the
site. There is no potential for the project site to support special -status plant species.
Special -Status Wildlife Species
No special -status wildlife species have the potential to occur within the project site due to
disturbed and developed site conditions. The project site does not contain suitable habitat for
any special -status wildlife species. California black rail (Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus)
and San Pablo song sparrow (Melospiza melodia samuelis) have been documented within 1.5
miles to the north of the project site in marsh areas connected to San Francisco Bay. However,
the project site does not contain salt marsh habitat and it is separated from San Francisco Bay
by urban development. Further, the channel within the project site is a cemented stormwater
drainage that lacks natural substrate and vegetation. Therefore, there is no potential for
special -status fish species to occur, nor is essential fish habitat (EFH) present within the
concrete channel.
Non -Special -Status Birds and Bats
Nesting birds have potential to occur within some areas of the project site including in trees,
shrubs, and along existing structures. No trees, structures, or culverts observed within the
project site provide suitable roost habitat for bat species; therefore, there is no potential for bats
to roost within the project site.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 31
Discussion of Impacts
a) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Special -status plant species
would not be affected by project construction activities. The project site is primarily
developed and landscaped or is surrounded by disturbed, residential and commercial
area and thus does not support suitable habitat for special -status plant species
known to occur in the vicinity of the project site. Impacts on developed, urban
landscapes would be limited to near the roadway and include trimming and the
potential removal of landscaping trees in accordance with the City's tree ordinance.
Impacts to special -status plant species would be less than significant.
Common and special -status wildlife, particularly birds, may be exposed to noise and
other disturbance during construction, but these activities are typical of urban
environments and these species are usually acclimated to these types of
disturbance. In addition to regulations for special -status species, most birds in the
United States, including non -special -status species, are protected by the MBTA and
the CFGC. Under this legislation, destroying active nests, eggs, and young is illegal.
The primary potential for impacts to birds (both special -status and non-) would be
direct disturbances (including physical impacts) to active bird nests during the
breeding bird season (defined generally as February 1 to August 31). Such
disturbances could result in the abandonment of the nest and/or the destruction or
injury of eggs and/or young. However, implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO -1
would reduce such impacts to a less -than -significant level.
Mitigation Measure BIO -1:
To the extent feasible, vegetation removal and initial ground disturbance shall occur
outside of the general breeding bird season (September 1 to January 31). If these
activities must occur during the general bird breeding season (February 1 to August
31), then a pre -construction breeding bird survey shall be conducted by a qualified
biologist within seven days prior to the initiation of these activities. The survey shall
cover project impact areas and surrounding areas within 250 feet. Any active bird
nests of species protected by the MBTA and/or CFGC found during the survey shall
be protected by a suitable work exclusion buffer until all young in the nest have
fledged or the nest otherwise becomes inactive. The size of the buffer shall be
determined by the qualified biologist and based on factors such as bird species, nest
location, level of ambient visual and acoustic disturbances in the immediate area,
and other factors. Such buffers may be as small as 25 feet for common species, and
up to 250 feet for raptors.
b) No Impact. The project site supports only managed landscaped areas that divide
impervious paved roadways and sidewalks. Landscaped areas exist as a barrier
between Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and the interior concrete channel, within the
central portion of the project site. Additionally, landscaped areas occur northeast of
the project site intersection, in adjacent unpaved surfaces to the turnoff from Manuel
T. Freitas Parkway to northbound Las Gallinas Avenue. Therefore, the project would
have no impact on riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in
local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of
Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 32
C) Less than Significant. Wetlands are not present in the project site. However,
approximately 0.19 acre (530 linear feet) of non -wetland waters were observed
within the project site, associated with Gallinas Creek. The channel of Gallinas
Creek is a concrete trapezoidal flood control and storm drainage channel, comprised
of a concrete bed and banks with no natural substrates. It is lined with ornamental
shrubs to provide a visual barrier to surrounding traffic lanes. This perennial channel
is fed by many storm drain outlets of varying sizes along its length and contained
water flowing from the west during the site visit. Las Gallinas Avenue crosses the
creek via a box culvert style bridge that spans and shades a portion of Gallinas
Creek. To the east of this bridge, along the southern bank of the concrete channel, a
large culvert feeds additional stormwater flows into Gallinas Creek.
Because the concrete channel of Gallinas Creek contains an identifiable ordinary
high water mark and carries water from a perennial stream to the San Francisco Bay,
the channel was determined to be potentially jurisdictional under Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act based on current U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) guidance.
Waters in the channel within the Study Area are not tidal and occur approximately
3.5 river -miles from the San Francisco Bay. However, the flood control channel is
altered to the extent that it provides no habitat value for biological resources.
Because of this state of alteration, minor impacts to the channel from a proposed
bridge expansion, which will result in expanding the bridge without conducting work
below OHWM, are considered less than significant.
d) No Impact. The flood control channel is altered to the extent that it provides no
habitat value for biological resources. Furthermore, the project would not conduct
work below OHWM.
e) Less than Significant. The City of San Rafael provides for the protection of street
trees along any public street, sidewalk or walkway in the city (Ord. 972 § 2, 1970;
Ord. 865 § 2, 1966: Ord. 609). Landscape trees along the roads at the project site
may require removal or trimming during construction, but measures would be taken
to avoid trees where possible. The project is not expected to impact or require the
removal of any protected trees, but if a protected tree must be removed or impacted,
it would be replaced in accordance with the municipal code. Tree removal as a
result of project implementation would not conflict with any local provisions for tree
protection, and no significant impacts are anticipated.
f) No Impact. No state, regional, or federal habitat conservation plans or Natural
Community Conservation Plans have been adopted for the project site.
Less than
Significant
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES — Would Potentially with Less than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
the project: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Source
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ❑ ❑ ❑ ® 1,2
significance of a historical resource as
identified in Section 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ❑ ® ❑ ❑ 1,2
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 33
Discussion of Impacts
a) No Impact. Pursuant to State CEQA guideline 15064.5, the City's General Plan
(Culture and Arts Chapter, Exhibit 24) was consulted to identify any National, State
or Local historical landmarks with the project site. The project site does not contain
any resource listed in, or determined to be eligible by, the State Historical Resource
Commission and does not contain a resource included in a local register of historic
resources or identified as significant in a historical resource survey. Additionally, the
project site does not contain any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record,
or manuscript that a lead agency determined to be historically significant or
significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural,
educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California. Historical
buildings would not be affected by the project because all disturbances would take
place within the road rights-of-way, and intersection improvements would not change
the visual character of the roads. Therefore, no impact would occur.
b) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. All proposed project
improvements would occur within existing rights-of-way and no improvements would
require additional large-scale excavation. Furthermore, the areas within the rights-
of-way have already been disturbed as a result of the original construction of the
roads and other improvements. The previous construction activity would likely have
reduced or eliminated the significance of archaeological resources if they were
encountered. The City of San Rafael implements specific adopted archeological
resource measures in the event resources are encountered during grading. Impacts
would be less than significant with implementation of the following mitigation
measure:
Mitigation Measure CULT -1:
Prior to the start of construction, an agreement shall be executed between the City
and a qualified archaeologist and cultural monitor designated by the Federated
Indians of Graton Rancheria to monitor all project construction activities, if deemed
necessary by the tribe.
In addition, the following note shall be included on the final site plans: If any
archaeological artifacts, exotic rock (non-native), or unusual amounts of shell or bone
are uncovered during any onsite construction activities, all work must stop
immediately in the area and the City of San Rafael Public Works Department must
be notified. A qualified archaeologist and cultural monitor designated by the
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 34
Less than
Significant
V.
CULTURAL RESOURCES — Would
Potentially
with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
the project:
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact Source
c)
Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
❑
❑
❑
® 1,2
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
d)
Disturb any human remains, including
❑
❑
®
❑ 1,2
those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
Discussion of Impacts
a) No Impact. Pursuant to State CEQA guideline 15064.5, the City's General Plan
(Culture and Arts Chapter, Exhibit 24) was consulted to identify any National, State
or Local historical landmarks with the project site. The project site does not contain
any resource listed in, or determined to be eligible by, the State Historical Resource
Commission and does not contain a resource included in a local register of historic
resources or identified as significant in a historical resource survey. Additionally, the
project site does not contain any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record,
or manuscript that a lead agency determined to be historically significant or
significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural,
educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California. Historical
buildings would not be affected by the project because all disturbances would take
place within the road rights-of-way, and intersection improvements would not change
the visual character of the roads. Therefore, no impact would occur.
b) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. All proposed project
improvements would occur within existing rights-of-way and no improvements would
require additional large-scale excavation. Furthermore, the areas within the rights-
of-way have already been disturbed as a result of the original construction of the
roads and other improvements. The previous construction activity would likely have
reduced or eliminated the significance of archaeological resources if they were
encountered. The City of San Rafael implements specific adopted archeological
resource measures in the event resources are encountered during grading. Impacts
would be less than significant with implementation of the following mitigation
measure:
Mitigation Measure CULT -1:
Prior to the start of construction, an agreement shall be executed between the City
and a qualified archaeologist and cultural monitor designated by the Federated
Indians of Graton Rancheria to monitor all project construction activities, if deemed
necessary by the tribe.
In addition, the following note shall be included on the final site plans: If any
archaeological artifacts, exotic rock (non-native), or unusual amounts of shell or bone
are uncovered during any onsite construction activities, all work must stop
immediately in the area and the City of San Rafael Public Works Department must
be notified. A qualified archaeologist and cultural monitor designated by the
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 34
Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria must evaluate the deposit. Work in the area
may only proceed after authorization is granted by the City and the development of a
tribal treatment plan in consultation with the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria
as outlined below:
1) Avoidance and preservation of the resources in place, pursuant to Public
Resources Code section 21084.3, including, but not limited to, planning and
construction to avoid the resources and protect the cultural and natural context, or
planning greenspace, parks or other open space, to incorporate the resources with
culturally appropriate protection and management criteria;
2) Treating the resources with culturally appropriate dignity taking into account the
tribal cultural values and meaning of the resources, including but not limited to the
following:
a. Protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource;
b. Protection the traditional use of the resource; and
c. Protecting the confidentiality of the resource.
3) Permanent conservation easements or other interests in real property, with
culturally appropriate management criteria for the purposes of preserving or utilizing
the resources or places.
4) Protecting the resource.
If the discovery consists of human remains, the Marin County Coroner and Native
American Heritage Commission must also be contacted. In the event that previously
unknown human remains are discovered in the project area during construction, the
procedures required by California Health and Safety Code Sections 7050.5 and
7052, as well as California Public Resources Code Section 5097, would be
implemented. These procedures include inspection of the remains by the county
coroner and a qualified archaeologist, as well as the treatment of the remains if they
are determined to be Native American in origin.c)
C) No Impact. The project site follows existing road rights -of -ways in a developed
portion of the City and does not contain any undisturbed land. No unique
paleontological or geologic resources are located in the project site.
d) Less Than Significant. There are no formal cemeteries on the site, nor are human
remains likely to exist on the site. However, the possibility remains that a resource of
cultural significance may be encountered. Per Public Resources Code 5097.98 and
Health and Human Safety Code 7050.5, if human remains are encountered,
excavation or disturbance of the location shall be halted in the vicinity of the find, and
the county coroner contacted. If the coroner determines the remains are Native
American, the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission. The
Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the person or persons believed
to be most likely descended from the deceased Native American. The most likely
descendent makes recommendations regarding the treatment of the remains with
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 35
appropriate dignity. With the compliance of State law, a less -than -significant impact
would result.
Environmental Setting
Regional Geologic Setting
The project site, like all properties in the San Francisco Bay area, is situated in a seismically
active area. The regional seismic setting is dominated by stress associated with the oblique
collision of the Pacific tectonic plate with the North American tectonic plate. The boundary
between the two tectonic plates is the San Andreas fault system, which extends nearly 700
miles along a northwest trend from Mexico to offshore northern California. In the San Francisco
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 36
Less than
Significant
VI.
GEOLOGY AND SOILS — Would the
Potentially
Significan
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
project:
tImpact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
Source
a)
Expose people or structures to potential
2,13,
substantial adverse effects, including the
16
risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault,
❑
❑
❑
®
2,13
as delineated on the most recent
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a known
fault?
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
❑
❑
®
❑
2,13
iii) Seismic -related ground failure,
❑
❑
®
❑
2,13
including liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
❑
❑
®
❑
2,13
b)
Result in substantial soil erosion or the
❑
❑
®
❑
1
loss of topsoil?
c)
Be located on a geologic unit or soil that
❑
❑
®
❑
2,6
is unstable, or that would become
unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction, or collapse?
d)
Be located on expansive soil, as defined
❑
❑
®
❑
2,6
in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building
Code, creating substantial risks to life or
property?
e)
Have soils incapable of adequately
❑
❑
❑
®
1
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater?
Environmental Setting
Regional Geologic Setting
The project site, like all properties in the San Francisco Bay area, is situated in a seismically
active area. The regional seismic setting is dominated by stress associated with the oblique
collision of the Pacific tectonic plate with the North American tectonic plate. The boundary
between the two tectonic plates is the San Andreas fault system, which extends nearly 700
miles along a northwest trend from Mexico to offshore northern California. In the San Francisco
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 36
Bay Area, the San Andreas fault system includes the San Andreas, Hayward, Calaveras, and
other related faults in the San Francisco Bay area. According to the U.S. Geological Survey
(Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities 2003), there is a 62% chance of at least
a magnitude 6.7 (or greater) earthquake in the San Francisco Bay region between 2003 and
2032.
The study area is not located within a State of California Earthquake Fault Zone for active
faulting and no active faults are mapped on the property. The nearest active faults are the San
Andreas Fault, located approximately 11 miles to the west of the project site at its closest point,
and the Hayward (9 Miles).
Discussion of Impacts
a -i,) No Impact. The project site is not located within a State of California designated
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (California Department of Conservation, 1974).
Earthquake fault zones are regulatory zones that encompass surface traces of active
faults that have a potential for future surface fault rupture. The closet active faults to
the site are the San Andreas Fault, located approximately 11 miles to the west of the
project site at its closest point, and the Hayward (9 Miles). No faults cross through
the project site, and surface rupture associated with a fault is not anticipated in the
City.
a -ii, iii, iv) Less than Significant Impact. The potential for landslides or liquefaction from
seismic activity is considered moderate in the project site based on the geologic units
and flat topography. Seismic -related ground failure is not anticipated in the project
site, and the project would not expose people to these hazards. Seismic activity
associated with nearby faults could cause ground shaking in the project site and
could create a risk for construction workers, if an earthquake happens during
construction. Occasional ground shaking is common in the Bay Area, and
construction workers would take the necessary precautions to maintain worker safety
in the event of an earthquake. In addition, the project is subject to all Federal, State,
and local regulations and standards for seismic conditions including the California
Building Code (CBC) and would be designed to conform to all building requirements.
Impacts associated with seismic ground shaking, liquefaction and landslides would
be less than significant.
b) Less than Significant Impact. Construction would involve limited soil disturbance,
which could temporarily expose soils to wind and water erosion. However, no native
topsoil would be disturbed because the activities would take place within existing
paved roads. Construction measures included in the project description would be
implemented to minimize the potential for erosion and indirect effects associated with
soil erosion (i.e., water quality impacts, fugitive dust). Impacts on soil would be less
than significant.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 37
c, d) Less than Significant Impact. The potential for geologic and soil hazards from
unstable or expansive soils in the project site is considered low based on the
geologic units, soil types, and flat topography. The ground disturbance associated
with the proposed project would cause soil disturbance but these actions would not
result in substantial changes in topography to ground surface relief features, geologic
substructures or unstable soil conditions, unique geologic or physical features. The
project is subject to all Federal, State, and local regulations and standards for
seismic conditions including the California Building Code (CBC)and would be
designed to conform to all building requirements. Therefore, the proposed projects
impacts would not expose human life to hazards and be less than significant.
e) No Impact. The project does not involve construction of septic tanks or alternative
wastewater disposal systems.
Less than
Significant
VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Potentially with Less than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Would the project: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Source
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, ❑ ❑ ® ❑ 1
either directly or indirectly, that may have
a significant impact on the environment?
b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ 1,14
regulation of an agency adopted for the
purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
Environmental Setting
Assembly Bill 32, adopted in 2006, established the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 which
requires the State to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. Senate
Bill 97, adopted in 2007, required the Governor's Office of Planning and Research to develop
CEQA guidelines "for the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions or the effects of greenhouse
gas emissions," and the Resources Agency certified and adopted the amendments to the
guidelines on December 30, 2009.
GHGs are recognized by wide consensus among the scientific community to contribute to global
warming/climate change and associated environmental impacts. The major GHGs released
from human activity are carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide (Governor's Office of
Planning and Research, 2008). The primary sources of GHGs are vehicles (including planes
and trains), energy plants, and industrial and agricultural activities (such as dairies and hog
farms).
Discussion of Impacts
a) Less Than Significant Impact. GHG emissions from the project would be produced
from construction -related equipment emissions. Based on the nature of the project
and short duration of construction, GHG emissions resulting from construction
activities will be both minor and temporary. While the project would have an
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 38
incremental contribution to GHG emissions within the context of the City and region,
the individual impact is considered less than significant.
b) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not conflict with an
applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG
emissions. GHG emissions from off-road equipment and utility electrical usage are
identified and planned for in the BAAQMD's 2010 Clean Air Plan as well as the
BAAQMD's Source Inventory of Bay Area Greenhouse Gas Emissions (BAAQMD
2010a and 2010b). A primary objective of the 2010 Clean Air Plan is to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and 40% below 1990 levels by
2035. The project would generate emissions similar to existing conditions and,
therefore, would not conflict with any applicable plans, policies, or regulations
adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. Therefore, a less -than -
significant impact would occur.
d) Be located on a site which is included on ❑ ❑ ® ❑ 7
a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it
create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land ❑ ❑ ❑ ® 1
use plan or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private ❑ ❑ ❑ ® 1
airstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in
the project area?
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 39
Less than
Significant
VIII.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS
Potentially
with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
MATERIALS — Would the project:
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
Source
a)
Create a significant hazard to the public or
❑
❑
®
❑
1
the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
b)
Create a significant hazard to the public or
❑
❑
®
❑
1
the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
c)
Emit hazardous emissions or handle
❑
❑
®
❑
1,7
hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within
one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on ❑ ❑ ® ❑ 7
a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it
create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land ❑ ❑ ❑ ® 1
use plan or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private ❑ ❑ ❑ ® 1
airstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in
the project area?
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 39
VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS Potentially
Significant
MATERIALS — Would the project: impact
g) Impair implementation of or physically ❑
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a ❑
significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas
or where residences are intermixed with
wildlands?
Environmental Setting
Less than
Significant
with
Less than
Mitigation
Significant No
Incorporated
Impact Impact Source
®
❑ ❑ 1
❑ ® ❑ 1,13
A material is considered hazardous if it appears on a list of hazardous materials prepared by a
federal, state, or local agency or if it has characteristics defined as hazardous by such an
agency. A hazardous material is defined in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations as
follows:
A substance or combination of substances which, because of its quantity, concentration,
or physical, chemical or infectious characteristics, may either (1) cause, or significantly
contribute to, an increase in mortality or an increase in serious irreversible, or
incapacitating reversible, illness; or (2) pose a substantial present or potential hazard to
human health or environment when improperly treated, stored, transported or disposed
of or otherwise managed. (California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Section 66261.10)
Chemical and physical properties cause a substance to be considered hazardous. Such
properties include toxicity, ignitability, corrosivity, and reactivity (as defined in California Code of
Regulations, Title 22, Sections 66261.20-66261.24). The accidental release of hazardous
materials into the environment could potentially contaminate soils, surface water, and
groundwater supplies. Under Government Code Section 65962.5, the California Department of
Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) maintains a list of hazardous substance sites. This list,
referred to as the "Cortese List," includes CALSITE hazardous material sites, sites with leaking
underground storage tanks, and landfills with evidence of groundwater contamination.
No hazardous substance sites from the Cortese List have been identified within the project site.
No hazardous material sites monitored by DTSC on the agency's Envirostor database have
been reported within one-quarter of a mile of the project site (Department of Toxic Substances
Control, 2011).
Discussion of Impacts
a, b) Less than Significant Impact. Small amounts of hazardous materials would be
used during construction activities for equipment maintenance (e.g., fuel and
solvents) and re -paving the roads. Use of hazardous materials would be limited to
the construction phase and would comply with applicable local, state, and federal
standards associated with the handling and storage of hazardous materials.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 40
Hazardous materials would not be stored or used, such as for equipment
maintenance, where they could affect nearby land uses. Standard construction
measures included in the project description will be implemented to contain any
accidental spills of oil and other hazardous materials, and the contractor will be
required to ensure that adequate materials are on hand to clean up any accidental
spill that may occur. With implementation of these standard measures included in
the project description, impacts associated with the use or accidental spill of
hazardous materials would be less than significant.
C) Less than Significant Impact. The project site is within 0.25 -mile of a private
school (St. Isabella) and two public schools (Mark Day and Vallecito Elementary)).
Although some hazardous materials would be used during construction, given
required compliance with applicable state and federal regulations regarding the
transport, use and storage of hazardous materials, a spill or accident would have a
low potential to affect people at the schools. Any spills will be cleaned up
immediately, and all wastes and used spill control materials will be properly disposed
of at approved disposal facilities. Impacts would be less than significant.
d) Less than Significant Impact. The project site has not been identified as a
hazardous material or clean-up site. If potentially contaminated soil or groundwater
is encountered during project excavation work, standard construction measures
included in the project description shall be implemented to handle and properly
dispose of such materials, and the contractor will be required to ensure that
adequate materials are on hand to manage and dispose of any potentially
contaminated materials encountered during excavation. Any contaminated soil or
groundwater encountered during excavation will be properly disposed of at approved
disposal facilities. With implementation of these standard measures, potential
impacts associated with encountering contaminated soil or groundwater, if any are
encountered, would be less than significant.
e) No Impact. The project site is not located near a public airport. The nearest airport
is the Marin County Airport (Gnoss Field) of located approximately nine miles from
the project site.
f) No Impact. The project site is located near the private San Rafael airport, located
approximately 1.5 miles from the project site. However, the project does not contain
any element that could alter air traffic patterns. Therefore, no impact would occur.
g) Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Construction
activities would require temporary lane closures and detours around the work area.
Emergency access to or evacuation from surrounding areas would not be restricted
during construction because of the availability of detours, but minor delays may be
experienced for access to or evacuation from the land uses adjacent to the work
area. All excavated areas could be quickly covered in the event of an emergency to
allow vehicles to drive through the work area, which would ensure the project does
not prevent emergency access to the residences or conflict with an emergency
response or evacuation plan. Detours will be readily available at all times to allow
emergency vehicles access around the work area. With implementation of Mitigation
Measures TRAFFIC -1 and traffic control measures included in the project
description, impacts would be less than significant.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 41
h) Less than Significant Impact. According to the Association of Bay Area
Governments (ABAG) Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) Fire Threat map, portions of
the project site are located within and adjacent to an area subject to a moderate
threat of wildland fires. However, the project involves the short-term construction of
intersection infrastructure and the long-term operation of the project would not
increase the risk of wildfire near an urban area. Impacts would be less than
significant.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 42
Less than
Significant
IX.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER
Potentially
with
Less than
QUALITY — Would the project:
Significant
Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
Significant No
Impact Impact Source
a)
Violate any water quality standards or
❑
❑
® ❑ 1
waste discharge requirements?
b)
Substantially deplete groundwater
❑
❑
® ❑ 1
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or
a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (e.g., the production rate of pre-
existing nearby wells would drop to a level
which would not support existing land
uses or planned uses for which permits
have been granted)?
c)
Substantially alter the existing drainage
❑
❑
® ❑ 1
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on -
or off-site?
d)
Substantially alter the existing drainage
❑
❑
® ❑ 1
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, or substantially increase
the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in flooding on -
or off-site?
e)
Create or contribute runoff water that
❑
❑
® ❑ 1
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned storm water drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
f)
Otherwise substantially degrade water
❑
❑
® ❑ 1
quality?
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 42
Environmental Setting
According to the RWQCB's Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Basin, the project
site is located in the Marin Coastal Basin. The project site is covered with pervious surfaces,
with drainage flowing into existing street culverts and into Gallinas Creek. According to the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Federal Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM), the
majority of the project site is in flood zone X, which is outside the 100 -year floodplain (FEMA,
2011). Portions of the project site adjacent to the Gallinas Creek are with flood zone AE. Zone
AE is defined as an area within the 100 -year flood zone where a base flood elevation has been
determined. All work within the channel would be performed above the top of bank.
Pursuant to Section 402 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the Porter -Cologne Water Quality
Control Act, municipal stormwater discharges in the City of San Rafael (the City is part of the
Marin Countywide Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program) are regulated under the San
Francisco Bay Region Municipal Regional Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) Permit, Order No. R2-2009-0074, NPDES Permit No. CAS612008, adopted
October 14, 2009 (MRP). The MRP is overseen by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water
Quality Control Board (Water Board).
Discussion of Impacts
a) Less than Significant Impact. Construction activities would require ground
disturbance for minor excavation, grinding and paving, retaining, and bridge
extension installation. Soil removed would be temporarily stockpiled within the
project site, and, if not properly controlled, soil particles and other materials could be
carried in stormwater runoff to drainage facilities, which could degrade water quality
in the Gallinas Creek. If necessary, standard construction measures identified in the
project description and recommended by the Marin Countywide Water Pollution
Prevention Program would be implemented during periods of rain to minimize
pollutants carried from the project site in runoff. The project would comply with terms
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 43
Less than
Significant
IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER
Potentially
with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
QUALITY — Would the project:
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
Source
g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood
❑
❑
®
❑
2,14
hazard area as mapped on a federal
Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area
❑
❑
❑
❑
1
structures which would impede or redirect
flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a
❑
❑
®
❑
1
significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving flooding, including flooding as a
result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation of seiche, tsunami, or
❑
❑
®
❑
2,14
mudflow?
Environmental Setting
According to the RWQCB's Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Basin, the project
site is located in the Marin Coastal Basin. The project site is covered with pervious surfaces,
with drainage flowing into existing street culverts and into Gallinas Creek. According to the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Federal Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM), the
majority of the project site is in flood zone X, which is outside the 100 -year floodplain (FEMA,
2011). Portions of the project site adjacent to the Gallinas Creek are with flood zone AE. Zone
AE is defined as an area within the 100 -year flood zone where a base flood elevation has been
determined. All work within the channel would be performed above the top of bank.
Pursuant to Section 402 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the Porter -Cologne Water Quality
Control Act, municipal stormwater discharges in the City of San Rafael (the City is part of the
Marin Countywide Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program) are regulated under the San
Francisco Bay Region Municipal Regional Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) Permit, Order No. R2-2009-0074, NPDES Permit No. CAS612008, adopted
October 14, 2009 (MRP). The MRP is overseen by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water
Quality Control Board (Water Board).
Discussion of Impacts
a) Less than Significant Impact. Construction activities would require ground
disturbance for minor excavation, grinding and paving, retaining, and bridge
extension installation. Soil removed would be temporarily stockpiled within the
project site, and, if not properly controlled, soil particles and other materials could be
carried in stormwater runoff to drainage facilities, which could degrade water quality
in the Gallinas Creek. If necessary, standard construction measures identified in the
project description and recommended by the Marin Countywide Water Pollution
Prevention Program would be implemented during periods of rain to minimize
pollutants carried from the project site in runoff. The project would comply with terms
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 43
of the San Francisco Bay Region Municipal Regional Stormwater National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System Permit. Water quality impacts during construction
would be less than significant.
b, c, d, e) Less than Significant Impact. The project would not require use of groundwater
supplies or affect groundwater recharge in the area. Virtually the entire project site is
paved and therefore implementation of the project would not result in a considerable
increase in impermeable surfaces or an increase in runoff compared to existing
conditions. Nor would the project cause a substantial change to the erosion and
accretion patterns.
The project would repair or replace storm drains, drainage pipes, and curb and gutter
within the project site. The project would also include the installation of new bio -
retention facilities within the project site. These improvements would increase the
ability for the project site to handle flood events, a net benefit. Impacts would be less
than significant.
f g, h, i, j) Less than Significant Impact. The project would not have other water quality
impacts beyond those discussed under item (a) above. Construction would take
place above top of bank. No housing is proposed as part of the project. Gallinas
Creek is identified as being within the 100 -year flood zone. However, upon
completion of construction, conditions would be similar to existing conditions and
would not impede or redirect flood flows. The project site is not located downstream
of any levee or dam. In addition, it is located well inland from San Francisco Bay and
is not located in a tsunami hazard zone according to the ABAG Hazard Maps.
Impacts would be less than significant.
X. LAND USE AND PLANNING — Would Potentially
Significant
the project: impact
a) Physically divide an established ❑
community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan,
policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but
not limited to the general plan, specific
plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an environmental
effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan?
❑-
❑E
Less than
Significant
with
Less than
Mitigation
Significant No
Incorporated
Impact Impact Source
❑
❑ ® 1
FOR
/1
FE -
FE
re
E
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 44
Environmental Setting
The project site is in a residential community/commercial portion of the City of San Rafael.
Existing land uses adjacent to the project site consist of single-family residential homes,
recreational uses, institutional uses (i.e., schools,), and commercial retail uses. The project site
is within existing roads and their associated rights-of-way. The City of San Rafael General Plan,
adopted in 2004 with various subsequent chapter amendments, provides policies and
implementation strategies for management of the resources and land uses in the City, and the
City Codes provide restrictions and requirements to protect resources and comply with local,
state, and federal laws. Applicable General Plan policies are listed below. No habitat
conservation plans have been adopted for the area.
Regulatory Setting
San Rafael General Plan
Land Use Element
LU -1. Planning Area and Growth to 2020. Plan the circulation system and infrastructure to
provide capacity for the total development expected by 2020.
Safety Element
S-2. Location of Public Improvements. Avoid locating public improvements and utilities in
areas with identified flood, geologic and/or soil hazards to avoid any extraordinary maintenance
and operating expenses. When the location of public improvements and utilities in such areas
cannot be avoided, effective mitigation measures will be implemented.
S-10. Location of Public Improvements. To minimize threat to human health or any
extraordinary construction and monitoring expenses, avoid locating improvements and utilities in
areas with dangerous levels of identified hazardous materials. When the location of public
improvements and utilities in such areas cannot feasibly be avoided, effective mitigation
measures will be implemented.
S-18 Storm Drainage Improvements. Require new development to improve local storm
drainage facilities to accommodate site runoff anticipated from a "100 -year" storm.
S-25. Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Requirements. Continue to work
through the Marin County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program to implement appropriate
Watershed Management plans as dictated in the RWQCB general National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System permit for Marin County and the local stormwater plan.
C-4. Safe Roadway Design. Design of roadways should be safe and convenient for motor
vehicles, transit, bicycles and pedestrians. Place highest priority on safety. In order to
maximize safety and multimodal mobility, the City Council may determine that an intersection is
exempt from the applicable intersection level of service standard where it is determined that a
circulation improvement is needed for public safety considerations, including bicycle and
pedestrian safety, and/or transit use improvements.
C-5. Traffic Level of Service Standards. A. Intersection LOS. In order to ensure an effective
roadway network, maintain adequate traffic levels of service (LOS) consistent with standards for
signalized intersections in the A.M. and P.M. peak hours as shown below, except as provided
for under (B) Arterial LOS.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 45
C-6. Proposed Improvements. The proposed circulation improvements in Exhibit 21 have
been identified as potentially needed to improve safety and relieve congestion in San Rafael
over the next 20 years. Major Proposed Circulation Improvements include those improvements
deemed necessary to maintain City LOS standards. Other recommended roadway
improvements, include additional improvements that may become necessary in the long-term
and are desirable to enhance San Rafael's circulation system, but are not necessary to maintain
LOS standards. Specific improvements will be implemented as conditions require, and will be
refined during the design phase. Recognize that other feasible design solutions may become
available and be more effective in achieving the same goals as the improvements listed in
Exhibit 19, and allow for their implementation, consistent with the most recent engineering
standards. As conditions change, planned roadway improvements may be amended, through
the annual General Plan Review. Roadway improvements are implemented through the Capital
Improvements Program, and are typically funded through a variety of sources, including Traffic
Mitigation Fees. Environmental review is required.
C-11. Alternative Transportation Mode Users. Encourage and promote individuals to use
alternative modes of transportation, such as regional and local transit, carpooling, bicycling,
walking and use of low -impact alternative vehicles. Support development of programs that
provide incentives for individuals to choose alternative modes
C-14. Transit Network. Encourage the continued development of a safe, efficient, and reliable
regional and local transit network to provide convenient alternatives to driving
C-26. Bicycle Plan Implementation. Make bicycling and walking an integral part of daily life in
San Rafael by implementing the San Rafael's Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.
C-27. Pedestrian Plan Implementation. Promote walking as the transportation mode of
choice for short trips by implementing the pedestrian element of the City's Bicycle and
Pedestrian Master Plan. In addition to policies and programs outlined in the Bicycle and
Pedestrian Plan, provide support for the following programs:
San Rafael Bicycle Master Plan
Goal 1 - Bicycle Transportation Make the bicycle an integral part of daily life in San Rafael,
particularly for trips of less than five miles, by implementing and maintaining a bicycle facilities
network, providing end -of -trip facilities, improving bicycle/transit integration, encouraging bicycle
use, and making bicycling safer.
Goal 2 - Pedestrian Transportation Encourage walking as a daily form of transportation in San
Rafael by completing a pedestrian network that accommodates short trips and transit, improves
the quality.
Objective B — Bicycle Facilities Complete a network of bicycle facilities that provide bicycle -
friendly connections through travel corridors and to important destinations, especially for travel
to employment centers, schools, commercial districts, transit stations, parks, and institutions.
Discussion of Impacts
a) No Impact. The project involves construction of intersection improvements within an
existing road in a devolved community. The project would not physically divide an
established community. No impact would occur.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 46
b) Less than Significant Impact. A proposed project would have a significant impact
if it were to conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an
agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan,
specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. The proposed project is subject to
several local policies, plans, and regulations, as described above. The primary
objective of the proposed project is to improve intersection geometry for pedestrian
and vehicle safety. General Plan Policy C-6 identifies the Freitas/Las Gallinas
intersection to "Upgrade the traffic signal system and operation, improve intersection
geometry, and cover portions of drainage ditch." Furthermore, the project meets
General Plan goals of improving safety and would not conflict with the City of San
Rafael General Plan or other applicable plans or policies. Impacts would be less
than significant.
C) No Impact. No habitat conservation plans or natural community conservation plans
have been adopted for the project site. No impact would occur.
Discussion of Impacts
a, b) No Impact. The project site is not in or adjacent to any important mineral resource
areas. Furthermore, the development of the proposed project would not preclude
future excavation of oil or minerals should such extraction become viable. As such,
there would be no loss of availability of known mineral resources and no impact to
mineral resources.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 47
Less than
Significant
XI. MINERAL RESOURCES — Would the
Potentially
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
project:
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact Source
a) Result in the loss of availability of a
❑
❑
❑
® 2
known mineral resource that would be of
value to the region and the residents of
the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
❑
❑
❑
❑ 2
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan,
specific plan, or other land use plan?
Discussion of Impacts
a, b) No Impact. The project site is not in or adjacent to any important mineral resource
areas. Furthermore, the development of the proposed project would not preclude
future excavation of oil or minerals should such extraction become viable. As such,
there would be no loss of availability of known mineral resources and no impact to
mineral resources.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 47
Environmental Setting
The City of San Rafael Noise Ordinance limits construction hours to 7:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M.
Monday through Friday. The Director of Public Works/City Engineer may grant exemptions.
Noise in the project site and vicinity is primarily from commercial development, residences, and
vehicular traffic along roads. The nearest sensitive noise receptors are the businesses and
homes along Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Las Gallinas Avenue. The proposed project would
not include construction generated noise from pile driving.
Discussion of Impacts
a, c, d) Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Sound is technically
described in terms of amplitude (loudness) and frequency (pitch). The standard unit
of sound amplitude measurement is the decibel (dB). The decibel scale is a
logarithmic scale that describes the physical intensity of the pressure vibrations that
make up any sound. The pitch of the sound is related to the frequency of the
pressure vibration. Since the human ear is not equally sensitive to a given sound
level at all frequencies, a special frequency -dependent rating scale has been devised
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 48
Less than
Significant
Potentially
with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
XII.
NOISE — Would the project result in:
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
Source
a)
Exposure of persons to or generation of
❑
®
❑
❑
1,2,
noise levels in excess of standards
12
established in the local general plan or
noise ordinance, or applicable standards
of other agencies?
b)
Exposure of persons to or generation of
❑
❑
❑
❑
1
excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
c)
A substantial permanent increase in
❑
®
❑
❑
1
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project?
d)
A substantial temporary or periodic
❑
®
❑
❑
1
increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
e)
For a project located within an airport land
❑
❑
❑
®
1
use plan or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport of public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
f)
For a project within the vicinity of a private
❑
❑
❑
®
1
airstrip, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
Environmental Setting
The City of San Rafael Noise Ordinance limits construction hours to 7:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M.
Monday through Friday. The Director of Public Works/City Engineer may grant exemptions.
Noise in the project site and vicinity is primarily from commercial development, residences, and
vehicular traffic along roads. The nearest sensitive noise receptors are the businesses and
homes along Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Las Gallinas Avenue. The proposed project would
not include construction generated noise from pile driving.
Discussion of Impacts
a, c, d) Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Sound is technically
described in terms of amplitude (loudness) and frequency (pitch). The standard unit
of sound amplitude measurement is the decibel (dB). The decibel scale is a
logarithmic scale that describes the physical intensity of the pressure vibrations that
make up any sound. The pitch of the sound is related to the frequency of the
pressure vibration. Since the human ear is not equally sensitive to a given sound
level at all frequencies, a special frequency -dependent rating scale has been devised
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 48
to relate noise to human sensitivity. The A -weighted decibel scale (dBA) provides
this compensation by discriminating against frequencies in a manner approximating
the sensitivity of the human ear.
Noise, on the other hand, is typically defined as unwanted sound. A typical noise
environment consists of a base of steady "background" noise that is the sum of many
distant and indistinguishable noise sources. Superimposed on this background
noise is the sound from individual local sources. These can vary from an occasional
aircraft or train passing by to virtually continuous noise from, for example, traffic on a
major highway.
Several rating scales have been developed to analyze the adverse effect of
community noise on people. Since environmental noise fluctuates over time, these
scales consider that the effect of noise upon people is largely dependent upon the
total acoustical energy content of the noise, as well as the time of day when the
noise occurs. Those that are applicable to this analysis are as follows:
• Leq — A Leq, or equivalent energy noise level, is the average acoustic energy
content of noise for a stated period of time. Thus, the Leq of a time -varying noise
and that of a steady noise are the same if they deliver the same acoustic energy
to the ear during exposure. For evaluating community impacts, this rating scale
does not vary, regardless of whether the noise occurs during the day or the night.
• Lmax — The maximum instantaneous noise level experienced during a given period
of time.
• Lm;n — The minimum instantaneous noise level experienced during a given period
of time.
• CNEL — The Community Noise Equivalent Level is a 24-hour average Leq with a 5
dBA "weighting" during the hours of 7:00 P.M. to 10:00 P.M. and a 10 dBA
"weighting" added to noise during the hours of 10:00 P.M. to 7:00 A.M. to account
for noise sensitivity in the evening and nighttime, respectively. The logarithmic
effect of these additions is that a 60 dBA 24 hour Leq would result in a
measurement of 66.7 dBA CNEL.
Noise environments and consequences of human activities are usually well
represented by median noise levels during the day, night, or over a 24-hour period.
For residential uses, environmental noise levels are generally considered low when
the CNEL is below 60 dBA, moderate in the 60-70 dBA range, and high above 70
dBA.4 Noise levels greater than 85 dBA can cause temporary or permanent hearing
loss. Examples of low daytime levels are isolated, natural settings with noise levels
as low as 20 dBA and quiet suburban residential streets with noise levels around 40
dBA. Noise levels above 45 dBA at night can disrupt sleep. Examples of moderate
level noise environments are urban residential or semi -commercial areas (typically
55-60 dBA) and commercial locations (typically 60 dBA). People may consider
louder environments adverse, but most will accept the higher levels associated with
more noisy urban residential or residential -commercial areas (60-75 dBA) or dense
urban or industrial areas (65-80 dBA).
4 Office of Planning and Research, State of California General Plan Guidelines, October 2003 (in coordination with
the California Department of Health Services).
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 49
It is widely accepted that in the community noise environment the average healthy
ear can barely perceive CNEL noise level changes of 3 dBA. CNEL changes from 3
to 5 dBA may be noticed by some individuals who are extremely sensitive to
changes in noise. A 5 dBA CNEL increase is readily noticeable, while the human ear
perceives a 10 dBA CNEL increase as a doubling of sound.
Noise levels from a particular source generally decline as distance to the receptor
increases. Other factors, such as the weather and reflecting or barriers, also help
intensify or reduce the noise level at any given location. A commonly used rule of
thumb for roadway noise is that for every doubling of distance from the source, the
noise level is reduced by about 3 dBA at acoustically "hard" locations (i.e., the area
between the noise source and the receptor is nearly complete asphalt, concrete,
hard -packed soil, or other solid materials) and 4.5 dBA at acoustically "soft" locations
(i.e., the area between the source and receptor is normal earth or has vegetation,
including grass). Noise from stationary or point sources is reduced by about 6 to 7.5
dBA for every doubling of distance at acoustically hard and soft locations,
respectively. Noise levels are also generally reduced by 1 dBA for each 1,000 feet of
distance due to air absorption. Noise levels may also be reduced by intervening
structures — generally, a single row of buildings between the receptor and the noise
source reduces the noise level by about 5 dBA, while a solid wall or berm reduces
noise levels by 5 to 10 dBA. The normal noise attenuation within residential
structures with open windows is about 17 dBA, while the noise attenuation with
closed windows is about 25 dBA.s
Table 1 lists the Federal Transit Administrations typical construction equipment noise
levels at 50 feet.
5 National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report 117, Highway Noise: A Design Guide for Highway
Engineers, 1971.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 50
Table 1. Construction Equipment Noise Generation
Equipment I Typical Noise Level (dBA) 50 ft from Source
Air Compressor
81
Backhoe
80
Ballast Equalizer
82
Ballast Tamper
83
Compactor
82
Concrete Mixer
85
Concrete Pump
82
Concrete Vibrator
76
Crane, Derrick
88
Crane, Mobile
83
Dozer
85
Generator
81
Grader
85
Impact Wrench
85
Jack Hammer
88
Loader
85
Paver
89
Pile-driver (Impact)
101
Pile-driver (Sonic)
96
Pneumatic Tool
85
Pump
76
Roller
74
Saw
76
Scarifier
83
Scraper
89
Shovel
82
Spike Driver
77
Truck
88
Source: Federal Transit Administration.
Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment,
2006
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 51
Construction activities would generate temporary noise from equipment use; the
most common noise generated would be from mobile diesel equipment such as
excavators, dozers, trucks, front end loaders and compactors. The proposed project
does not include pile driving for construction. Activities would be restricted to the
hours of 7:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. Monday through Friday, unless otherwise approved
in writing by the Director of Public Works.
Table 1 illustrates typical noise levels from construction equipment at a reference
distance of 50 feet. Noise levels from construction equipment attenuate at a rate of
six dBA per doubling of distance. Therefore, the noise levels at a distance of 100
feet would be 6 dBA less than those shown in Table 1. Construction equipment
would generate maximum noise levels of approximately 89 decibels (dB) at 50 feet.
Construction noise levels may periodically exceed noise standards in the existing
Noise Ordinance. The temporary noise from construction would not cause a
substantial increase in ambient noise or expose sensitive receptors to unacceptable
noise levels for long periods of time. Impacts associated with construction noise
would cause a significant, temporary increase in noise levels. Incorporation of
Mitigation Measure NOISE -1 would reduce potentially significant noise impacts to a
less -than -significant level.
Long-term operational noise impacts would be less than significant because the
conditions would be similar to existing noise levels.
Mitigation Measure NOISE -1:
The City shall incorporate the following practices, in addition to those listed in the
project description, into the construction documents to be implemented by the project
contractor:
• Construction hours shall be limited to 7:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. Monday through
Friday, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Director of Public Works.
Notify businesses, residences, and noise -sensitive land uses adjacent to
construction sites of the construction schedule in writing. Designate the City's
construction manager as responsible for responding to any local complaints
about construction noise. The construction manager shall determine the cause
of the noise complaints (for example starting too early, or a bad muffler) and
institute reasonable measures to correct the problem. Conspicuously post a
telephone number for the construction manager at the construction site.
• Maximize the physical separation between noise generators and noise receptors.
Such separation includes, but is not limited to, the following measures:
Use heavy-duty mufflers for stationary equipment and barriers around
particularly noisy areas of the site or around the entire site;
■ Where feasible, use shields, impervious fences, or other physical sound
barriers to inhibit transmission of noise to sensitive receptors;
Locate stationary equipment to minimize noise impacts on the
community; and
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 52
■ Minimize backing movements of equipment.
• Use quiet construction equipment whenever possible.
Impact equipment (e.g., jack hammers and pavement breakers) shall be
hydraulically or electrically powered wherever possible to avoid noise associated
with compressed air exhaust from pneumatically -powered tools. Compressed air
exhaust silencers shall be used on other equipment. Other quieter procedures,
such as drilling rather than using impact equipment, shall be used whenever
feasible.
• Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines.
b) Less than Significant Impact. Ground -borne vibration is typically associated with
blasting operations, the use of pile drivers, and large-scale demolition activities, none
of which are anticipated for the construction or operation of the proposed project. As
such, no excessive ground -borne vibrations would be generated by the proposed
project and these impacts would be less than significant.
e) No Impact. The nearest public airport to the project site is the Marin County Airport,
located approximately nine miles to the north. This distance precludes the possibility
of the project site being adversely exposed to aviation noise. No impacts in this
regard would occur.
f) No Impact. The project site is located near the private San Rafael airport, located
approximately 1.5 miles from the project site. However, the intersection would could
continue to be used in the same manner as existing conditions. No impacts in this
regard would occur.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 53
Environmental Setting
The project site is in an urbanized portion of the City of San Rafael; however, no homes are
located within the project site.
Discussion of Impacts
a -c) No Impact. The project would improve vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian circulation
safety of the intersection. The project would be within existing road rights-of-way
and would not displace people or housing. As the project does not include new
housing, it would not result in a substantial increase in population or housing units in
the City. No impacts would occur.
Less than
Less than
Significant
Significant
PUBLIC SERVICES — Would the
PotenXIV.
Significantlly
Significant
with
Mitigation
POPULATION AND HOUSING —
PotenXIII.
Significantlly
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Incorporated
Impact
Would the project:
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
Source
a)
Induce substantial population growth in an
❑
❑
❑
®
1
area, either directly (for example, by
facilities, need for new or physically
proposing new homes and businesses) or
altered governmental facilities, the
indirectly (for example, through extension
construction of which could cause
of roads or other infrastructure)?
significant environmental impacts, in order
b)
Displace substantial numbers of existing
❑
❑
❑
®
1
housing, necessitating the construction of
response times, or other performance
replacement housing elsewhere?
c)
Displace substantial numbers of people
❑
❑
❑
❑
1
❑
necessitating the construction of
❑
❑
1
Schools?
❑
❑
replacement housing elsewhere?
®
1
Parks?
❑
❑
Environmental Setting
The project site is in an urbanized portion of the City of San Rafael; however, no homes are
located within the project site.
Discussion of Impacts
a -c) No Impact. The project would improve vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian circulation
safety of the intersection. The project would be within existing road rights-of-way
and would not displace people or housing. As the project does not include new
housing, it would not result in a substantial increase in population or housing units in
the City. No impacts would occur.
Less than
Significant
PUBLIC SERVICES — Would the
PotenXIV.
Significantlly
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
project:
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
Source
a) Result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered governmental
facilities, need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order
to maintain acceptable service ratios,
response times, or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection?
❑
®
❑
❑
1
Police protection?
❑
❑
❑
❑
1
Schools?
❑
❑
❑
®
1
Parks?
❑
❑
❑
®
1
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project
January
2016
City of San Rafael
54
Environmental Setting
San Rafael Fire Department
The San Rafael Fire Department provides life safety emergency and non -emergency services in
the areas of fire protection, technical rescue, emergency medical services, and disaster
response. The Department has operates 7 Fire Stations with 23 personnel 24/7 that provide
these services within the City limits and other areas as defined through contracts and mutual aid
agreements with bordering areas.
San Rafael Police Department
The San Rafael Police Department has been in existence since 1855. In its current
configuration, the Chief of Police directs a staff of 65 sworn and 24 non -sworn employees.
Patrol is the largest division led by a Captain and includes the Traffic Unit, SWAT team, and
Foot -beat. The Support Services Captain oversees Investigations, which is comprised of one
lieutenant, one sergeant and four detectives, one School Resource Officer, a one sergeant -two
officer Directed Patrol Unit, Youth Services Counseling, Records, Property Evidence, Dispatch,
Permits and Personnel and Training.
San Rafael City Schools
The San Rafael City Schools (SRCS) includes the San Rafael Elementary School District and
the San Rafael High School District, with a total student population of nearly 7,000. The two
districts are governed by one school board and one district office administration. The
Elementary District is composed of nine schools. The High School District provides secondary
education to students residing in two elementary districts: Dixie School District and San Rafael
Elementary District. The High School District has two comprehensive 9-12 high schools and a
continuation high school.
Parks and Recreational Facilities
The City of San Rafael has 25 City -owned parks totaling 140 acres, eight county parks totaling
532 acres, one State park with 1,640 acres and three community centers. There are 3,285
acres of open space within the city limits of San Rafael, or approximately 25 percent of the
City's land area, which is owned or in part by the City of San Rafael. There is almost 7,300
acres of combined City and County open space within San Rafael's Sphere of Influence.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 55
Less than
Significant
PUBLIC SERVICES
PotenXIV.
— Would the
with
Less than
Significantlly
Significant
Mitigation
Significant No
project:
Impact
Incorporated
Impact Impact Source
Other public facilities?
❑
❑
❑ ❑ 1
Environmental Setting
San Rafael Fire Department
The San Rafael Fire Department provides life safety emergency and non -emergency services in
the areas of fire protection, technical rescue, emergency medical services, and disaster
response. The Department has operates 7 Fire Stations with 23 personnel 24/7 that provide
these services within the City limits and other areas as defined through contracts and mutual aid
agreements with bordering areas.
San Rafael Police Department
The San Rafael Police Department has been in existence since 1855. In its current
configuration, the Chief of Police directs a staff of 65 sworn and 24 non -sworn employees.
Patrol is the largest division led by a Captain and includes the Traffic Unit, SWAT team, and
Foot -beat. The Support Services Captain oversees Investigations, which is comprised of one
lieutenant, one sergeant and four detectives, one School Resource Officer, a one sergeant -two
officer Directed Patrol Unit, Youth Services Counseling, Records, Property Evidence, Dispatch,
Permits and Personnel and Training.
San Rafael City Schools
The San Rafael City Schools (SRCS) includes the San Rafael Elementary School District and
the San Rafael High School District, with a total student population of nearly 7,000. The two
districts are governed by one school board and one district office administration. The
Elementary District is composed of nine schools. The High School District provides secondary
education to students residing in two elementary districts: Dixie School District and San Rafael
Elementary District. The High School District has two comprehensive 9-12 high schools and a
continuation high school.
Parks and Recreational Facilities
The City of San Rafael has 25 City -owned parks totaling 140 acres, eight county parks totaling
532 acres, one State park with 1,640 acres and three community centers. There are 3,285
acres of open space within the city limits of San Rafael, or approximately 25 percent of the
City's land area, which is owned or in part by the City of San Rafael. There is almost 7,300
acres of combined City and County open space within San Rafael's Sphere of Influence.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 55
Discussion of Impacts
a) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Given the proposed project
would not permanently increase the existing residential or employment population in
the City, the project would not result in a long-term increase in the demand for public
services or require construction of new governmental facilities. The purpose of the
project is to improve vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian circulation safety of the
intersection. Therefore, no impacts related to schools, parks or other public facilities
would occur. However, there is the potential for construction activities to slow
emergency response times. Implementation of Mitigation Measure TRAFFIC -1
would reduce potentially significant impacts related to any potential Fire Department
and Police Department delays to a less -than -significant level.
Environmental Setting
No parks or recreational facilities are located in the project site. The Arbor Park parquette is
located adjacent to western edge of the project site.
Discussion of Impacts
a, b) No Impact. Given the proposed project would not permanently increase the existing
residential or employment population in the City, the project would not affect
recreational facilities or increase the use of nearby recreational facilities. The
purpose of the project is to improve vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian circulation
safety of the intersection and it does not include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities. No Impacts would occur.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 56
Less than
Significant
Potentially
with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
XV. RECREATION —Would the project:
impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact Source
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood
❑
❑
❑
® 1
and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or
be accelerated?
b) Include recreational facilities or require the
❑
❑
❑
® 1
construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
Environmental Setting
No parks or recreational facilities are located in the project site. The Arbor Park parquette is
located adjacent to western edge of the project site.
Discussion of Impacts
a, b) No Impact. Given the proposed project would not permanently increase the existing
residential or employment population in the City, the project would not affect
recreational facilities or increase the use of nearby recreational facilities. The
purpose of the project is to improve vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian circulation
safety of the intersection and it does not include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities. No Impacts would occur.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 56
b)
Conflict with an applicable congestion
Less than
❑
®
❑
Significant
TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
PotenXVI. nt
Significant
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant No
Would the project:
Impact
Incorporated
Impact Impact Source
a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance
❑
❑
® ❑ 1,2,
or policy establishing measures of
travel demand measures, or other
10
effectiveness for the performance of the
circulation system, taking into account all
standards established by the county
modes of transportation including mass
transit and non -motorized travel and
relevant components of the circulation
designated roads or highways?
system, including but not limited to
intersections, streets, highways and
c)
Result in a change in air traffic patterns,
❑
freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths,
❑
®
1,2,
and mass transit?
including either an increase in traffic levels
b)
Conflict with an applicable congestion
❑
❑
®
❑
1,2,
management program, including, but not
10
limited to level of service standards and
travel demand measures, or other
standards established by the county
congestion management agency for
designated roads or highways?
c)
Result in a change in air traffic patterns,
❑
❑
❑
®
1,2,
including either an increase in traffic levels
10
or a change in location that results in
substantial safety risks?
d)
Substantially increase hazards to a design
❑
❑
®
❑
1,2,
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
10
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g.,
farm equipment)?
e)
Result in inadequate emergency access?
❑
®
❑
❑
1 2
10
f)
Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or
❑
❑
®
❑
1,2,
programs supporting alternative
10
transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle
racks)?
The following discussion related to transportation and traffic utilizes a Traffic Impact Analysis
Memorandum prepared by Fehr and Peers in 2015 and is provided in Appendix B.
Environmental Setting
The project site is the Las Gallinas Avenue/Manual T. Freitas Parkway intersection. The
intersection is frequently congested due to traffic from the adjacent shopping center and local
schools, peak residential commute traffic destined to and from U.S. 101, and split -phase signal
operations required by the tight intersection geometrics that are limited in part by a large
drainage culvert in the median of Freitas Parkway. Further, pedestrian and bicycle access is
limited due to geometry constraints.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 57
Pedestrians
Pedestrian facilities in the project site include sidewalks, crosswalks, and pedestrian signals. At
the Las Gallinas Avenue/ Manual T. Freitas Parkway intersection, both streets provide
sidewalks on all approaches to the intersection. Crosswalks, curb ramps, and pedestrian
signals are provided on all legs of the intersection except for the east leg, crossing Freitas
Parkway. Currently, pedestrians starting at the southeast corner of the intersection must cross
three legs of traffic to get to northwest corner.
Bicyclists
Bicycle facilities are provided in the general vicinity of the project site. Class II bicycle lanes are
provided leading up to the north, south, and west sides of the intersection. Approximately 180 -
feet before the intersection, the northbound Class II bicycle lane ends, dropping bicyclists into
the vehicle travel way. Similarly, approximately 220 feet and 310 feet, southbound and
eastbound, respectively, before the intersection, the Class II bicycle lanes end, dropping
bicyclists into the vehicle travel way. Bicycle lanes are provided in the westbound and
southbound exit approaches, just after the intersection.
Transit
Several transit routes are within proximity of the project intersection. A list of those routes and
their stop location relative to the project intersection is shown in Appendix B, Table 1.
Sidewalks are provided to the bus stop and bus shelters are provided at some of the nearby
stops.
Vehicles
Las Gallinas Avenue is a two-lane north -south facility beginning at the Northgate Mall to the
south and terminating in a residential neighborhood to the north. Freitas Parkway is a four -lane
east -west facility connecting U.S.-101 to neighborhoods west of the freeway. The intersection is
signalized with left turn and right turn pockets for each approach.
Discussion of Impacts
a) Less than Significant Impact. Construction traffic (equipment and materials
transport and daily worker traffic) would slightly increase traffic on local roads during
the temporary construction phase of the proposed project. Temporary construction
traffic would be limited to equipment delivery and material transport, and a few
employee vehicles on a daily basis. The temporary construction -related traffic would
not result in a noticeable increase in traffic on local roads and is not expected to
reduce the level of service (LOS) for local intersections. Vehicles transporting
equipment and materials to the project site could cause slight delays for travelers as
the construction vehicles stop to unload. Temporary lane closures could also require
motorists to detour around the project site or expect delays while traveling through
the project site. Traffic control measures described in the project description would
be in place during the construction phase to alert motorists to potential delays and
identify detour routes, as described in the project description. With these measures
and the temporary nature of construction -related traffic, impacts on traffic would be
less than significant.
Under existing conditions, year 2015, results in a nominal increase to intersection
delay. In the near term, year 2020, the no project conditions degrade such that the
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 58
project intersection operates at an unacceptable LOS during the A.M. peak hour.
The Fehr and Peers memorandum concluded that the proposed project would result
in better intersection operations with a decrease to intersection delay. In the P.M.
peak hour, the intersection would operate at the same LOS as the no project
condition. Therefore, operational impacts on traffic would be less than significant.
b) Less than Significant Impact. A significant impact may occur if the adopted
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and Marin County Congestion
Management Agency (CMA) thresholds for a significant project impact would be
exceeded. To address the increasing public concern that traffic congestion is
impacting the quality of life and economic vitality of the State of California, the
Congestion Management Program (CMP) was enacted by Proposition 111. The
CMP designated a transportation network including all State highways and some
arterials within the County to be monitored by local jurisdictions. If the LOS standard
deteriorates on the CMP network, then local jurisdictions must prepare a deficiency
plan to be in conformance with the CMP program.
As discussed above, the proposed project would not permanently increase traffic on
local roads or highways to a level that would affect intersection LOS. The project
would maintain at least one lane of traffic in one direction at all times during
construction. The proposed project would not result in long-term traffic increases.
Impacts would be less than significant.
C) No Impact. This question would apply to the proposed project only if it were an
aviation -related use. The project site does not contain any aviation -related uses, and
the proposed project would not include the development of any aviation -related uses.
Therefore, the proposed project would not affect air traffic patterns and would have
no effect on air traffic levels or safety.
d) Less than Significant Impact. A significant impact may occur if a project were to
include a new roadway design, introduce a new land use or permanent project
features into an area with specific transportation requirements and characteristics
that have not been previously experienced in that area, or if project access or other
features were designed in such a way as to create hazardous conditions. The
memorandum prepared by Fehr and Peers found that the proposed project would
provide benefits to pedestrian and bicycle safety by removing pork chops and
slowing vehicles down, providing exclusive left turns and separating the pedestrian
and vehicle conflicts, or a leading pedestrian interval to give pedestrians the right-of-
way before vehicles. Adequate sight distance would be available for motorists to
access and depart the project site. Impacts would be less than significant.
e) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Construction activities would
require temporary lane closures and detours around the work area. Minor delays
may be experienced for emergency access to the residences adjacent to the work
area. Detours would be available throughout the construction period in the event of
an emergency to allow vehicles to drive around the work area. The earthwork could
be quickly covered in the event of an emergency to allow vehicles to drive through
the work area. This is a short term construction related impact that would cease
upon project completion. Implementation of Mitigation Measures TRAFFIC -1 and
would reduce this impact to less than significant.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 59
Mitigation Measure TRAFFIC -1:
• Local emergency services shall be notified prior to construction to inform
them that traffic delays may occur, and also of the proposed construction
schedule.
• The City shall require the contractor to provide for passage of emergency
vehicles through the project site at all times.
• The City shall require the contractor to maintain access to all properties
during project construction.
f) Less than Significant Impact. The project's purpose is to improve pedestrian and
bicycle safety by removing pork chop islands and slowing vehicles down, providing
exclusive left turns and separating the pedestrian and vehicle conflicts. Upon
completion of the project, the accessibility of pedestrian, bicycle and alternative
forms of transit facilities would be improved over existing conditions.
b)
Require or result in the construction of
Less than
❑
®
❑ 1
Significant
new water or wastewater treatment
XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Potentially
with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant No
—Would the project:
Impact
Incorporated
Impact Impact Source
a) Exceed wastewater treatment
❑
❑
® ❑ 1
requirements of the applicable Regional
significant environmental effects?
Water Quality Control Board?
c)
Require or result in the construction of
b)
Require or result in the construction of
❑
❑
®
❑ 1
new water or wastewater treatment
facilities or expansion of existing facilities,
the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
c)
Require or result in the construction of
❑
❑
❑
❑ 1
new storm water drainage facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d)
Have sufficient water supplies available to
❑
❑
®
❑ 1
serve the project from existing
entitlements and resources, or are new or
expanded entitlements needed?
e)
Result in a determination by the
❑
❑
❑
❑ 1
wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the project's
projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
f)
Be served by a landfill with sufficient
❑
❑
®
❑ 1
permitted capacity to accommodate the
project's solid waste disposal needs?
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 60
Discussion of Impacts
a - e) Less than Significant Impact. Neither construction nor operation of the project
would generate wastewater or consume potable water. The project would repair or
replace storm drains, drainage pipes, and curb and gutter within the project site. The
project would also include the installation of new bio -retention facilities within the
project site. These improvements would increase the ability for the project site to
handle flood events, a net benefit. As a result, the project would have less than
significant impacts related to: 1) exceedance of wastewater treatment requirements;
2) physical impacts from new storm drainage facilities; 3) water supply; and 4)
wastewater treatment capacity.
f, g) Less than Significant Impact. The project would generate a small quantity of soil
spoils and solid waste from removal of pavement within the intersection, but all
generated waste would be properly disposed or recycled in a nearby landfill or
approved disposal facility with capacity to receive the waste. Any materials used
during construction would be properly disposed of in accordance with federal, state,
and local regulations. Impacts related to solid waste facilities would be less than
significant.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 61
Less than
Significant
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PotenXVII.
with
Less than
Significantlly
Significant
Mitigation
Significant No
—Would the project:
Impact
Incorporated
Impact Impact Source
g) Comply with federal, state, and local
❑
❑
® ❑ 1
statutes and regulations related to solid
waste?
Discussion of Impacts
a - e) Less than Significant Impact. Neither construction nor operation of the project
would generate wastewater or consume potable water. The project would repair or
replace storm drains, drainage pipes, and curb and gutter within the project site. The
project would also include the installation of new bio -retention facilities within the
project site. These improvements would increase the ability for the project site to
handle flood events, a net benefit. As a result, the project would have less than
significant impacts related to: 1) exceedance of wastewater treatment requirements;
2) physical impacts from new storm drainage facilities; 3) water supply; and 4)
wastewater treatment capacity.
f, g) Less than Significant Impact. The project would generate a small quantity of soil
spoils and solid waste from removal of pavement within the intersection, but all
generated waste would be properly disposed or recycled in a nearby landfill or
approved disposal facility with capacity to receive the waste. Any materials used
during construction would be properly disposed of in accordance with federal, state,
and local regulations. Impacts related to solid waste facilities would be less than
significant.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 61
XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF Potentially
Significant
SIGNIFICANCE Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental
effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of
past projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable future
projects)?
a
n
c) Does the project have environmental ❑
effects that will cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
Discussion
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
/1
Less than
Significant
Impact
a
111
No
Impact Source
❑ 1
IN
IN
a) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation. The incorporation of the
mitigation measures included in Section IV (Biological Resources) would reduce
potential impacts to a less -than -significant level. The project site does not contain
any resource listed in, or determined to be eligible by, the State Historical Resource
Commission and does not contain a resource included in a local register of historic
resources or identified as significant in a historical resource survey. Additionally, the
project site does not contain any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record,
or manuscript that a lead agency determined to be historically significant or
significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural,
educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California. However,
cultural resources could potentially be uncovered during construction. Mitigation
measures included in Section V (Cultural Resources) would reduce potential impacts
to a less -than -significant level.
b) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. Cumulatively
considerable means that the incremental effects of an individual project are
considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects
of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects. The analysis
within this Initial Study demonstrates that the project would not have any individually
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 62
limited, but cumulatively considerable impacts. As presented in the analysis in
Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Noise,
Public Services, and Transportation/Traffic sections, any potentially significant
impacts would be less than significant after mitigation. Due to the limited scope of
direct physical impacts to the environment associated with construction, the project's
impacts are project -specific in nature. Compliance with the conditions of approval
issued for the proposed development would further assure that project -level impacts
would not be cumulatively considerable. Consequently, the project along with other
cumulative projects will create a less than significant cumulative impact with respect
to all environmental issues.
C) Less Than Significant Impact. With implementation of the various construction
measures and BMPs included in the proposed project description, the project would
not result in substantial adverse effects to human beings, either directly or indirectly.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 63
CHECKLIST INFORMATION SOURCES
1. Professional judgment and expertise of the environmental/technical specialists
evaluating the project, based on a review of existing conditions and project details,
including standard construction measures
2. City of San Rafael General Plan, 2004
3. California Department of Transportation, 2012
4. California Department of Conservation, 2010
5. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game, and California
Native Plant Society species lists
6. Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2011
7. Department of Toxic Substances Control, 2011, and State Water Resources Control
Board, 2011
8. Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2011
9. WRA, Inc., 2015
10. Fehr and Peers, 2015
11. California Department of Conservation, 2006
12. City of San Rafael Noise Ordinance
13. ABAG Hazards Mapping, 2014
14. Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2010
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 64
SETTING REFERENCES
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). Earthquake and Hazards Program.
http://gis.abag.ca.gov/website/Hazards/?hlyr=femaZones Accessed May 2015.
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2010a. Clean Air Plan, BAAQMD,
Planning Rules and Research Division, Plans. October 4, 2010
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2010b. Source Inventory of Bay Area
Greenhouse Gas Emissions, San Francisco, CA. February 2010
California Department of Conservation. 2006. State of California Seismic Hazard Zones Palo
Alto Quadrangle Official map. Available at
http://gmw.consrv.ca.gov/shmp/download/pdf/ozn_paloa.pdf Accessed May 2015.
California Department of Conservation. 2010. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program:
Marin County Important Farmland 2010. Accessed May 2015.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2014. California Natural Diversity
Database. Wildlife and Habitat Data Analysis Branch, Sacramento, CA.
California Department of Transportation. 2012. Scenic highways: Marin County. Accessed
May 2015.
California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2014. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of
California. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California. Online at:
http://www.rareplants.cnps.org; accessed: December 2014.
Department of Toxic Substances Control. 2011. EnviroStor database: San Rafael Available
at: <http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/>. Accessed May 2015.
Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2011. Flood Insurance Rate Map 06041CO293D,
Available at:
http://map1.msc.fema.gov/idms/IntraList.cgi?displ=wsp/item_06041 CO293D.txt
Accessed August 2015
Fehr and Peers, 2015. Las Gallinas Avenue / Manuel T Freitas Parkway Intersection
Improvement — Multimodal Assessment
Governor's Office of Planning and Research. 2008. Technical advisory: CEQA and climate
change: Addressing climate change through California Environmental Quality Act
Review. Sacramento, CA. Available at: <http://opr.ca.gov/docs/june08-ceqa.pdf >.
June 19, 2008. Accessed May 2015.
Lynn Terry (California Air Resources Board Deputy Executive Officer), letter to Deborah Jordan
(U.S. EPA Region 9 Air Division Director), October 12, 2011, available from
http://www.epa.gov/ozonedesignations/2008standards/rec/letters/09_CA_rec2.pdf.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 65
National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report 117, Highway Noise: A Design Guide
for Highway Engineers, 1971.
Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2011. Web Soil Survey for the San Rafael Area.
Available at: <http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm>. Accessed May
2015.
Office of Planning and Research, State of California General Plan Guidelines, October 2003 (in
coordination with the California Department of Health Services).
Sawyer, J, T Keeler -Wolf and J Evens. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation. California
Native Plant Society, Berkeley, CA.
State Water Resources Control Board. 2011. GeoTracker GAMA (Groundwater Ambient
Monitoring and Assessment): San Rafael. Available at:
<http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/gama/>. Accessed May 2015.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2014. Species List for Marin County,
Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Service.
Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities. 2008. The Uniform California
Earthquake Rupture Forecast, Version 2 (UCERF 2). U.S. Geological Survey Open -File
Report 2007-1437 and California Geological Survey Special Report 203. Reston, VA.
2008
WRA, 2015. Biological Reconnaissance: Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Las Gallinas Avenue
Intersection Improvements, San Rafael, CA
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 66
REPORT PREPARATION
City of San Rafael — CEQA Lead Agency
Jeff Stutsman, P.E.,
Assistant Civil Engineer
CSW/Stuber-Stroeh Engineering Group, Inc. — Project Engineer
Rich Souza, P.E.
Project Manager
WRA, Inc. — CEQA and Regulatory Permits Consultant
Geoff Smick
Principal
Justin Semion
Principal
Geoff Reilly
Project Manager
Jonathan Hidalgo
Environmental Planner
Stephanie Freed
Biologist
Derek Chan
GIS Professional
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 67
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 68
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project
Mitigation Measure
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
13I0-1 To the extent feasible, vegetation
removal and initial ground disturbance
shall occur outside of the general breeding
bird season (September 1 to January 31).
If these activities must occur during the
general bird breeding season (February 1
to August 31), then a pre -construction
breeding bird survey shall be conducted
by a qualified biologist within seven days
prior to the initiation of these activities.
The survey shall cover project impact
areas and surrounding areas within 250
feet. Any active bird nests of species
protected by the MBTA and/or CFGC
found during the survey shall be protected
by a suitable work exclusion buffer until all
young in the nest have fledged or the nest
otherwise becomes inactive. The size of
the buffer shall be determined by the
qualified biologist and based on factors
such as bird species, nest location, level of
ambient visual and acoustic disturbances
in the immediate area, and other factors.
Such buffers may be as small as 25 feet
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project
City of San Rafael
Implementation
Procedure
Require as a
condition of
approval
Monitoring
Responsibility
Planning
Division
Project sponsor Building
obtains Division
approvals from
appropriate
agencies prior
to issuance of
building permits
.•
Monitoring /
Reporting
Action & Schedule
Incorporate as
condition of project
approval
Building Division
verifies appropriate
approvals obtained
prior to issuance of
building permit
Non -Compliance Monitoring
Sanction/Activity Compliance
Record
(Name/Date)
Deny project
Deny issuance of
building permit
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2016
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project
Mitigation Measure
for common species, and up to 250 feet
for raptors.
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
CULT -1 Prior to the start of construction, an
agreement shall be executed between the City
and a qualified archaeologist and cultural
monitor designated by the Federated Indians of
Graton Rancheria to monitor all project
construction activities, if deemed necessary by
the tribe.
In addition, the following note shall be included
on the final site plans: If any archaeological
artifacts, exotic rock (non-native), or unusual
amounts of shell or bone are uncovered during
any onsite construction activities, all work must
stop immediately in the area and the City of
San Rafael Public Works Department must be
notified. A qualified archaeologist and cultural
monitor designated by the Federated Indians of
Graton Rancheria must evaluate the deposit.
Work in the area may only proceed after
authorization is granted by the City and the
development of a tribal treatment plan in
consultation with the Federated Indians of
Graton Rancheria as outlined below:
1) Avoidance and preservation of the
resources in place, pursuant to Public
Resources Code section 21084.3,
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project
City of San Rafael
Implementation
Procedure
Require as a
condition of
approval
Monitoring Monitoring / Non -Compliance Monitoring
Responsibility Reporting Sanction/Activity Compliance
Action & Schedule Record
(Name/Date)
Planning
Division
Project sponsor Building
obtains Division
approvals from
appropriate
agencies prior
to issuance of
building permits
70
Incorporate as
condition of project
approval
Building Division
verifies appropriate
approvals obtained
prior to issuance of
building permit
Deny project
Deny issuance of
building permit
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2016
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project
Mitigation Measure
including, but not limited to, planning
and construction to avoid the resources
and protect the cultural and natural
context, or planning greenspace, parks
or other open space, to incorporate the
resources with culturally appropriate
protection and management criteria;
2) Treating the resources with culturally
appropriate dignity taking into account
the tribal cultural values and meaning
of the resources, including but not
limited to the following:
a. Protecting the cultural character and
integrity of the resource;
b. Protection the traditional use of the
resource; and
c. Protecting the confidentiality of the
resource.
3) Permanent conservation easements or
other interests in real property, with
culturally appropriate management
criteria for the purposes of preserving
or utilizing the resources or places.
4) Protecting the resource.
If the discovery consists of human remains, the
Marin County Coroner and Native American
Heritage Commission must also be contacted.
In the event that previously unknown human
remains are discovered in the project area
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project
City of San Rafael
Implementation Monitoring Monitoring / Non -Compliance Monitoring
Procedure Responsibility Reporting Sanction/Activity Compliance
Action & Schedule Record
(Name/Date)
71
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2016
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project
Mitigation Measure
during construction, the procedures required by
California Health and Safety Code Sections
7050.5 and 7052, as well as California Public
Resources Code Section 5097, would be
implemented. These procedures include
inspection of the remains by the county coroner
and a qualified archaeologist, as well as the
treatment of the remains if they are determined
to be Native American in origin.
XII. NOISE
NOISE -1 The City shall incorporate the
following practices, in addition to those
listed in the project description, into the
construction documents to be
implemented by the project contractor:
• Construction hours shall be limited to
7:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. Monday
through Friday, unless otherwise
approved in writing by the Director of
Public Works.
• Notify businesses, residences, and
noise -sensitive land uses adjacent to
construction sites of the construction
schedule in writing. Designate the
City's construction manager as
responsible for responding to any
local complaints about construction
noise. The construction manager
shall determine the cause of the
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project
City of San Rafael
Implementation Monitoring Monitoring / Non -Compliance Monitoring
Procedure Responsibility Reporting Sanction/Activity Compliance
Action & Schedule Record
(Name/Date)
Require as a Planning
condition of Division
approval
Project sponsor Building
obtains Division
approvals from
appropriate
agencies prior
to issuance of
building permits
72
Incorporate as
condition of project
approval
Building Division
verifies appropriate
approvals obtained
prior to issuance of
building permit
Deny project
Deny issuance of
building permit
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2016
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project
Mitigation Measure
noise complaints (for example
starting too early, or a bad muffler)
and institute reasonable measures to
correct the problem. Conspicuously
post a telephone number for the
construction manager at the
construction site.
• Maximize the physical separation
between noise generators and noise
receptors. Such separation includes,
but is not limited to, the following
measures:
■ Use heavy-duty mufflers for
stationary equipment and
barriers around particularly
noisy areas of the site or
around the entire site;
■ Where feasible, use shields,
impervious fences, or other
physical sound barriers to
inhibit transmission of noise to
sensitive receptors;
■ Locate stationary equipment to
minimize noise impacts on the
community; and
■ Minimize backing movements
of equipment.
• Use quiet construction equipment
whenever possible.
• Impact equipment (e.g., jack
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project
City of San Rafael
Implementation Monitoring Monitoring / Non -Compliance Monitoring
Procedure Responsibility Reporting Sanction/Activity Compliance
Action & Schedule Record
(Name/Date)
73
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2016
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project
Mitigation Measure
hammers and pavement breakers)
shall be hydraulically or electrically
powered wherever possible to avoid
noise associated with compressed air
exhaust from pneumatically -powered
tools. Compressed air exhaust
silencers shall be used on other
equipment. Other quieter
procedures, such as drilling rather
than using impact equipment, shall be
used whenever feasible.
• Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal
combustion engines.
XVI. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
TRAFFIC -1
• Local emergency services shall be
notified prior to construction to inform
them that traffic delays may occur,
and also of the proposed construction
schedule.
• The City shall require the contractor
to provide for passage of emergency
vehicles through the project site at all
times.
• The City shall require the contractor
to maintain access to all properties
during project construction.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project
City of San Rafael
Implementation Monitoring Monitoring / Non -Compliance Monitoring
Procedure Responsibility Reporting Sanction/Activity Compliance
Action & Schedule Record
(Name/Date)
Require as a Planning
condition of Division
approval
Project sponsor Building
obtains Division
approvals from
appropriate
agencies prior
to issuance of
building permits
74
Incorporate as
condition of project
approval
Building Division
verifies appropriate
approvals obtained
prior to issuance of
building permit
Deny project
Deny issuance of
building permit
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2016
Appendix A - Biological Reconnaissance Memorandum
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 75
This page intentionally left blank.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 76
ks]iwra
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
January 27, 2015
Rich Souza
CSW Stuber Stroeh
45 Leveroni Ct
Novato, California 94949
Re: Biological Reconnaissance: Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Las Gallinas Avenue
Intersection Improvements, San Rafael, CA
Dear Mr. Souza,
The purpose of this letter is to inform you of the results of the biological resources site visit,
biological resources assessment, and routine wetland delineation for the Manuel T. Freitas
Parkway and Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements (Project), located in San Rafael,
Marin County, California (Figure 1, attached). The WRA site visit took place on November 21,
2014 and was conducted by a qualified biologist experienced in similar site inspections.
The Study Area (Figure 2, attached) is comprised of developed, paved parcels that include
roadways, pedestrian crosswalks, landscaped areas, and a concrete channel carrying Gallinas
Creek. The Study Area is bounded to the north, east, and west by existing single-family
residences; and to the south by single-family residences and commercial facilities. In the
greater landscape context, the Study Area occurs within a developed area of San Rafael and
does not provide habitat connections to or from open space in the area.
Based on the site visit and review of background literature and databases, the Study Area does
not currently support special -status plant or wildlife species; however, non -special -status
nesting birds may be present during the breeding season. In addition, the concrete drainage
channel centrally located in the median of Manuel T. Freitas Parkway meets the definition of
unvegetated "Waters of the U.S.", as identified in Figure 3, attached.
Methods
Prior to the site visit, background literature was reviewed to determine potential presence of
sensitive vegetation types, aquatic communities, and special -status plant and wildlife species.
Resources reviewed for sensitive vegetation communities and aquatic features include aerial
photography, mapped soil types, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife's (CDFW)
California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), the USGS 7.5' quadrangle map of the vicinity.
Background information regarding special -status plant and wildlife species was obtained
through review of the CNDDB, California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Online Database (2014),
USFWS species list for Marin County and the USGS 7.5' quads surrounding the Study Area
(Novato and San Rafael), as well as available aerial photography, and species habitat
requirements as noted in available literature.
On November 21, 2014, WRA traversed the Study Area on foot to evaluate the potential
presence of sensitive vegetation communities and aquatic features, and evaluate on-site habitat
to determine the potential for occurrence of special -status plant and wildlife species. Observed
plant communities, aquatic features, and plant and wildlife species were noted. Site conditions
2169-G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901 (415) 454-8868 tel (415) 454-0129 fax info@wra-ca.com www.wro-co.com
were noted as they relate to habitat requirements of special -status plant and wildlife species
known to occur in the vicinity as determined by the background literature research.
Results
Vegetation Communities
The Study Area supports only managed landscaped areas that divide impervious paved
roadways and sidewalks. Landscaped areas exist as a barrier between Manuel T. Freitas
Parkway and the interior concrete channel, within the central portion of the Study Area.
Additionally, landscaped areas occur northeast of the Study Area intersection, in adjacent
unpaved surfaces to the turnoff from Manuel T. Freitas Parkway to northbound Las Gallinas
Avenue. Landscaped areas contained an array of planted ornamental shrubs and trees as well
as invasive species. Site hydrology is managed via a storm water drainage system that drains
into the concrete channel.
Dominant vegetation included ornamental species such as juniper (Juniperus sp.), oleander
(Nerium oleander), firethorn (Pyracantha sp.), and crimson bottlebrush (Callistemon citrinus).
Ornamental trees were scattered throughout landscaped areas and include sweetgum
(Liquidambar styraciflua), and coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia). Additionally, the northern -most
landscaped area in the Study Area included a redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), Monterey pine
(Pinus radiata), and blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus), with ground cover dominated by English
ivy (Hedera helix).
Aquatic communities within the Study Area include open waters associated with the concrete
channel of Gallinas Creek, discussed in detail below.
Wetlands and Waters of the US
Wetlands are not present in the Study Area. However, approximately 0.19 acre (530 linear feet)
of non -wetland waters were observed within the Study Area, associated with Gallinas Creek.
The channel of Gallinas Creek is a concrete trapezoidal flood control and storm drainage
channel, comprised of a concrete bed and banks with no natural substrates. It is lined with
ornamental shrubs to provide a visual barrier to surrounding traffic lanes. This perennial
channel is fed by many storm drain outlets of varying sizes along its length and contained water
flowing from the west during the site visit. Las Gallinas Avenue crosses the creek via a box
culvert style bridge that spans and shades a portion of Gallinas Creek. To the east of this
bridge, along the southern bank of the concrete channel, a large culvert feeds additional
stormwater flows into Gallinas Creek.
Because the concrete channel of Gallinas Creek contains an identifiable ordinary high water
mark and carries water from a perennial stream to the San Francisco Bay, the channel was
determined to be potentially jurisdictional under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act based on
current U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) guidance. Waters in the channel within the
Study Area are not tidal and occur approximately 3.5 river -miles from the San Francisco Bay.
2
Photograph facing east toward trapezoidal Photograph facing east toward concrete flood
channel of Gallinas Creek, carrying potential control channel of Gallinas Creek, east of
waters of the U.S., with subject intersection subject intersection, carrying potential waters
bridge in distance. of the U.S.
Special -Status Plant Species
Sixty-six special -status plant species are known to occur in the vicinity of the Study Area
(CDFW 2014, CNPS 2014). No rare plant species were observed during the site visit. Current
conditions in the Study Area do not contain suitable habitat for special -status plant species
known to occur in the vicinity, based on the highly disturbed and developed conditions of the
site. There is no potential for the Study Area to support special -status plant species.
Special -Status Wildlife Species
No special -status wildlife species have the potential to occur within the Study Area due to
disturbed and developed site conditions. The Study Area does not contain suitable habitat for
any special -status wildlife species. California black rail (Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus)
and San Pablo song sparrow (Melospiza melodia samuelis) have been documented within 1.5
miles to the north of the Study Area in marsh areas connected to San Francisco Bay. However,
the Study Area does not contain salt marsh habitat and it is separated from San Francisco Bay
by urban development. Further, the channel within the Study Area is a cemented stormwater
drainage that lacks natural substrate and vegetation. Therefore, there is no potential for
special -status fish species to occur, nor is essential fish habitat (EFH) present within the
unnamed concrete channel.
Non -Special -Status Birds and Bats
Nesting birds have potential to occur within some areas of the Study Area including in trees,
shrubs, and along existing structures. No trees, structures, or culverts observed within the
Study Area provide suitable roost habitat for bat species; therefore, there is no potential for bats
to roost within the Study Area.
3
Conclusions and Recommendations Summary
Based on the results of the site visit, the Study Area contains a concrete drainage channel that
is potentially jurisdictional as "Waters of the U.S" by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and as
"waters of the State" by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). However, the
flood control channel is altered to the extent that it provides no habitat value for biological
resources. Because of this state of alteration, minor impacts to the channel from a proposed
bridge expansion, which will result in expanding the bridge without conducting work below
OHWM, are considered less than significant. This `less than significant' determination does not
change the potential extent of Corps and RWQCB jurisdiction and associated permit
requirements.
The Study Area does not have the potential to support special -status plant or wildlife species.
However, trees and shrubs in the Study Area do have the potential to support nesting birds
protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. To comply with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, pre -
construction breeding bird surveys completed by a qualified biologist are recommended if
construction activity is initiated or if trees and shrubs are removed between February 15 and
August 31 (the dates of the breeding bird season in this vicinity). If nesting birds are observed
during the preconstruction surveys, the biologist will set appropriate buffers surrounding active
nests based on the species present, generally between 50 and 100 feet given the urban
environment present. Construction and vegetation removal within those buffers would be
allowed only if nests are monitored periodically by a qualified biologist. If nesting birds are
showing signs of distress, construction may need to be stopped until appropriate measures are
implemented to avoid disturbance or the young birds have fled the nest. Removing trees and
shrubs and initiating construction between September 1 and February 14 (outside of the
breeding bird season) would also avoid affecting nesting birds.
Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions or concerns
Sincerely,
tm Semion
Principal, Aquatic Ecologist
Enclosures: References Cited
Figure 1. Study Area Location Map
Figure 2. Biological Communities within the Study Area
Figure 3. Wetlands and Non -Wetland Waters within the Study Area
Ell
References Cited
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2014. California Natural Diversity
Database. Wildlife and Habitat Data Analysis Branch, Sacramento, CA.
California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2014. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of
California. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California. Online at:
http://www.rareplants.cnps.org; accessed: December 2014.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2014. Species List for Marin County,
Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Service.
�r\Skids/ yountville
y4 BtI say Boyes Hot 0
kohnert Park Springs
PrOewond Or. „ G,t, r` 101• Sonoma : apa
Ke,eberry Or� ._ a, gab pawn 'A Petaluma
Round.
Maenwood C vra Cr Detail Area N,
Fa rk
\a6berry Ln s 'dallejo•
Hercules
jEl Sobrant�-
x Oak OrCedar yt// Or -Rid—Ind
n�klan'l P.1or
IdnO ANeO2oaK�tAfir ,,r✓�
San Francisco*
f v an Le
n Ot
S\. Dal;
Nair.
• rAillbi , n oAar_
\i0_ Las_R_apoS
ElGranada,
\ 2 La G��etta /'alrycie VJay - yr Sa\VaAof `� RedtivoI..
P
Or P°e knook aF,.
� Penq - n26or,/W A
p_ yROYaI Ln ay � I �r Mifch �- �„rt"•/off;
Oq 9 � e7r BtYn f✓n,�`.,
- •' IVa""o Rd Terre Hea
R7n
Linda m
rboo Ter Park tta r04
Prop o
rrt >
Qay ml h �r v iI o Galllft,
evas era i, � OvcYr a I �
RFs "may
cJ � r'
Pro/essrcoal C�o�
mpe a -
m
Study Area
�r
7
a� The Mall At\
ja Northgate
Fa�Oc Dr Esmeyer Or j Mtolivet / `✓tiye
- - - - Cemetery
`rrd unaa0 `r AL. -
`: DeerHw/o%Y R6 Fr F.alsa9D
a
�p\ameda A/n,
Qe
I Oar egrvn b
CP n Cb J
si R De Pr at'ye : 'ter .a
- von Or Oo\de b"�,ae/ P'Dr - Ga�;/enP
o
Oak. 'Fca j CoM1`�u aq VillageU ....
Sort 9P "a Se^y
q, m Ra I open :p r3ir Ra _
anteoa m Space Pa rk a RO .os Rarrchr( \ �rG,
'-'an Roi r cs Ra en Tet Barbrel
0 11� �9Plk �n �iCrP �a Park
erPYAor- -
eq
- yrrzm2° R,a ay
cq °GfS Pt„y0. Red
mil
9troP 'v� Cal k r. MtTamalpais
Frnc
Fa ode Cemetery - ✓yr9
Pa rl,
Figure 1. Study Area Location Map
W+E w ra
S
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Las Gallinas Avenue
Intersection Improvements o �,000 2,00o Map Prepared Date: 12/17/2014
Map Prepared By:dchan
San Rafael, California Feet Base Source: ESRI/National Geographic
Data Source(s): WRA
Path: L:Wcad 2000 Files\24000\24189\GIS\ArcMap\Fig1_LocMap_20141217.mxd
- =T
a
T .
t
>1111r
i � ri'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i"i'i'i'i'i'i♦i'i'i'
1111111111111111111111111111
t♦'i'i'i'ii'i'i'i'i'ii'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'Oi'i'i'i. •
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦.♦♦♦♦♦ 1♦♦♦♦111
r ,,,� •*'�♦i'Oi♦i'000•i♦i'Oi♦i♦i'Oi♦iO�i�i'Oi�i 'Oi♦i'O.
• ♦111111111111111111 ♦♦♦♦♦ X1111.
iii'i'i'i'i'ii'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'iii'i0�'i'i'i
11111111 11111111111111111111 .<♦♦<♦♦ 1
♦'i'i♦i'i'i♦i'i'i�i'i'i♦i'i'i♦i'i'i♦i'i'i♦i'i'�O'i'i'i'. !�'i�i'i0'i'i • � 7
♦♦♦<♦♦ ♦♦ 11.1111111111111111 ♦♦<♦♦<♦♦♦
•
0. ii�i'ii♦'i'ii�i ♦i`+'ii♦i'ii♦i'ii♦i'i'i♦i�i'Oi�i, �•.'i'i'+!.•i♦i'i.
41.11111111101111111111111111♦ a � �♦<.
11'11+1111111111111111111 1141111 •�>
♦<♦♦.1111111♦.♦ 111111111111 <♦♦114 �,.
O�♦�,i3O��� a• •i♦i♦i'Oi♦i000���a♦♦r•.. - DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOi�00000000.�00i�'000.Oe •E ► �
'0000♦ 'i'i'i'i'i•O� ... • Oi'i'i♦i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i09'i'i'i'i♦i'i'ii
11111♦►11111111111111111111111111111��1�w'�1-1-w..♦41111/1111♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦♦♦♦♦♦<� +-•
Oii♦i'i'ii'i'i4�c'i♦i'ii♦i'ii♦i'ii♦i'ii♦i'ii♦i'ii♦i' rii♦i'i'ii♦i'iiii'i'i♦i'ii♦i'ii♦i'ii♦i'ii♦iii♦i'ii♦i'i'ii'i'ii♦i'ii♦i'ii♦i'ii♦i'ii♦i'ii♦i'ii♦i'ii♦i'ii♦i'i'ii'i'ii;0iw<, +i'<>•�•.
O,•♦•O♦p•O♦♦p♦•,p•♦•,p•♦•,p•♦•,p•♦•,p•♦•,p•♦•,p•♦•,p•♦•O♦p•O♦p0•,p•♦•,p•♦•,p•♦•,p•♦•,p•♦•,p•♦•,p•♦•,p�1..♦.<O♦p•♦•,p•♦•O,•♦•,p•♦•,p•♦•,p•♦•,p•♦•,p•♦•,•♦O•O♦p.,f .,e s,., ;.i.,.♦<� «
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ .♦111111111111111111111111111111♦ .♦. +�♦♦•
♦<♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦♦�♦♦♦1111111111111111111<11/11/11+.1 ♦ ♦114,.. !
j♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦♦111111111111111111111111111111t♦<♦♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦..♦♦.♦♦<♦♦.♦♦ • .. .♦<♦♦�
..♦♦.♦♦.♦♦.♦♦..♦..♦..♦..♦..♦..♦..♦♦.♦♦.♦♦.♦♦..♦..♦..♦..♦..♦..♦♦.♦ ♦♦.♦♦1111111111111111111111111119'1.
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦II11/111111111111111111111/11/11/11/1111111111111111111♦♦♦••.•♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦<♦..♦♦<♦♦<♦♦<♦11 '♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦�: ♦♦♦♦♦♦11•♦,
•11.•.1��� �♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦14 X11♦♦♦♦♦♦♦11 ♦♦♦'♦•♦♦♦'♦♦'♦'♦'♦'♦•♦f.v
.i. ♦+Y'�Y�, .1.♦.1�♦♦1♦♦1♦♦1♦41, so♦1.♦1♦♦1..♦♦.♦♦♦♦1♦♦1♦♦1♦♦1♦♦1♦♦1♦♦1♦♦1♦♦- ♦♦1.♦1<♦1♦♦♦♦� { i�
a0�. 4- •,1 �. ,��♦���r���rr. 1' �'♦i'i'i♦i'i'i♦i'i'i♦i'i'i♦i'i'i♦i'i'i♦i'i'i♦i'i'i'i'i'i'i♦i'i'i♦i'i'i♦i'i'i♦i'i'i♦i'i'i♦i'i'i♦i'i'i♦i'i'i• -;�♦♦'i♦i'i'i�i'i'i'i'i'i♦i'i'i'i'�'iv4'i� v`4..
>ai+i'i �>'♦'♦'♦'♦'♦•♦'i'♦•w!i'♦'♦'♦'♦'♦•♦•i�<�r .'♦'♦'s<i!♦!♦',!,'♦'<'♦'♦•<'♦'♦'<'♦'♦'<'♦'♦'<'♦'♦•♦'<'♦'♦'<'♦'♦'<'♦'♦'<'♦'♦'1'♦'♦'♦'♦'♦'<'♦'♦'<'♦'♦'<'♦f i•'.. � t' °e)•♦<<'♦'♦<<'♦'♦<<'♦'♦<<'♦'♦<<'♦'♦•j<<'♦•j<<'♦'♦+<'♦'♦Q4♦ ' `
,<♦ 11111111♦ . >♦�♦Oii♦Oii'Oii♦Oii♦Oi♦� �Oi'i �+ O�OO♦X000,000.0�010�0010�010�0,0�O,�w�y0<O♦Oii♦O<O♦Oe O'ii+i•iisiA.'i♦Oii♦Oii♦Oii♦Oii♦Oii♦i♦ii♦i♦Oii♦Oii♦Oiiv
""'♦'O�♦��'i'i♦i'i�♦�• �i'i'C. ♦0000�0'0�00'000000000000000�� ;00♦i'i'i♦i'•'�♦�i ►i'i'i♦i'i'i♦i'i'i'i'ii♦i'i'i♦i'i'i♦i'i'i♦i'i'i♦i'i'i♦i'i'i'i♦i'i'i♦i'i'i♦i'i'i'i'i
""i'i'i'i'i'i0•�Oi'i'i'i'�1 'i'i'i'i0'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i!1� �O'ilO�'w��'i1 �♦ ><'i♦iii'i�i'i1. _`r<...•i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i00
♦<♦♦010♦010♦w<c 1+'i♦i'ii'ii'OOi•OOi'i•• +•+ >4 .'D<O'1s.♦es,♦,p.,♦ .•>.p♦♦♦O,•,O♦010♦0100.10♦010♦010♦010♦0,00.10♦O,•,O♦010♦♦p0♦♦p0♦0100.10 �
♦♦♦f,1� ►i00'i'OOi'i•Oi'i'i♦i♦iO' �!+vv�i�♦�,�,�i�9i�♦�,�i�♦�,�.,pp4♦�i�i�...14�♦���•♦��♦��♦��♦��♦��♦��♦��♦��♦����•♦��♦♦♦•♦♦♦��♦��♦��♦��♦��♦��♦��♦��♦��♦��♦�♦
.,.,.,.,.,.,.,...,.,.....,,< .,...e ., +.. �.11p,!�i1i 'i'i'i'i'i'4 - •.•0.•.•0.•.•0.•.•0.•.•0.•.•0.•.•.0•.•.0•.•.•0.•.•0.•.•0.•.•0.•.•0.•.•. - � `•
�o•.o•.•.o•.•.o•.•.•.o•.❖,.•♦,.e � ..,.1.•.•.o•.•....o•.•.o•.•.o•.•.o•.•.o•.•.o•.•.•.o•.•.o•.•.o•.00•.•.o•.•.o•.•.o•.•.o•.
`O`s .-.ter.. i'i'iii'iii'i!i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i' 4 "ice♦ ��'♦♦'♦���♦�:♦i'i• . �4<ii'i'i'iii'iii'i'i!i!iii'ii♦i'ii'i'ii♦iii♦iii♦ii0♦i♦ • �
�s + Oi♦i'ii'i'i'i'ii'i'i•����a��r. �Op�O♦p�0♦�♦� ♦,p0�♦p0�♦p�♦�ps,,r +.�w.. ♦. ♦♦♦1..1••11 ..♦, ♦♦1♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦1•
's'i1i'i'i1i'i'i1i'i01i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'ii'i�a�•.......�.•��1�1��100000000i' O'00000000i ' '1�i',��..•'00i'i'1i•♦'♦1i'i''i1i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i'i1i'i'i1i•�..
,1,1,111,1,111,1,111,1,111,111,1,111,1,111,111,1,111,1,111,1,111,1,111,1,111,1,111,1,111,1,1,1,f,1,1,111,1,1,♦ ,1,1,111,1,111,1,1,E � 1�i�1��1• aw1�11111,♦1,1,�+
... 1.,1'�1�,•.►.1i11:'1.1•1•.1:�'111.1•1•.1i11:�'111.1•1•.1i11:�'111.111•:1i.1.�1111.1111:1.1•.1i11:�'111.1�•1•.1i11:�'111.1�•1•.1i11:�'111.1�•1•.1i11:�'111.1�•1•.1i11:�'111.1�•1•.1i11:�'111.1�•1•.1i11:�'11.1•i.11i:<11.11•1!.1111:'111.111•:1i.1.�1111.1i11:1�.1•.1i11.�'111:1•11.�s.1. 11�A'11.1ii1:1'111:1�•1•.1i11:1'111.1i•1.1if11,4111.1�,11.1i11.11111:1i,1.1ie11.'11.�•�1111.i. . 1�ii��r♦�� . ♦- i,1 A�,!11111.41�1/11!11'11•�i.,-11,1-11•1-11-111,/
11////11,1111 1,w111•,1,111,111,1,111,�1//111�1/,1-/1.
.-//-31
1i1�•♦1♦�•1�1- ,.1•„�
.��Xry 1�+!1�1�1i11�•i �1�•�� fi11�•i11�•i11�•i14. a•1°11111
t :111,♦ X11,1,11111,11111,11111,1,11111,11111,11111,111,0011110111101,1,104 i'i1i1i1i1i1i1i'i1i'i'i1i1i'i1i1i'i1i1i'i1i1i`i1i1i'i1i1i'i1i • �• + '1•i<i1i1i1i�. , .'i1i` !i'i1i 1. w!1i�1�1i�1�1i�..1.1�1�1< . ,
• +� �i1♦1♦1<1♦1♦1<1♦1♦1<1♦1i'i1♦1♦1♦1<1♦1♦1<1if 1.�,�1�,�,�1� .e ♦1/111111111111111111111111111111. 1a. ♦111111.1♦ 111 ♦1111111 ♦1,
`*i'i1♦1i'i1♦1i'i1♦1♦1<1♦1♦1<1♦1♦1i'i1♦1i'ie a1♦1i'i1i♦ �+1i'i1♦1i'i1♦1i1,1♦1i1i'i1♦1i'i1♦1i'i1♦1i'i1♦1i'i1♦1i'i1♦1i'i1♦1i'i1♦1i1i�... •�1i.. +.!Oi1♦1ii1i1i'i4k �1♦101 1i1i'i1♦1i'i1i 'i1ii•i C"i e 4
i1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1ii1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1i �i' ROi1♦1.1i`•i�i1i1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1ii1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1i1ii1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1ii1iii1 • • •i .i1i">1i^0♦1♦1i ,1i�" �i1♦1♦1♦1♦1ii ii.. >1♦1♦1♦1ii1i•<'i
• � �1�1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i/i1i1i/i100i,1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1ii1i� i!�`s'i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i100i011... 1 �'1` ' � R11'1. i1i 11i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i�i1i1
•1♦i�,1,,1,,1,,1,1,,1�,�,�1�,�,�1�,�,�1�,�,�1�,�,1�4 �i�,,:,,,,,,,,1,,1,,1,,1,,1,,1,1,,1,,1,,1�,�,�1�,�1�,�,�1�,�,�1�,�,�,1�• � •1:♦i�♦♦♦♦�♦1•,♦�♦���♦�♦�♦�♦�♦�♦�♦�♦�♦�1
1 �..�i!��Oi��������������i����������i���O�������������������������������������������i����i����i������������������������������������������i����i����i����i������i.,• i•< �.,'������i�����w� �i'p��������������
•' � -111!1i1�110'1"1111i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1!1:1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i0'i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i'i1i1i1i01i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i r. ';p F 4.1♦01+1�1�♦� �.< +�1�1�1�1�1�1�♦
1 r +1,1,111,1,111,1,1
110.1
.,111,1,111,1,111,111,1,111,1,.11,111,1,111,1,111,1,1,1,1111,111,1,111,1,111,.11,1,.11,1,.,1,111,11111,1,111,1,111,1„ a ,.4 ,1i!0<1i�11<1♦1i'i1♦1i'i
%i
.[•111111 ♦1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111, /•- 111111111♦ 1i1i1i1i1i i1i!i1i1i1i1i'i i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1i1�'�1i1i�%1Ri1i1i1i1i1ii1i'w.. 11 •c. - '111+lili/i/ �
�,�,�1�,�4>,�.,�,�1�,�,p�,�,�1�,�1.,�1�,�,�1�,�,�1� s � �1�0,�,00�,�01�,�,�0,�1�0,�1�,� L!4 ' Qe1Q0<1♦1i'i1♦1i'i'i ♦ 1i"�„ �0
�1p00;0�,11�1p0�1000,�1�1�1p0�1pO�w�l^ � >OOOOD,pOOp0�1p�f .1♦10♦1♦1<1♦1♦1<1♦1i1i1. 1i•�4
� �' a1♦1♦1i.01♦1♦1♦1♦1♦101�i1i1f01♦1i1♦1♦1♦1♦1 �D0♦1♦1♦1i'0♦1♦1i♦i �i1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1i1♦1♦1i'O0i1i 1. 1i1 1
� >100000000000�� 1+/0♦1i1♦1i"i1i'i1 � �' ��i1♦1i'0♦14/+1♦1i'i1♦1i'i1♦1i'i1♦1♦O'i1i'i'� 1. / 1♦1.
y1•.1111•.1111•.1111•.11� 41♦,1,111,c X11 •�A'c. �i1♦1<1♦1♦1<1♦1♦1<1♦1♦1<1♦1♦1♦1<1i'i/. 1<1" r . • • i
• � 1 X11111111111 111s► ... ♦1111111111111111111. ♦♦
►111,11111,11111,111,1,1 ►11,1,1♦ >.,11111,111,1,1,11♦,+1,1,1,1,111,111,♦,.s,<� 1 ♦,
a1♦1i1<1♦1♦1<1♦1i1♦1♦1i'sOOi'i1i� �'0<1♦1♦1<1i'i'i1' !!0<1♦1♦1♦1<1♦1♦1i1♦`s1i•�.
i !0000000 'Oi >"0i10♦1i1i, �1i'0♦1♦1ii1i4. !i10♦1♦1i'0♦1i'0♦1i'0♦1i:..
i = s 1 " �1�'�'10�'�'10�ii aZ�j01�1�1�.10 � ♦ 11,�'i'i•i' , �,�,i�`• �+!1i1i'i1i1i'i1i1i. i0 • .
Oil<1♦1♦1<1♦1♦1�'OiJ0i1<1♦1i1i� �� r 4!c �i1i1. 1♦1♦1<1♦1♦1<1♦1♦1<1i'i4�.
� +•e10000001♦1♦1i'0♦1i'0♦lie !�� ... 1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1i'0♦1i', ;'i`
► - �,�p,�,�,p�O,p�sp�,�,p�,� • �i1i1♦1iO �Di1i'i1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1♦1i•00♦O•�1 �-
• >111111911111111. 41111111111111111111111111
111111 /1111111 0111. •.11111111111111111 .
• /♦10♦1i'0♦1i01p�01p�010♦p�0�101p�1pp�1pp�1�00,0�01pp�1��010�c
� 111111111111111♦ ♦11111111111111111111111114 r1P -
1111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111♦w.
/1111/1111111111 ♦1111111111111111111111/1f
111111111111111. • ♦11111111111111111111111..
/,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1, , 1,111,1,111,1,111,1,111,1,111,1,111,1,111•e � ► .
>,�,�,�,�,e,�,�,�,�,pp�,�,�4 ♦ 111111111111111 ^ �1 f
'� 1111111111111 ♦ �'i1♦1i'i1♦1i'i1♦1i'i1i1i'i . � Or
1120000000p1p� � ppppppp�, pps,/ ►,�, +i
. , 11111111 A�1111. +�1 ►�
qh
11,1k
StudyArea I acres
V, • `
Developed Area - 1.54 acres
It
Landscaped Area 0.41 . •
1 ♦� i
Perennial Channel - 0.19 acre 40
• r %
blbwrc
eai. �o!U iU 1'•+T1 ioUaUay
Lon: -122.549941120756
� Q
z
Frietas Parkway �
'�
na�".Y, k Oil
4l
Non -wetland Waters
ID Linear Feet Acres
Gallinas Creek 530 0.19
Total 530 0.19 1.t
I� Study Area - 2.14 acres
Non -wetland Waters (Gallinas Creek) - 530 linear ft.; 0.19 acre
O ControlPoints
Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\24000\24189\GIS\ArcMap\Fig3_Delin_20150122.mxd
•
T I ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway
and Las Gallinas Avenue
Intersection Improvements
San Rafael,
California
Figure 3.
Wetlands and
Non -Wetland Waters
within the Study Area
It .
may
0 25 50 100
Feet
Map Prepared Date: 1/22/2015
Map Prepared By: dchan
Base Source: ESRI World Imagery (2010)
Data Source(s): WRA
Appendix B - Traffic -Multimodal Assessment Memorandum
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 77
This page intentionally left blank.
Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project January 2016
City of San Rafael 78
FEHRPEERS
MEMORANDUM
Date: May 6, 2015
To: Leslie Blomquist and Jeff Stutsman, City of San Rafael
From: Sarah Nadiranto, PE and Bob Grandy, PE
Subject: Las Gallinas Avenue / Manuel T Freitas Parkway Intersection Improvement —
Multimodal Assessment
SF14-0781
This memorandum documents our transportation assessment for the Las Gallinas Avenue /
Manuel T Freitas Parkway (Las Gallinas / Freitas Parkway) Intersection Improvement Project
(Project). The memorandum summarizes an evaluation of different treatments designed to
improve pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and vehicle operations. Included are a description of the
project purpose, existing conditions, future conditions, improvement alternatives, evaluation of
alternatives, and a recommendation for the improvement project.
PROJECT PURPOSE
The purpose of this Project is to evaluate and redesign the Las Gallinas / Freitas Parkway
intersection to provide efficient and safe travel paths for all modes, reduce delays for all travel
modes, and reduce vehicle queues. The intersection is frequently congested due to traffic from
the adjacent shopping center and local schools, peak residential commute traffic destined to and
from Highway 101, and split -phase signal operations required by the tight intersection
geometrics that are limited in part by a large drainage culvert in the median of Freitas Parkway.
Further, pedestrian and bicycle access is limited due to geometry constraints, such that the Project
has the opportunity to enhance facilities for all users.
332 Pine Street 14t" Floor I San Francisco, CA 94104 1 (415) 348-0300 1 Fax (415) 773-1790
www.fehrandpeers.com
Leslie Blomquist and Jeff Stutsman, City of San Rafael
May 6, 2015
Page 2 of 17
EXISTING CONDITIONS
This section describes the existing transportation facilities in the Project Area, including the
surrounding pedestrian, bicycle, transit and vehicle facilities. Existing intersection operations are
also described.
PEDESTRIANS
Pedestrian facilities in the study area include sidewalks, crosswalks, and pedestrian signals. At the
Las Gallinas Avenue / Freitas Parkway intersection, both streets provide sidewalks on all
approaches to the intersection. Crosswalks, curb ramps, and pedestrian signals are provided on all
legs of the intersection except for the east leg, crossing Freitas Parkway. Currently, pedestrians
starting at the southeast corner of the intersection must cross three legs of traffic to get to
northwest corner. Field observations noted a few pedestrians jay -walking" to avoid the three-
legged crossing.
BICYCLISTS
Bicycle facilities are provided in the general study area. Class II bicycle lanes are provided leading
up to the north, south, and west sides of the intersection. Approximately 180 -feet before the
intersection, the northbound Class II bicycle lane ends, dropping bicyclists into the vehicle travel
way. Similarly, approximately 220 feet and 310 feet, southbound and eastbound, respectively,
before the intersection, the Class II bicycle lanes end, dropping bicyclists into the vehicle travel
way. Bicycle lanes are provided in the westbound and southbound exit approaches, just after the
intersection.
TRANSIT
Several transit routes are within proximity of the Project intersection. A list of those routes and
their stop location relative to the Project intersection is shown in Table 1, below. Sidewalks are
provided to the bus stop and bus shelters are provided at some of the nearby stops.
Leslie Blomquist and Jeff Stutsman, City of San Rafael
May 6, 2015
Page 3 of 17
Route Operator Type of Bus
Route
38 — San Francisco to/from Golden Gate
Commute Bus
Terra Linda Transit
45/45K— San Rafael
— Friday
6:00 AM —
9:00 AM 30 mins
Golden Gate
Marin County
to/from Kaiser
Sunday
8:00 AM to 8:00 PM1
Transit
Local
Hospital/Northgate
Las Gallinas / Nova
49 — San Rafael to/from
Golden Gate
Marin County
Novato
Transit
Local
139 —Terra Linda High
Local Service —
School to/from Marinwood
Marin Transit
School
257 — Ignacio to/from
Local Service /
Albion Way
Marin Transit
Community
San Rafael
Shuttle
259 — Novato to/from
Local Service /
Marin Transit
Community
San Rafael
Shuttle
Hours of Operation I Headways
Monday
— Friday
6:00 AM —
9:00 AM 30 mins
4:00 PM -7:00
PM
Monday —
Sunday
Closest Stop Location
Northbound Southbound
Las Gallinas / Las Gallinas / Nova
Freitas Parkway Albion Way
Monday — Friday
60 mins
6:30 AM — 7:30 PM
Monday — Sunday
60 mins
7.00 AM — 11:00 PM
Notes:
1. Reduced hours of operations and increased headways on the Saturdays, Sundays and holidays
Fehr & Peers, 2015
Las Gallinas / Nova Las Gallinas / Nova
Albion Way Albion Way
Las Gallinas / Las Gallinas /
Oleander Drive Freitas Parkway
30 mins
Las Gallinas / Nova
Las Gallinas / Nova
6:00 AM to 9:00 PM
1
60 mins
Albion Way
Albion Way
8:00 AM to 8:00 PM1
Monday — Friday
Las Gallinas / Nova
Las Gallinas / Nova
6:00 AM — 8:00 PM
60 mins
Albion Way
Albion Way
Schooldays
1 bus for
7:00 AM — 8:00 AM
each peak
Las Gallinas /Nova
Las Gallinas /
Albion Way
Freitas Parkway
2:45 PM — 4:30 PM
period
Monday — Friday
60 mins
6:30 AM — 7:30 PM
Monday — Sunday
60 mins
7.00 AM — 11:00 PM
Notes:
1. Reduced hours of operations and increased headways on the Saturdays, Sundays and holidays
Fehr & Peers, 2015
Las Gallinas / Nova Las Gallinas / Nova
Albion Way Albion Way
Las Gallinas / Las Gallinas /
Oleander Drive Freitas Parkway
Leslie Blomquist and Jeff Stutsman, City of San Rafael
May 6, 2015
Page 4 of 17
VEHICLES
Las Gallinas Avenue is a two-lane north -south facility beginning at the Northgate Mall to the
south and terminating in a residential neighborhood to the north. Freitas Parkway is a four -lane
east -west facility connecting US -101 to neighborhoods west of the freeway. The intersection is
signalized with left turn and right turn pockets for each approach. As part of this assessment, a
simulation study was completed for the intersection as described below.
Operations Analysis
To accurately assess the operations of the intersection and understand the downstream and
upstream effects on the Project intersection, adjacent study intersections were evaluated. The
following intersections were reviewed as part of this study:
1. Las Gallinas / Freitas Parkway (signalized)
2. Las Gallinas / Nova Albion (signalized)
3. Northgate Drive / Freitas Parkway (signalized)
The traffic analysis software Synch ro/SimTraffic 7.0 was used for this study. For purposes of
modeling the entire network as one system, micro -simulation (SimTraffic) was used. The primary
difference between SimTraffic and HCM is that the HCM analyzes intersections in isolation and
does not include the effects of upstream or downstream intersections. SimTraffic analyzes
intersections as a "system," with intersections directly affecting traffic flow through the entire
project study area. SimTraffic provides measures of effectiveness that are consistent with the HCM
such as movement delay and weighted average delay.
The operations of roadway facilities are described with the term "level of service" (LOS). LOS is a
qualitative description of traffic flow from a vehicle driver's perspective based on factors such as
speed, travel time, delay, and freedom to maneuver. Six levels of service are defined ranging from
LOS A (best operating conditions) to LOS F (worst operating conditions). LOS E corresponds to
operations "at capacity." When volumes exceed capacity, stop -and -go conditions result and
operations are designated to LOS F. The relationship between LOS and control delay is
summarized in Table 2.
Leslie Blomquist and Jeff Stutsman, City of San Rafael
May 6, 2015
Page 5 of 17
Level of Service I Description
Progression is extremely favorable and most vehicles
A arrive during the green phase. Most vehicles do not
stop at all. Short cycle lengths may also contribute
to low delay.
Progression is good, cycle lengths are short, or both.
B More vehicles stop than with LOS A, causing higher
levels of average delay.
Higher congestion may result from fair progression,
longer cycle lengths, or both. Individual cycle
C failures may begin to appear at this level, though
many still pass through the intersection without
stopping.
The influence of congestion becomes more
noticeable. Longer delays may result from some
D combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle
lengths, or high V/C ratios. Many vehicles stop, and
the proportion of vehicles not stopping declines.
Individual cycle failures are noticeable.
This level is considered by many agencies to be the
limit of acceptable delay. These high delay values
E generally indicate poor progression, long cycle
lengths, and high V/C ratios. Individual cycle failures
are frequent occurrences.
This level is considered unacceptable with
oversaturation, which is when arrival flow rates
exceed the capacity of the intersection. This level
F may also occur at high V/C ratios below 1.0 with
many individual cycle failures. Poor progression
and long cycle lengths may also be contributing
factors to such delay levels.
Source: 2010 Highway Capacity Manual
Data Collection/ Field Observations
Delay in Seconds
< 10.0
> 10.0 to 20.0
> 20.0 to 35.0
> 35.0 to 55.0
> 55.0 to 80.0
> 80.0
City of San Rafael staff furnished weekday AM and PM peak hour data at all locations,
summarized in Figure 2. In addition, Fehr & Peers completed field observations. During the AM
peak hour, the westbound left turn was observed to spillback beyond its provided pocket length
to the traffic signal at the Los Gamos Road intersection due to the high demand of left turning
vehicles to adjacent land uses such as the retail center and local schools. The southbound
approach was also queued beyond the upstream intersection at Hyacinth Way. At the Las Gallinas
Leslie Blomquist and Jeff Stutsman, City of San Rafael
May 6, 2015
Page 6 of 17
1i
/ Nova Albion intersection, it was observed that the southbound queue would spillback to the
Freitas Parkway intersection during peak demand conditions, though it cleared after each cycle.
Results
Existing operations were evaluated using the methods and data collection described above.
Existing AM and PM weekday intersection delay and level of service is summarized in Table 3 and
queue summaries for critical movements at the Project intersection is summarized in Table 4.
Detailed levels of service calculation worksheets are included in Attachment A.
As shown in Table 2, intersections operate at LOS C or better during the AM and PM peak hour/.
At the Las Gallinas / Freitas Parkway intersection, queues spillback beyond the provided storage
length in the westbound left and southbound left turn pocket, matching field observations.
Similarly, at the Las Gallinas / Nova Albion intersection, the southbound queue on Las Gallinas
spills back to the Freitas Parkway intersection, matching field observations.
Intersection
Control
Peak Hour
Existing
Delay
LOS
1. Las Gallinas Avenue /
Signal
AM
35
C
Manuel T Freitas Parkway
PM
24
C
2. Las Gallinas Avenue /
Signal
AM
22
C
Nova Albion Way
PM
19
B
3. Northgate Drive / Manuel
Signal
AM
13
B
T Freitas Parkway
PM
21
C
Fehr & Peers, 2015
Leslie Blomquist and Jeff Stutsman, City of San Rafael
May 6, 2015
Page 7 of 17
6
Notes:
Bold fields indicate queue is longer than available pocket length.
1. Westbound left turn queue spills back to westbound through, such that left turn queue length should equate to
the through queue length.
Fehr & Peers, 2015
FUTURE CONDITIONS
To assess the effects of the improvements for near-term benefits, a future year of 2020, consistent
with the City of San Rafael General Plan, was assessed. Based on discussions with City staff, a
growth rate of 2% was applied based on volumes forecasts from the General Plan. 2020 Near
Term volumes are summarized in Figure 3.
PROJECT IMPROVEMENT ALTERNATIVES
The purpose of this assessment is to understand the existing conditions and identify treatment as
the Las Gallinas / Freitas Parkway intersection to provide a safe and efficient intersection which
caters to the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, transit, and drivers. This section documents the
treatments assessed and the effects on each mode of travel.
WBL
150
1501
2301
2101
1. Las Gallinas Avenue
WBT
620
130
Existing
290
/ Manuel T Freitas
95thLen
Intersection Movement
Pocket
Parkway
Length 9
Average
Percentile
Max
180
SBT
630
Queue
170
AM Peak Hour
WBL
150
1901
2501
2101
1. Las Gallinas Avenue
WBT
620
260
530
530
/ Manuel T Freitas
Parkway
SBL
120
160
220
180
SBT
630
260
500
550
PM Peak Hour
Notes:
Bold fields indicate queue is longer than available pocket length.
1. Westbound left turn queue spills back to westbound through, such that left turn queue length should equate to
the through queue length.
Fehr & Peers, 2015
FUTURE CONDITIONS
To assess the effects of the improvements for near-term benefits, a future year of 2020, consistent
with the City of San Rafael General Plan, was assessed. Based on discussions with City staff, a
growth rate of 2% was applied based on volumes forecasts from the General Plan. 2020 Near
Term volumes are summarized in Figure 3.
PROJECT IMPROVEMENT ALTERNATIVES
The purpose of this assessment is to understand the existing conditions and identify treatment as
the Las Gallinas / Freitas Parkway intersection to provide a safe and efficient intersection which
caters to the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, transit, and drivers. This section documents the
treatments assessed and the effects on each mode of travel.
WBL
150
1501
2301
2101
1. Las Gallinas Avenue
WBT
620
130
260
290
/ Manuel T Freitas
Parkway
SBL
120
90
170
180
SBT
630
90
170
230
Notes:
Bold fields indicate queue is longer than available pocket length.
1. Westbound left turn queue spills back to westbound through, such that left turn queue length should equate to
the through queue length.
Fehr & Peers, 2015
FUTURE CONDITIONS
To assess the effects of the improvements for near-term benefits, a future year of 2020, consistent
with the City of San Rafael General Plan, was assessed. Based on discussions with City staff, a
growth rate of 2% was applied based on volumes forecasts from the General Plan. 2020 Near
Term volumes are summarized in Figure 3.
PROJECT IMPROVEMENT ALTERNATIVES
The purpose of this assessment is to understand the existing conditions and identify treatment as
the Las Gallinas / Freitas Parkway intersection to provide a safe and efficient intersection which
caters to the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, transit, and drivers. This section documents the
treatments assessed and the effects on each mode of travel.
Leslie Blomquist and Jeff Stutsman, City of San Rafael
May 6, 2015
Page 8 of 17
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT ALTERNATIVES
A series of improvements were identified and tested as shown in Table 5. Table 5 describes the
treatment assessed in each alternative.
The four improvement alternatives have several common features as summarized below.
■ Construct a new crosswalk on the east leg of the intersection
■ Restripe to provide continuous bike lanes
■ Remove pork chop islands
The unique features of the four alternatives are described as follows.
■ Alternative 1
• Provide dual westbound left turn lanes
■ Alternative 2
• Provide dual westbound left turn lanes
• Provide protected left turn lane phasing
■ Alternative 3
• Provide Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI)
• Extend length of westbound left turn lane and eastbound right turn lane pockets
■ Alternative 4
• Extend length of westbound left turn lane and eastbound right turn lane pockets
• Provide protected left turn lane phasing
Leslie Blomquist and Jeff Stutsman, City of San Rafael
May 6, 2015
Page 9of17
6
TABLE 5: PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT ALTERNATIVES
Treatment Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3
Alternative 4
Pedestrian Improvements
Construct east leg crosswalk
Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI)
x
x
x
x
x
Bicycle Improvements
Continue bicycle lanes
x
x
x
x
Vehicle Operation Improvements
Westbound Left Turn Extension
Dual Westbound Left Turn Lanes
Eastbound Right Turn Lane Extension x x
Pedestrian + Vehicle Operation Improvements
Remove Pork Chop Islands
Protected Left Turn Phasing (8 Phase)
Fehr & Peers, 2015
Leslie Blomquist and Jeff Stutsman, City of San Rafael
May 6, 2015
Page 10 of 17
MULTI -MODAL EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES
Pedestrians
Alternatives 1 to 4 provide a pedestrian crossing on the east leg. The addition of the crosswalk
would enhance the pedestrian facilities at the intersection by connecting all legs of the
intersection, such that a pedestrian walking on the east side of Las Gallinas Avenue no longer
needs to cross three legs of the intersection or illegally cross, as noted in field observations, to
continue on the east side of Las Gallinas Avenue.
Alternatives 1 to 4 also removes the pork chops islands and channelized right turns. Pork chops
islands allow vehicles to make right turns at higher speeds and requires pedestrians to cross
multiple sections of a roadway which could introduce additional conflict points. Removing the
pork chops and squaring the corners of the intersection, would lower the right turning vehicle
speed and thereby create a safer pedestrian environment.
Alternatives 2 and 4 assumed an 8 -phase traffic signal which would protect the left turning
movements on Las Gallinas Avenue. Protecting the left turning vehicles would reduce the number
of potential conflicts with pedestrians.
A leading pedestrian interval (LPI) was assessed in Alternative 3. A LPI typically gives a pedestrian
a 3 to 7 second head start when entering an intersection with a corresponding green signal in the
same direction. In this case, a LPI was assessed with alternatives that kept the existing 6 -phase
traffic signal (permitted left turns on Las Gallinas Avenue). The addition of the LPI would benefit
pedestrians by enhancing their visibility in the intersection and give them priority over turning
vehicles.
Bicyclists
Alternatives 1 to 4 connect the existing bicycle lanes to the intersection, thereby creating a
connected bicycle facility. As noted above, existing bicycle lanes are provided leading up to the
intersection, but stop short of the intersection by approximately 200 to 300 feet on the north,
south, and west legs. By extending the bicycle facilities to the intersection, bicyclists are provided
their own facility rather than mixing them with vehicle traffic.
Leslie Blomquist and Jeff Stutsman, City of San Rafael
May 6, 2015
Page 11 of 17
Ii
Alternatives 2 and 4 assume an 8 -phase traffic signal which would protect the left turning
movements on Las Gallinas Avenue. Protecting the left turning vehicles would reduce the number
of potential conflicts with bicyclists.
Transit
The proposed treatments do not affect the physical transit environment; rather, it effects transit
operations. Transit operations would parallel the vehicle operations as described in the section
below.
Vehicles
To assess the effects of the treatments to vehicle operations, the alternatives were analyzed using
Synchro and SimTraffic software. The level of service (LOS) and delay for each of the alternatives
are described in Table 6. Detailed LOS calculations are included in Attachment A.
Queue lengths were also calculated for the existing plus alternative scenarios. The average, 95th
percentile, and maximum queue for critical movements at the Project intersection (Las Gallinas
Avenue / Manuel T Freitas Parkway) are described in Table 7. Detailed queue calculations are
included in Attachment A.
Existing LOS/Delay Results
As shown in Table 3, for all alternatives, all intersections operate at an acceptable LOS, LOS D or
better, during the AM and PM peak hour, with exception to Las Gallinas / Manuel T Freitas
Parkway with Alternative 4 during the AM peak hour. Vehicle operations degrade from the
existing LOS C to LOS E because the intersection provides protected left turn lanes along Las
Gallinas Avenue, which limits the green time for the conflicting movements.
Alternatives 1 and 2 provide dual left turn lanes from the westbound approach which do not
adversely impact the intersection, however, do not provide an added benefit and the cost to
construct this alternative is high, therefore Alternatives 1 and 2 are infeasible.
Alternative 3 results in an increase in delay at the Las Gallinas / Manuel T Freitas Parkway
intersection because green time for vehicles are taken away to accommodate a leading
pedestrian interval for pedestrians crossing Manuel T Freitas Parkway. Although intersection delay
increases, the project alternative does not result in a significant impact to existing operations.
Leslie Blomquist and Jeff Stutsman, City of San Rafael
May 6, 2015
Page 12 of 17
Queue Results
As shown in Table 4, the project alternatives decrease the existing queue spillback from the
westbound left turn on Manuel T Freitas Parkway, thereby reducing the westbound through
queue because the left turn cars no longer block through vehicles from reaching the intersection.
Generally, the storage length can accommodate the average and 95th percentile queue except for
the southbound left turn which current and future queues are estimated to go beyond the
provided storage length. The southbound left turn is constrained by closely spaced intersection
just upstream at Hyacinth Way.
Similar to the delay and LOS calculations, Alternatives 3 and 4 result in slightly longer queue
lengths due to the decrease in green time to accommodate the leading pedestrian interval or
protected left turn phase, respectively.
Near Term (2020) LOS/Delay Results
The LOS and delay for each of the No Project and Alternative 3 and 4 scenarios are described in
Table 8 and queue lengths are described in Table 9. (Alternatives 1 and 2 were not assessed
because they were deemed infeasible under existing conditions).
As shown in Table 8, the delay decreases with Alternative 3 and increases with Alternative 4. The
addition of a leading pedestrian interval results in better operations than Alternative 4 because
the green time taken away with Alternative 3 is less than the green time taken away for protected
left turns on Las Gallinas Avenue. Alternatives 3 and 4 result in similar queue lengths and operate
better than the no project condition.
Leslie Blomquist and Jeff Stutsman, City of San Rafael
May 6, 2015
Page 13 of 17
AM Peak Hour
1. Las Gallinas Avenue / Manuel T Freitas Parkway
35
C
35
C
49
D
40
D
56
E
2. Las Gallinas Avenue / Nova Albion Way
22
C
28
C
26
C
23
C
23
C
3. Northgate Drive / Manuel T Freitas Parkway
13
B
14
B
15
B
13
B
16
B
PM Peak Hour
1. Las Gallinas Avenue / Manuel T Freitas Parkway
24
C
22
C
28
C
27
C
32
C
2. Las Gallinas Avenue / Nova Albion Way
19
B
19
B
21
C
20
C
21
C
3. Northgate Drive / Manuel T Freitas Parkway
21
C
21
C
24
C
21
C
22
C
Fehr & Peers, 2015
Leslie Blomquist and Jeff Stutsman, City of San Rafael
May 6, 2015
Page 14 of 17
No Project Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 1 Alternative 4
r
Gl
E R r
Intersection � 0 ai RLn R R
0 tn Q m Q m Q m ¢ m 2 Q7z-ix
AM Peak Hour
1. Las Gallinas
WBL 1501 1902 2502
2102
140
220
240
150
230
270
250
420
490
290
460
490
Avenue/
WBT 620 260 530
530
130
220
270
170
280
330
140
330
420
130
270
380
Manuel T Freitas
SBL 120 160 220
180
150
220
180
170
210
180
150
210
180
170
210
180
Parkway
SBT 630 260 500
550
280
540
590
460
900
1,000
310
620
600
500
800
680
PM Peak Hour
1. Las Gallinas
WBL 1501 1502 2302
2102
100
150
180
110
180
220
190
310
350
215
360
420
Avenue/
WBT 620 130 260
290
90
150
170
80
160
200
80
150
170
80
160
210
Manuel T Freitas
SBL 120 90 170
180
90
150
170
100
160
180
90
150
170
100
160
170
Parkway
SBT 630 90 170
230
90
160
190
100
190
230
80
170
240
100
180
210
Notes:
1. Storage length increase with Project Alternatives
a.
Alternative 1, 2, 5, 6: 450' pocket
b.
Alternative 3, 4: 250' pocket (two
lanes)
2. Westbound
left turn queue spills back to westbound
through,
such
that left
turn queue
length should equate to the
through
queue
length.
Fehr & Peers, 2015
Leslie Blomquist and Jeff Stutsman, City of San Rafael
May 6, 2015
Page 15 of 17
Ii
AM Peak Hour
1. Las Gallinas Avenue / Manuel T Freitas Parkway
88
F
76
E
110
F
2. Las Gallinas Avenue / Nova Albion Way
29
C
28
C
29
C
3. Northgate Drive / Manuel T Freitas Parkway
23
C
23
C
25
C
PM Peak Hour
1. Las Gallinas Avenue / Manuel T Freitas Parkway
30
C
46
D
37
D
2. Las Gallinas Avenue / Nova Albion Way
32
C
44
D
49
D
3. Northgate Drive / Manuel T Freitas Parkway
38
D
37
D
39
D
Fehr & Peers, 2015
Leslie Blomquist and Jeff Stutsman, City of San Rafael
May 6, 2015
Page 16 of 17
Intersection
AM Peak Hour
r
No Project
a
ICm x
r
L
0
Alternative 3
x
Ln
r0
Q Cn
�i
Alternative 4
WBL
1501
2002
230
210
340
560
510
340
540
510
WBT
620
510
860
690
220
630
550
160
490
590
1. Las Gallinas Avenue / Manuel T Freitas Parkway
SBL
120
180
190
180
180
190
180
180
200
180
SBT
630
650
680
680
650
670
680
650
690
680
PM Peak Hour
WBL 1501 170 240 210 220 380 420 280 460 480
WBT 620 200 400 440 130 280 310 130 300 350
1. Las Gallinas Avenue / Manuel T Freitas Parkway
SBL 120 130 210 180 170 210 180 130 200 180
111illillillillEAl:3��:�_����i7��ii1��Z1,
Notes:
1. Storage length increase with Project Alternatives
a. Alternative 1, 2, 5, 6: 450' pocket
b. Alternative 3, 4: 250' pocket (two lanes)
2. Westbound left turn queue spills back to westbound through, such that left turn queue length should equate to the through queue length.
Fehr & Peers, 2015
Leslie Blomquist and Jeff Stutsman, City of San Rafael
May 6, 2015
Page 17 of 17
RECOMMENDATION
Alternatives 1 through 4 all result in an added benefit to pedestrian and bicycle safety by
removing pork chops and slowing vehicles down, providing exclusive left turns and separating the
pedestrian and vehicle conflicts, or a leading pedestrian interval to give pedestrians the right-of-
way before vehicles. While Alternatives 1 and 2 are possible, the benefits to the different modes
do not out -weigh the costs associated with the project alternatives, therefore the alternatives are
not considered feasible options.
Under existing conditions, year 2014, Alternatives 3 and 4 results in a nominal increase to
intersection delay. In the near term, year 2020, the no project conditions degrade such that the
Project intersection operates at an unacceptable level of service during the AM peak hour.
Alternative 3 results in better intersection operations with a decrease to intersection delay while
Alternative 4 worsens conditions and increases delay. In the PM peak hour, the intersection
operates about the same between the three alternatives.
Despite the changes in vehicle operations, Alternatives 3 and 4 result in better multi -modal
operations because they accommodate pedestrians, bicyclists and vehicles through the
intersection and create a more multi -modal friendly environment. Alternative 3 provide the best
combination of operations at the intersection.
This concludes our findings; please contact Sarah Nadiranto at (415)348-0300 for questions or
comments.
Attachments
Figure 1— Existing Conditions (Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Transit Network)
Figure 2 — Existing (2014) AM and PM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes
Figure 3 — 2020 AM and PM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes
Attachment A — LOS and Queue Calculations
Mao4PxT ,.�
FrP%r
as
Hyacinth Wait
' MI6
.....-..!-------
�� I
� I
_J_.,j-J-%
L---- —
Existing Class II Bicycle Lane
Existing Class III Bicycle Route
���■ Proposed Class II Bicycle Lane
Existing Pedestrian Facilities (Crosswalk/Sidewalk)
Ah Transit Stop
Or
ahge ej
oSso
Las Gallinas AveryUe
—4.,,,,, m
Figure 1
Existing Facilities
PrT
Hyacinth Way
ay-------
_i
1 I
-T
I I
I I
� I
I
1 I
r�
I I
r�
tas Ga7linas pYenve
1. Las Gallinas Ave/M. T. Freitas Pkwy
2. Las Gallinas Ave/Nova Albion Way
3. Northgate Drive/M. T. Freitas Pkwy
CO 0-
T2
in
x.93 (177)N
N o
J 5 (8)
:S El °...
X 83 (71)
M M N
—4--
571 (413)
N N
21 (36)
� � v
993 (941)
—343(277)
7 (7)
Ar-
Ar -348(447)
)�
4 �
M1.T Frete Pk
k
Nova Nbion Waw
MTFrei�as Pkwy
1 �
40(38)--o
316 (400) _
28 (25)
654 (413) =
2(1)x►
���
1,172(968)
71 (56) —
�LDN
T US
183 (205)
31 (39)
aNm
M O M
O LD
uo ul
N Lo
'It r N
LD
N
q
Existing (2014)
Peak Hour Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations
PrT
Hyacinth Way
ay-------
_i
1 I
-T
I I
I I
� I
I
1 I
r�
I I
r�
tas Ga7linas pYenve
1. Las Gallinas Ave/M. T. Freitas Pkwy
2. Las Gallinas Ave/Nova Albion Way
3. Northgate Drive/M. T. Freitas Pkwy
O
Sao J
--178 (300)Nim
N N
J 4 (15)
S:S
X 175 (141)
M It 't
487 (571)
M
'ice 38 (56)
N N m
972 (1,103)
� J
—355(302)
)�
14 (16)
4 �
r 475 (500)
M1.T F-Pk
Nova Nbion Waw
MTF- Pkwy
36 (62) —w
279 (422)
63 (43)
755 (467)
ti N M
_
3 (6)
o
1,285 (1,023) —►
c') ro o
81 (92) —
�►
254 (171)
Avon
118 (91)
-1
NNS
0 LO
DD 04
u'l 2 CD
O O
7 I�
q
Near Term (2020)
Peak Hour Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations
SimTraffic Post -Processor Las Gallinas / Manuel Freitas Pkwy Intersection Improvement
Average Results from 30 Runs Existing
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Las Gallinas Ave/Manuel T Freitas Pkwy Signal
Intersection 2
Las Gallinas Ave/Nova Albion Way -1-80 EB On-ramp
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Signal
Demand
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
GEH
Average
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
LOS
Std. Dev. Minimum Maximum
U Turn
U Turn
2
96.0%
0.6
1
3
0.1
54.2
25.0
15.8
Second Left
D
SB Through
Second Left
216
97.2%
15.6
190
239
0.4
Left Turn
119
111
93.3%
9.0 99
124
0.7
Left Turn
43
43
99.3%
6.2
36
56
0.0
56.1
20.0
42.7
98.8
E
NB
Through
120
112
93.4%
7.6
102
126
0.7
23.2
2.0
20.2
25.7
C
96.8%
Right Turn
213
202
94.8%
20.6
151
227
0.8
9.0
1.0
7.3
10.4
A
Second Right
Second Left
Subtotal
376
357
94.9%
19.3
317
11111dr
19.0
3.0
15.1
25.0
B
325
U Turn
15.8
1.6
13.5
18.4
B
EB Through
2
2
100.8%
1.6
0
5
0.0
Second Left
15.7
0.0
48.2
B
Right Turn
183
168
91.8%
10.0
149
183
1.1
6.3
Left Turn
237
230
97.2%
9.2
214
244
0.4
51.8
5.6
44.0
60.1
D
SB
Through
327
321
98.2%
13.1
300
342
0.3
38.9
4.8
31.6
48.6
D
S.6
Right Turn
34
30
89.2%
5.0
20
36
0.6
11.3
5.4
6.5
23.6
B
Second Right
Second Left
Subtotal
59
7
.3%
11.6
564
603
0.7
42.6
4.9
34.9
50.7
D
WB Through
U Turn
19
92.8%
2.8
13
24
0.3
60.9
7.0
47.4
71.0
E
Right Turn
5
Second Left
96.0%
1.6
3
9
0.1
18.1
12.6
4.3
46.1
B
Second Right
Left Turn
40
39
97.4%
5.0
34
48
0.2
58.6
9.0
45.8
70.9
E
EB
Through
654
634
97.0%
14.3
614
661
0.8
38.5
8.2
33.5
60.9
D
33.0
Right Turn
71
67
94.1%
5.7
60
80
0.5
11.5
5.0
7.0
21.1
B
Second Right
Subtotal
765
740
96.8%
13.9
725
767
0.9
37.2
7.6
32.5
57.9
D
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
343
326
95.0%
18.0
296
354
0.9
66.3
20.4
47.9
109.8
E
WB
Through
571
549
96.2%
25.0
507
584
0.9
19.3
1.4
17.5
21.9
B
Right Turn
93
92
98.6%
11.4
75
108
0.1
4.3
0.5
3.8
5.3
A
Second Right
Subtotal
1,007
967
96.0%
38.7
907
1,022
1.3
33.7
7.2
27.2
48.8
C
Total
2,746
2,645
96.3%
40.6
2,587
2,711
1.9
34.7
3.1
30.6
40.2
C
Intersection 2
Las Gallinas Ave/Nova Albion Way -1-80 EB On-ramp
Signal
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Second Left
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Dev. Minimum
Maximum
GEH
Average
Std. Dev. Minimum Maximum
LOS
U Turn
2
96.0%
0.6
1
3
0.1
54.2
25.0
15.8
Second Left
D
SB Through
222
216
97.2%
15.6
190
239
0.4
Left Turn
119
111
93.3%
9.0 99
124
0.7
62.8
5.9 55.7 74.8
E
NB Through
55
54
99.0%
7.1 38
64
0.1
32.8
2.6 28.9 36.0
C
Right Turn
4
4
110.4%
1.4 2
7
0.2
15.5
11.1 1.4 33.9
B
Second Right
Subtotal
736
712
96.8%
23.3
683
749
0.9
19.3
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
2
2
96.0%
0.6
1
3
0.1
54.2
25.0
15.8
98.0
D
SB Through
222
216
97.2%
15.6
190
239
0.4
51.9
3.4
47.8
59.9
D
Right Turn
512
494
96.6%
19.6
463
521
0.8
5.0
0.5
4.3
6.0
A
Second Right
Subtotal
736
712
96.8%
23.3
683
749
0.9
19.3
F.1
21.2
B
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
316
297
93.9%
16.2
272
325
1.1
15.8
1.6
13.5
18.4
B
EB Through
2
2
100.8%
1.6
0
5
0.0
15.5
15.7
0.0
48.2
B
Right Turn
183
168
91.8%
10.0
149
183
1.1
6.3
0.9
4.7
7.4
A
Second Right
Subtotal
501
467
93.2%
16.7
438
494
1.6
12.4
1.2
S.6
13.9
B
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
7
7
107.0%
2.7
4
12
0.2
64.4
11.7
46.0
86.1
E
WB Through
21
19
92.8%
2.8
13
24
0.3
60.9
7.0
47.4
71.0
E
Right Turn
5
5
96.0%
1.6
3
9
0.1
18.1
12.6
4.3
46.1
B
Second Right
Subtotal
33
32
96.3%
4.6
26
40
0.2
54.9
5.0
46.2
62.5
D
Total
1,448
1,381
95.3%
33.0
1,322
1,426
1.8
21.8
0.7
20.8
22.6
C
Fehr & Peers 5/5/2015
SimTraffic Post -Processor
Average Results from 10 Runs
Volume and Delay by Movement
Intersection Northgate Drive/Las Gallinas Ave
Las Gallinas / Manuel Freitas Pkwy Intersection Improvement
Existing
AM Peak Hour
Signal
Fehr & Peers 5/5/2015
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
GEH
Average
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
LOS
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
25
22
89.1%
4.9
14
29
0.6
44.5
5.1
34.6
49.8
D
NB
Through
5
5
97.9%
1.9
4
10
0.0
45.0
12.6
29.4
65.7
D
Right Turn
25
25
98.7%
5.0
18
32
0.1
2.3
0.4
1.7
2.9
A
Second Right
Subtotal
55
52
94.3%
6.7
43
64
0.4
24.4
3.9
18.3
30.9
C
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
46
42
91.0%
7.9
28
53
0.6
42.8
5.0
34.6
50.9
D
SB
Through
17
17
97.1%
5.0
7
26
0.1
40.2
4.8
34.8
47.0
D
Right Turn
11
10
88.1%
2.3
7
12
0.4
2.0
0.4
1.5
3.1
A
Second Right
Subtotal
74
68
92.0%
8.4
54
78
0.7
36.1
3.4
30.2
39.5
D
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
28
26
93.9%
5.7
17
35
0.3
47.3
4.2
41.8
57.5
D
EB
Through
1,172
1,141
97.3%
30.7
1,084
1,205
0.9
7.3
0.5
6.6
8.1
A
Right Turn
31
30
95.4%
4.1
20
34
0.3
6.8
1.5
4.3
9.0
A
Second Right
Subtotal
1,231
1,196
97.2%
26.6
1,150
1,253
8.2
0.5
7.5
9.0
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
348
333
95.6%
17.5
295
349
0.8
47.5
2.5
43.9
53.2
D
WB
Through
993
954
96.0%
38.2
889
1,011
1.3
6.0
0.4
5.4
6.7
A
Right Turn
83
84
101.2%
6.1
73
95
0.1
3.9
0.5
3.1
4.6
A
Second Right
Subtotal
1,424
1,370
96.2%
39.9
1,321
1,439
1.4
16.0
14.0
18.2
B
Total
2,784
2,687
96.5%
46.4
2,628
2,790
1.9
13.2
12.5
14.5
B
Fehr & Peers 5/5/2015
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existing AM 12/31/2014
Intersection: 1: Las Gallinas Ave & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
NB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
T
R
L
T
T
R
L
T
R
L
Maximum Queue (ft)
190
432
423
130
210
523
479
158
126
198
168
180
Average Queue (ft)
52
216
194
40
188
256
201
10
45
66
72
152
95th Queue (ft)
142
363
348
135
242
526
441
80
99
145
139
213
Link Distance (ft)
0
1120
1120
0
623
623
17
1
212
4
0
Upstream Blk Time (%)
1
0
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
5
0
1
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
140
70
150
140
110
110
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
0
28
37
0
36
1
3
0
3
2
2
25
Queuing Penalty (veh)
1
11
26
1
105
3
3
0
10
6
3
91
Intersection: 1: Las
Gallinas
Ave
& Manuel T Freitas
Pkwy
Movement
SB
SB
Directions Served
T
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
549
147
Average Queue (ft)
258
17
95th Queue (ft)
492
99
Link Distance (ft)
631
227
Upstream Blk Time (%)
1
100
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
106
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
158
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
25
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
69
0
Intersection: 2: Las
Gallinas Ave & Nova Albion Way
Movement
EB
EB WB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served
L
TR
LTR
L
TR
LT
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
168
307
98
191
198
227
215
Average Queue (ft)
100
61
30
106
52
158
83
95th Queue (ft)
177
187
72
174
133
231
186
Link Distance (ft)
677
288
836
149
149
Upstream Blk Time (%)
18
2
Queuing Penalty (veh)
66
6
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
110
140
Storage Blk Time (%)
9
0
7
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
17
1
4
0
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 1
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existing AM 12/31/2014
Intersection: 3: Northgate Drive & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
SB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
TR
L
L
T
TR
LT
R
L
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
98
207
234
255
284
200
196
78
32
90
82
Average Queue (ft)
26
86
114
119
165
79
64
25
2
35
17
95th Queue (ft)
68
163
190
227
248
166
146
61
21
73
54
Link Distance (ft)
411
411
1064
1064
450
229
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
190
330
330
50
50
Storage Blk Time (%)
0
0
5
0
12
2
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
0
1
0
3
1
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 437
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 2
SimTraffic Post -Processor Las Gallinas / Manuel Freitas Pkwy Intersection Improvement
Average Results from 30 Runs Existing
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Las Gallinas Ave/Manuel T Freitas Pkwy Signal
Intersection 2 Las Gallinas Ave/Nova Albion Way -1-80 EB On-ramp Signal
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
GEH
Average
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
LOS
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
155
153
98.4%
16.3
125
172
0.2
33.7
2.7
28.4
37.1
C
NB
Through
258
255
98.9%
16.4
224
272
0.2
24.7
1.5
22.1
27.2
C
Right Turn
324
309
95.4%
13.4
282
328
0.8
9.3
1.3
7.6
11.4
A
Second Right
Subtotal
737
717
97.3%
25.0
669
755
0.7
.0
1.1
20.2
21.1
B
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
125
116
92.5%
10.6
103
138
0.9
45.8
6.6
37.6
59.5
D
SB
Through
158
153
96.9%
8.4
140
165
0.4
22.5
1.6
20.2
25.3
C
Right Turn
24
23
97.6%
6.0
13
31
0.1
2.7
0.6
1.5
3.6
A
Second Right
Subtotal
307
292
95.2%
12.4
268
306
0.9
30.2
3.6
24.9
12.4
B
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
38
33
87.7%
5.3
27
44
0.8
48.4
3.9
41.3
53.6
D
EB
Through
413
400
96.8%
17.6
360
421
0.6
27.9
1.0
26.2
29.4
C
Right Turn
56
56
99.6%
8.2
36
65
0.0
3.4
0.7
2.5
4.3
A
Second Right
Subtotal
507
489
96.5%
18.0
457
520
0.8
23.9
4.1
24.7
28.2
C
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
277
271
98.0%
20.5
239
295
0.3
40.3
4.5
34.9
50.3
D
WB
Through
413
405
98.2%
14.6
371
425
0.4
20.0
1.3
18.3
22.2
B
Right Turn
177
168
95.2%
12.5
154
191
0.6
4.0
0.2
3.8
4.3
A
Second Right
Subtotal
867
845
97.5%
22.1
821
885
0.7
23.4
2.1
20.6
28.0
C
Total
2,418
2,343
96.9%
40.2
2,248
2,390
1.5
23.8
1.1
22.5
26.5
C
Intersection 2 Las Gallinas Ave/Nova Albion Way -1-80 EB On-ramp Signal
Fehr & Peers 5/5/2015
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
GEH
Average
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
LOS
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
143
142
99.2%
10.0
127
154
0.1
30.7
2.7
26.7
34.6
C
NB
Through
217
204
94.2%
18.5
180
247
0.9
16.2
1.1
14.7
18.3
B
Right Turn
2
3
168.0%
1.4
1
5
0.8
7.0
5.9
2.3
22.3
A
Second Right
Subtotal
362
350
96.6%
22.4
324
402
0.7
22.0
1.5
20.2
24.1
C
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
SB
Through
113
110
97.5%
9.4
103
133
0.3
25.4
1.5
22.6
27.3
C
Right Turn
295
284
96.2%
19.0
252
312
0.7
5.3
0.7
4.3
6.5
A
Second Right
Subtotal
408
394
96.5%
18.6
365
418
0.7
10.9
1.0
9.5
12.4
B
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
400
396
99.0%
21.3
349
427
0.2
30.3
4.7
23.5
37.6
C
EB
Through
1
1
105.6%
1.1
0
3
0.1
9.0
14.4
0.0
44.3
A
Right Turn
205
192
93.8%
18.9
172
231
0.9
10.6
2.4
8.1
14.9
B
Second Right
Subtotal
606
589
97.2%
25.7
554
627
0.7
23.9
4.1
17.8
30.0
C
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
7
7
94.6%
2.2
2
10
0.1
33.2
8.9
17.7
52.9
C
WB
Through
36
33
92.3%
7.5
23
46
0.5
33.1
3.5
28.0
39.0
C
Right Turn
8
9
109.2%
3.9
3
16
0.3
13.4
5.8
4.5
24.2
B
Second Right
Subtotal
51
49
95.2%
7.6
36
60
0.3
29.6
4.8
20.2
36.5
C
Total
1,427
1,381
96.8%
26.7
1,315
1,408
1.2
19.9
2.0
17.2
23.4
B
Fehr & Peers 5/5/2015
SimTraffic Post -Processor
Average Results from 10 Runs
Volume and Delay by Movement
Intersection Northgate Drive/Las Gallinas Ave
Las Gallinas / Manuel Freitas Pkwy Intersection Improvement
Existing
PM Peak Hour
Signal
Fehr & Peers 5/5/2015
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
GEH
Average
Std. Dev.
Minimum Maximum
LOS
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
41
40
98.3%
5.0
33
50
0.1
33.9
3.0
29.4 38.7
C
NB
Through
21
19
89.1%
4.0
14
25
0.5
34.3
4.4
27.3 42.8
C
Right Turn
136
138
101.3%
13.5
121
168
0.2
3.2
0.4
2.9 4.2
A
Second Right
Subtotal
198
197
99.4%
11.5
180
221
5.0
B
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
63
62
98.7%
8.6
50
75
0.1
34.1
3.1
28.3 38.7
C
SB
Through
21
23
110.6%
2.3
19
26
0.5
31.2
3.5
25.9 36.8
C
Right Turn
40
41
103.0%
3.8
35
46
0.2
2.1
0.3
1.8 2.8
A
Second Right
Subtotal
124
127
102.1%
9.9
115
140
0.2
23.2
1.9
�5.8
C
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
25
22
87.2%
4.5
15
32
0.7
50.4
5.6
43.8 61.5
D
EB
Through
968
930
96.1%
20.3
900
965
1.2
20.4
2.1
17.5 24.3
C
Right Turn
39
36
93.3%
5.3
30
45
0.4
15.8
3.7
11.7 20.6
B
Second Right
Subtotal
1,032
989
95.8%
20.4
952
1,015
1.4
20.9
2.1
18.1 24.7
C
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
447
431
96.4%
19.8
403
467
0.8
44.6
2.7
40.6 49.3
D
WB
Through
941
914
97.1%
22.6
870
960
0.9
12.3
1.2
10.6 15.0
B
Right Turn
71
72
101.8%
6.3
60
82
0.2
8.3
1.4
6.3 10.5
A
Second Right
Subtotal
1,459
1,417
97.1%
29.5
1,361
1,455
1.1
21.9
1.5
19.7 24.6
C
Total
2,813
2,729
97.0%
47.2
2,636
2,786
1.6
21.0
1.2
18.8 23.2
C
Fehr & Peers 5/5/2015
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existinq PM 12/30/2014
Intersection: 1: Las Gallinas Ave & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
NB
SB
SB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
T
L
T
T
L
T
R
L
T
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
80
176
156
209
290
249
170
248
170
179
222
167
Average Queue (ft)
28
122
91
149
129
95
81
136
108
86
84
7
95th Queue (ft)
62
180
157
224
259
180
155
228
182
162
170
59
Link Distance (ft)
0
1120
1120
0
623
623
Queuing Penalty (veh)
206
0
631
1
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Intersection: 3: Northgate Drive &
Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
1
WB
WB
WB
WB NB NB SB SB
Queuing Penalty (veh)
10
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
140
150
110
110
120
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
5
16
10
0
1
4
11
6
5
3
Queuing Penalty (veh)
2
9
20
0
1
22
51
23
10
4
Intersection: 2: Las
Gallinas
Ave
& Nova Albion
Way
Movement
EB
EB
WB
NB
NB
SB
SB
Directions Served
L
TR
LTR
L
TR
LT
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
170
360
112
168
151
158
209
Average Queue (ft)
138
119
39
80
82
65
71
95th Queue (ft)
197
301
85
138
135
129
153
Link Distance (ft)
113
677
288
255
836
155
155
Upstream Blk Time (%)
84
83
42
411
1
1
Queuing Penalty (veh)
1064
1064
450
1
2
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
110
140
Storage Blk Time (%)
18
0
1
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
36
0
2
1
Intersection: 3: Northgate Drive &
Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served
Maximum Queue (ft)
Average Queue (ft)
95th Queue (ft)
Link Distance (ft)
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 220
L
T
TR
L
L
T
TR
LT
R
L
TR
250
334
338
281
308
334
378
80
102
98
52
39
172
197
151
206
142
181
40
27
42
16
113
277
296
255
296
272
335
78
84
83
42
411
411
1064
1064
450
229
d
330 330
50 50
0 9 0 15 1
1 13 0 9 1
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 1
SimTraffic Post -Processor Las Gallinas / Manuel Freitas Pkwy Intersection Improvement
Average Results from 30 Runs Alternative 2 (6 Phase)
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Las Gallinas Ave/Manuel T Freitas Pkwy Signal
Intersection 2 Las Gallinas Ave/Nova Albion Way -1-80 EB On-ramp Signal
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
GEH
Average
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
LOS
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
43
42
97.6%
5.0
36
50
0.2
52.3
16.7
37.5
94.0
D
NB
Through
120
113
94.4%
10.1
96
127
0.6
23.6
2.2
20.0
25.9
C
Right Turn
213
198
92.9%
12.9
172
210
1.1
9.3
0.8
8.2
10.7
A
Second Right
Subtotal
376
353
93.9%
19.1
320
379
1.2
49.9
Z.2.
6.0
23.5
B
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
237
223
94.1%
12.2
199
240
0.9
56.3
12.9
40.1
82.5
E
SB
Through
327
313
95.7%
14.9
285
339
0.8
42.1
9.7
32.4
61.6
D
Right Turn
34
32
94.0%
6.0
25
43
0.4
18.7
6.4
9.3
27.8
B
Second Right
Subtotal
598
568
95.0%
20.2
540
603
1.2
46.4
10.8
34.0
68.2
D
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
40
37
93.1%
6.5
30
49
0.4
64.1
18.6
43.0
102.4
E
EB
Through
654
629
96.1%
23.8
602
676
1.0
44.2
18.8
27.1
85.4
D
Right Turn
71
66
92.8%
4.4
60
73
0.6
26.0
16.4
10.0
60.1
C
Second Right
Subtotal
765
732
95.7%
25.7
694
777
1.2
43.6
18.4
26.2
83.8
D
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
343
326
95.1%
17.6
287
344
0.9
46.8
8.5
37.5
64.3
D
WB
Through
571
540
94.6%
19.5
510
574
1.3
18.4
0.8
17.2
19.7
B
Right Turn
93
91
98.0%
7.9
80
107
0.2
4.8
0.2
4.3
5.2
A
Second Right
Subtotal
1,007
958
95.1%
19.4
929
984
1.6
26.8
3.3
22.8
33.2
C
Total
2,746
2,610
95.1%
38.0
2,545
2,672
2.6
34.7
6.9
26.5
46.6
C
Intersection 2 Las Gallinas Ave/Nova Albion Way -1-80 EB On-ramp Signal
Fehr & Peers 12/31/2014
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
GEH
Average
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
LOS
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
119
118
99.4%
11.9
101
137
0.1
60.9
5.4
52.2
69.8
E
NB
Through
55
52
93.7%
6.4
39
63
0.5
28.1
5.2
17.5
34.9
C
Right Turn
4
5
112.8%
1.1
3
7
0.2
7.7
3.8
3.0
14.1
A
Second Right
Subtotal
178
174
97.9%
15.0
145
189
0.3
49.9
4.8
43.0
59.3
D
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
2
1
67.2%
0.8
0
3
0.5
50.2
25.0
0.0
84.1
D
SB
Through
222
216
97.3%
15.3
196
239
0.4
60.4
3.0
56.0
65.2
E
Right Turn
512
490
95.6%
25.7
447
534
1.0
15.5
4.0
9.9
22.6
B
Second Right
Subtotal
707
96.0%
27.5
655
751
1.1
29.3
3.5'4.0
34.8
C
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
316
296
93.6%
14.2
269
317
1.2
19.0
1.6
17.2
22.4
B
EB
Through
2
2
91.2%
1.3
0
5
0.1
11.1
8.5
0.0
23.7
B
Right Turn
183
175
95.7%
8.4
161
190
0.6
6.6
1.0
5.6
8.4
A
Second Right
Subtotal
501
473
94.4%
16.7
434
490
1.3
14.4
1.2
12.9
16.7
B
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
7
6
86.4%
1.5
5
10
0.4
60.4
17.5
22.1
87.4
E
WB
Through
21
21
101.0%
4.5
15
30
0.0
64.8
10.0
49.9
85.0
E
Right Turn
5
6
126.7%
3.4
3
14
0.6
32.9
18.9
12.9
75.5
C
Second Right
Subtotal
33
34
101.8%
5.4
26
42
0.1
57.8
9.2
35.9
67.3
E
Total
1,448
1,387
95.8%
40.2
1,308
1,445
1.6
27.5
1.7
25.4
29.9
C
Fehr & Peers 12/31/2014
SimTraffic Post -Processor
Average Results from 10 Runs
Volume and Delay by Movement
Intersection Northgate Drive/Las Gallinas Ave
Las Gallinas / Manuel Freitas Pkwy Intersection Improvement
Alternative 2 (6 Phase)
AM Peak Hour
Signal
Fehr & Peers 12/31/2014
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
GEH
Average
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
LOS
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
25
23
91.4%
4.5
14
27
0.4
42.6
7.2
28.1
56.4
D
NB
Through
5
6
117.1%
2.4
3
11
0.4
44.2
16.3
10.7
72.4
D
Right Turn
25
26
102.5%
3.0
21
30
0.1
2.3
0.3
1.9
2.8
A
Second Right
Subtotal
55
54
98.8%
7.1
41
63
0.1
23.8
5.7
13.3
33.4
C
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
46
45
98.1%
7.6
32
54
0.1
42.6
3.9
37.0
48.8
D
SB
Through
17
18
106.2%
4.7
11
25
0.3
36.1
5.6
25.3
43.6
D
Right Turn
11
10
90.8%
3.7
4
14
0.3
1.9
0.3
1.5
2.6
A
Second Right
Subtotal
74
73
98.9%
8.7
62
84
0.1
35.5
4.2
28.6
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
28
28
100.1%
5.3
17
36
0.0
46.1
5.5
39.2
55.2
D
EB
Through
1,172
1,110
94.7%
31.2
1,058
1,171
1.8
8.6
0.8
7.6
10.2
A
Right Turn
31
32
102.8%
6.4
21
44
0.2
5.8
0.9
4.3
7.2
A
Second Right
Subtotal
1,231
1,170
95.0%
33.9
1,115
1,236
1.8
9.5
0.8
8.4
10.8
A
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
348
338
97.2%
15.7
313
364
0.5
46.3
2.7
43.2
50.5
D
WB
Through
993
944
95.1%
14.7
918
967
1.6
5.8
0.5
5.1
6.8
A
Right Turn
83
79
94.8%
7.8
65
88
0.5
4.2
0.6
3.3
5.2
A
Second Right
Subtotal
1,424
1,361
95.6%
20.1
1,333
1,402
1.7
15.8
1.0
14.0
16.8
B
Total
2,784
2,658
95.5%
42.2
2,611
2,763
2.4
13.7
0.6
12.6
14.5
B
Fehr & Peers 12/31/2014
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existing AM - Alt 2 (6 Phase) 12/31/2014
Intersection: 1: Las Gallinas Ave & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
NB
Directions Served
L
T
T
R
L
L
T
T
R
L
T
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
198
611
575
120
234
254
267
253
177
106
170
164
Average Queue (ft)
48
237
211
50
111
131
119
127
24
33
55
58
95th Queue (ft)
134
510
471
125
199
212
217
210
89
81
126
129
Link Distance (ft)
0
1104
1104
0
627
627
1
195
0
Upstream Blk Time (%)
0
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
1
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
150
60
250
250
150
110
110
Storage Blk Time (%)
0
24
40
2
0
0
1
3
1
2
2
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
10
29
7
0
1
3
3
3
4
3
Intersection: 1: Las
Gallinas
Ave
& Manuel T Freitas
Pkwy
Movement
SB
SB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
180
585
179
Average Queue (ft)
149
271
33
95th Queue (ft)
212
537
118
Link Distance (ft)
109
630
31
Upstream Blk Time (%)
47
4
147
Queuing Penalty (veh)
182
0
69
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
120
279
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
28
25
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
104
68
0
Intersection: 2: Las
Gallinas Ave & Nova Albion Way
Movement
EB
EB
WB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served
L
TR
LTR
L
TR
LT
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
169
318
84
192
216
247
218
Average Queue (ft)
109
79
31
109
47
202
147
95th Queue (ft)
182
228
69
178
131
279
209
Link Distance (ft)
677
288
836
150
150
Upstream Blk Time (%)
30
12
Queuing Penalty (veh)
110
45
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
110
140
Storage Blk Time (%)
11
0
7
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
22
1
4
0
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 1
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existing AM - Alt 2 (6 Phase) 12/31/2014
Intersection: 3: Northgate Drive & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
SB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
TR
L
L
T
TR
LT
R
L
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
81
222
239
230
273
196
203
78
19
88
78
Average Queue (ft)
27
96
124
120
168
82
79
29
1
36
17
95th Queue (ft)
64
182
204
218
243
166
172
66
14
74
53
Link Distance (ft)
411
411
1064
1064
450
229
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
190
330
330
50
50
Storage Blk Time (%)
0
0
7
13
2
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
0
2
4
1
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 424
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 2
SimTraffic Post -Processor Las Gallinas / Manuel Freitas Pkwy Intersection Improvement
Average Results from 30 Runs Existing - Alternative 2 (6 Phase)
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Las Gallinas Ave/Manuel T Freitas Pkwy Signal
Intersection 2 Las Gallinas Ave/Nova Albion Way -1-80 EB On-ramp Signal
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
GEH
Average
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
LOS
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
155
147
95.1%
12.3
126
162
0.6
36.0
3.3
29.4
40.5
D
NB
Through
258
258
100.1%
11.7
241
275
0.0
23.5
1.5
21.5
25.5
C
Right Turn
324
297
91.8%
10.2
277
314
1.5
7.9
0.6
7.0
8.6
A
Second Right
Subtotal
737
703
95.4%
20.3
680
738
1.3
22.5
1.8
.4
21.7
B
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
125
117
93.3%
9.2
98
131
0.8
48.7
6.7
32.9
58.7
D
SB
Through
158
156
98.7%
12.2
132
176
0.2
22.1
1.0
21.0
23.8
C
Right Turn
24
24
101.2%
5.5
15
32
0.1
5.7
0.8
4.8
7.3
A
Second Right
Subtotal
307
297
96.7%
14.6
273
323
0.6
31.2
1.2
10.6
34.4
C
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
38
36
94.2%
3.9
31
43
0.4
45.7
4.9
39.7
54.3
D
EB
Through
413
377
91.3%
19.9
340
400
1.8
24.4
1.7
21.8
27.0
C
Right Turn
56
56
100.1%
6.2
44
67
0.0
6.5
0.8
5.2
7.6
A
Second Right
Subtotal
507
469
92.5%
22.1
436
498
1.7
23.9
1.5
21.4
25.8
C
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
277
267
96.6%
19.3
239
291
0.6
30.1
1.2
28.6
32.6
C
WB
Through
413
392
94.9%
18.0
366
424
1.1
19.2
2.0
16.4
22.7
B
Right Turn
177
170
96.3%
9.0
153
183
0.5
8.6
0.8
7.8
9.8
A
Second Right
Subtotal
867
830
95.7%
33.1
778
892
1.3
20.5
1.1
19.1
22.1
C
Total
2,418
2,298
95.1%
51.1
2,199
2,368
2.5
22.3
0.8
21.0
23.3
C
Intersection 2 Las Gallinas Ave/Nova Albion Way -1-80 EB On-ramp Signal
Fehr & Peers 12/30/2014
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
GEH
Average
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
LOS
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
143
135
94.2%
8.9
119
148
0.7
31.5
3.3
27.6
37.6
C
NB
Through
217
206
94.9%
17.6
176
226
0.8
16.7
1.5
14.1
18.7
B
Right Turn
2
3
129.6%
1.4
1
5
0.4
6.0
5.1
1.3
17.4
A
Second Right
Subtotal
362
343
94.8%
19.7
310
375
1.0
22.5
1.8
20.5
25.0
C
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
SB
Through
113
110
97.6%
11.1
90
124
0.3
27.0
2.2
23.6
30.5
C
Right Turn
295
286
97.1%
19.7
258
324
0.5
6.3
0.9
5.0
7.3
A
Second Right
Subtotal
408
397
97.2%
26.4
348
435
0.6
12.0
1.2
10.6
14.6
B
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
400
380
94.9%
14.1
349
395
1.0
28.6
2.4
25.3
32.8
C
EB
Through
1
1
86.4%
0.7
0
2
0.1
23.5
37.0
0.0
102.2
C
Right Turn
205
198
96.7%
15.1
175
214
0.5
9.6
1.2
8.0
11.9
A
Second Right
Subtotal
606
579
95.5%
21.1
531
603
1.1
22.1
19.2
26.0
C
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
7
6
83.7%
1.8
4
9
0.5
34.8
8.9
20.9
51.2
C
WB
Through
36
35
96.5%
5.9
26
42
0.2
30.8
4.5
24.5
39.2
C
Right Turn
8
8
94.8%
3.5
2
12
0.1
10.9
5.6
3.6
24.6
B
Second Right
Subtotal
51
48
94.5%
6.8
41
60
0.4
28.1
4.1
22.5
34.5
C
Total
1,427
1,367
95.8%
29.9
1,321
1,406
1.6
19.5
1.3
17.4
21.0
B
Fehr & Peers 12/30/2014
SimTraffic Post -Processor
Average Results from 10 Runs
Volume and Delay by Movement
Intersection Northgate Drive/Las Gallinas Ave
Las Gallinas / Manuel Freitas Pkwy Intersection Improvement
Existing - Alternative 2 (6 Phase)
PM Peak Hour
Signal
Fehr & Peers 12/30/2014
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
GEH
Average
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
LOS
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
41
40
98.3%
5.1
32
47
0.1
34.6
6.0
23.0
43.0
C
NB
Through
21
21
100.1%
5.2
12
28
0.0
33.6
4.6
24.0
41.0
C
Right Turn
136
132
96.8%
7.3
120
143
0.4
3.5
0.5
2.8
4.5
A
Second Right
Subtotal
198
193
97.5%
7.3
182
204
0.4
13.3
1.5
11.0
15.3
B
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
63
61
96.2%
8.4
49
71
0.3
34.3
4.1
28.5
42.8
C
SB
Through
21
18
84.1%
2.4
12
20
0.8
27.7
5.7
19.3
39.2
C
Right Turn
40
42
104.6%
5.7
34
53
0.3
1.9
0.1
1.7
2.0
A
Second Right
Subtotal
124
120
96.9%
9.4
108
135
0.4
22.0
2.8
18.6
27.0
C
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
25
25
98.7%
5.0
18
32
0.1
52.1
5.5
45.4
61.8
D
EB
Through
968
895
92.5%
28.9
855
955
2.4
20.6
2.2
18.0
23.4
C
Right Turn
39
39
99.2%
5.6
32
47
0.1
15.7
2.7
11.6
19.9
B
Second Right
Subtotal
1,032
959
92.9%
28.9
922
1,018
2.3
21.2
2.2
18.5
24.2
C
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
447
439
98.3%
19.4
407
465
0.4
45.9
2.1
42.1
49.2
D
WB
Through
941
899
95.6%
39.5
835
981
1.4
11.8
1.4
10.0
13.5
B
Right Turn
71
67
94.9%
5.6
56
75
0.4
8.3
1.7
6.7
12.2
A
Second Right
Subtotal
1,459
1,406
96.4%
43.7
1,357
1,516
1.4
22.3
1.5
19.4
24.1
C
Total
2,813
2,678
95.2%
57.1
2,620
2,781
2.6
21.2
1.4
19.1
23.2
C
Fehr & Peers 12/30/2014
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existinq PM - Alt 2 (6 Phase) 12/30/2014
Intersection: 1: Las Gallinas Ave & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
NB
Directions Served
L
T
T
R
L
L
T
T
R
L
T
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
108
202
189
112
164
176
166
159
119
166
218
170
Average Queue (ft)
35
114
84
31
72
92
74
86
41
94
127
94
95th Queue (ft)
81
179
160
80
137
149
140
146
92
164
222
183
Link Distance (ft)
0
1107
1107
1
623
623
1
192
1
Upstream Blk Time (%)
2
Queuing Penalty (veh)
17
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
150
60
250
250
150
110
110
Storage Blk Time (%)
0
2
14
0
1
0
8
11
1
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
1
8
1
1
0
44
55
5
Intersection: 1: Las
Gallinas
Ave
& Manuel T Freitas
Pkwy
Movement
SB
SB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
162
181
95
Average Queue (ft)
86
84
15
95th Queue (ft)
149
158
55
Link Distance (ft)
141
627
30
Upstream Blk Time (%)
88
74
83
Queuing Penalty (veh)
196
377
66
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
120
148
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
7
2
288
Queuing Penalty (veh)
13
4
156
Intersection: 2: Las
Gallinas Ave & Nova Albion Way
Movement
EB
EB
WB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served
L
TR
LTR
L
TR
LT
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
169
472
81
176
202
188
171
Average Queue (ft)
141
146
30
86
88
74
83
95th Queue (ft)
196
377
66
148
161
148
154
Link Distance (ft)
677
288
836
156
156
Upstream Blk Time (%)
0
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
1
1
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
110
140
Storage Blk Time (%)
24
0
2
1
Queuing Penalty (veh)
50
1
4
1
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 1
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existing PM - Alt 2 (6 Phase) 12/30/2014
Intersection: 3: Northgate Drive & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
SB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
TR
L
L
T
TR
LT
R
L
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
175
347
365
281
321
270
326
157
109
82
66
Average Queue (ft)
30
173
200
165
204
124
145
49
25
41
13
95th Queue (ft)
95
299
325
256
288
235
269
109
90
74
44
Link Distance (ft)
411
411
1064
1064
450
229
Upstream Blk Time (%)
0
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
190
330
330
50
50
Storage Blk Time (%)
6
0
0
14
0
15
1
Queuing Penalty (veh)
2
0
1
19
0
9
1
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 238
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 2
SimTraffic Past -Processor
U Turn
Las Gallinas/ Manuel
Freitas Pkwy Intersection Improvement
Average Results from 10 Runs
Second Left
Alternative
2 (8 Phase)
Volume and Delay by Movement
Left Turn
7
7
107.0%
4.1
AM
Peak Hour
Intersection 1
Las Gallinas Ave/Manuel
T
Freitas Pkwy
70.9
D
WB
Through
21
19
92.3%
Signal
13
Demand
0.4
57.6
Served Volume (vph)
42.9
68.3
E
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Right Turn
Direction Movement
Volume(vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Day
Minimum Maximum
0.1
GEH
Average
Std Dev
Minimum Maximum
LOS
U Turn
Second Right
Second Left
Subtotal
33
1 32
96.0%
6.7
21
43
0.2
49.2
7.1
37.8
Left Turn
43
37
86.6%
7.8
30
55
0.9
67.8
2.9
63.0
72.6
E
NO Through
120
116
97.0%
14.4
101
145
0.3
31.9
4.5
25.8
39.3
C
Right Turn
213
206
96.5%
15.1
185
230
0.5
8.8
1.8
6.5
11.4
A
Second Right
j Subtotal
376
359
95.6%
22.0
319
385
0.9
22.4
1.8
19.6
25.4
C
V Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
237
225
94.8%
14.8
202
241
0.8
95.9
19.1
63.7
127.7
F
SB Through
327
313
95.7%
19.7
285
341
0.8
64.8
17.5
39.1
95.6
E
Right Turn
34
30
87.8%
4.4
22
38
0.7
42.8
17.2
17.5
80.2
D
Second Right
A Subtotal
598
567
94.9%
21.5
540
601
1.3
76.0
1
107.7
E
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
40
39
98.6%
6.5
29
52
0.1
82.8
22.8
59.3
118.6
F
EB Through
654
627
95.8%
28.1
586
684
1.1
62.8
27.3
35.4
106.5
E
Right Turn
71
67
93.8%
7.3
58
78
0.5
35.5
28.1
10.0
95.8
D
Second Right
J Subtotal
765
733
95.8%
31.0
679
790
1.261.4
34.6
106.2
E
V Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
343
324
94.5%
18.5
297
356
1.0
51.0
4.2
46.1
60.8
D
WB Through
571
552
96.6%
13.9
522
576
0.8
29.0
0.9
27.5
30.1
C
Right Turn
93
86
93.0%
9.1
72
102
0.7
7.3
0.9
5.5
9.1
A
Second Right
Subtotal
1,007
962
95.6%
15.3
936
984
1.4
34.4
1.7
32.4
37.9
C
Total
2,746
2,622
95.5%
33.7
2,576
2,676
2.4
49.3
6.0
42.0
57.9
D
Intersection
Las Gallinas Ave/Nova
Albion
Way -I-80 EB On-ramp
Signal
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement
Volume(vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Day
Minimum Maximum
GEH
Average
Std. Day
Minimum Maximum
LOS
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
119
110
92.2%
9.9
93
120
0.9
92.0
25.9
67.1
157.2
F
NO Through
55
51
93.6%
6.9
39
61
0.5
31.4
8.7
24.4
54.7
C
Right Turn
4
5
120.0%
2.7
1
10
0.4
19.2
16.2
2.8
47.9
B
Second Right
j Subtotal
178
166
93.2%
13.8
144
187
0.9
71.6
22.6
52.3
130.9
E
V Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
2
1
57.6%
1.0
0
3
0.7
32.5
28.1
0.0
70.5
C
SB Through
222
213
95.7%
17.2
184
239
0.6
51.6
4.8
45.1
58.3
D
Right Turn
512
487
95.0%
22.6
460
521
1.1
11.9
2.0
9.7
15.3
B
Second Right
Subtotal
736
700
95.1%
30.8
663
751
1.3
24.0
2.9
20.1
28.4
C
V Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
316
302
95.7%
17.7
271
323
0.8
15.9
1.3
13.8
18.1
B
EB Through
2
3
129.6%
1.4
0
5
0.4
15.5
10.8
4.9
39.0
B
Right Turn
183
176
96.1%
13.3
150
198
0.5
6.2
0.6
4.7
7.2
A
Second Right
Fehr & Veers 12/31/2014
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
7
7
107.0%
4.1
3
13
0.2
49.4
11.4
36.9
70.9
D
WB
Through
21
19
92.3%
4.3
13
26
0.4
57.6
8.0
42.9
68.3
E
Right Turn
5
5
96.0%
2.7
0
9
0.1
10.1
6.5
0.0
20.5
B
Second Right
Subtotal
33
1 32
96.0%
6.7
21
43
0.2
49.2
7.1
37.8
58.4
D
Total
1,448
1 1,379
95.2%
37.0
1,332
1,437
1.8 j
26.2
3.2
21.5
32.3
C
Fehr & Veers 12/31/2014
SimTraffic Part -Processor
Las Gallinas/ Manuel
Freitas Pkwy Intersection Improvement
Average Results from 10 Runs
Second Left
Alternative
2 (8 Phase)
Volume and Delay by Movement
AM
Peak Hour
Intersection
Northgate Drive/Las Gallinas Ave
Left Turn
46
45
97.7%
Signal
37
Demand
0.2
Served Volume (vph)
5.3
Total Delay (sec/veh)
59.4
Direction Movement
Volume(vph) Average
Percent
Std. Day
Minimum Maximum
GEH Average
Std. Day Minimum Maximum
LOS
U Turn
53.4
11.5
38.8
68.6
D
Right Turn
11
Second Left
115.2%
4.1
6
18
0.5
1.9
0.2
Left Turn
25 23
92.2%
4.7
14 30
0.4 55.7
8.6 45.4 68.3
E
NB Through
5 5
105.6%
2.6
2 30
0.1 53.2
22.1 11.2 80.9
D
Right Turn
25 28
111.4%
5.2
18 36
0.6 2.6
0.4 2.2 3.7
A
Second Right
4.0
38.7
49.2
D
U Turn
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
46
45
97.7%
6.4
37
60
0.2
51.6
5.3
43.0
59.4
D
SB Through
17
16
94.9%
4.7
10
26
0.2
53.4
11.5
38.8
68.6
D
Right Turn
11
13
115.2%
4.1
6
18
0.5
1.9
0.2
1.7
2.4
A
Second Right
A Subtotal
74
74
99.6%
9.8
62
87
0.0
43.7
4.0
38.7
49.2
D
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
28
25
90.9%
5.8
18
36
0.5
63.2
5.6
52.3
71.9
E
EB Through
1,172
1,133
96.7%
40.9
1,079
1,212
1.1
7.4
1.0
6.4
9.1
A
Right Turn
31
29
93.8%
5.1
21
38
0.3
5.9
1.8
3.8
9.3
A
Second Right
A Subtotal
1,231
1,188
96.5%
42.5
1,121
1,266
1.2
8.6
0.9
7.4
10.2
A
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
348
342
98.4%
19.2
314
372
0.3
55.4
3.5
50.0
60.6
E
WB Through
993
954
96.1%
14.3
930
975
1.2
5.5
0.6
4.6
6.6
A
Right Turn
83
82
98.4%
5.9
71
87
0.1
4.3
0.8
3.0
5.7
A
Second Right
Subtotal
1,424
1,378
96.8%
24.3
1,352
1,420
1.2
17.8
1.6
15.1
20.0
B
Total
2,784
2,696
96.8%
37.8
2,632
2,752
1.7
14.7
1.0
13.0
16.7
B
Fehr & Veers 12/31/2014
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existing AM - Alt 2 (8 Phase) 12/31/2014
Intersection: 1: Las Gallinas Ave & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
NB
Directions Served
L
T
T
R
L
L
T
T
R
L
T
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
209
696
682
120
218
265
311
329
210
118
190
152
Average Queue (ft)
58
307
283
49
123
144
161
167
49
32
64
55
95th Queue (ft)
163
630
608
123
203
230
271
277
166
83
144
121
Link Distance (ft)
0
1104
1104
0
627
627
1
195
0
Upstream Blk Time (%)
1
0
1
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
0
3
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
150
60
250
250
150
110
110
Storage Blk Time (%)
38
51
1
0
0
1
11
0
3
1
Queuing Penalty (veh)
15
36
3
0
1
4
10
1
9
1
Intersection: 1: Las
Gallinas
Ave
& Manuel T Freitas
Pkwy
Movement
SB
SB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
180
994
166
Average Queue (ft)
167
453
25
95th Queue (ft)
208
893
105
Link Distance (ft)
108
1629
27
Upstream Blk Time (%)
72
198
145
Queuing Penalty (veh)
186
219
67
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
120
280
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
43
24
288
Queuing Penalty (veh)
158
65
150
Intersection: 2: Las
Gallinas
Ave & Nova Albion Way
Movement
EB
EB
WB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served
L
TR
LTR
L
TR
LT
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
169
341
87
194
255
235
208
Average Queue (ft)
108
70
27
119
72
198
145
95th Queue (ft)
186
219
67
195
216
280
207
Link Distance (ft)
677
288
836
150
150
Upstream Blk Time (%)
22
7
Queuing Penalty (veh)
83
27
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
110
140
Storage Blk Time (%)
9
0
17
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
17
1
10
0
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 1
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existing AM - Alt 2 (8 Phase) 12/31/2014
Intersection: 3: Northgate Drive & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
SB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
TR
L
L
T
TR
LT
R
L
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
112
282
304
264
307
248
250
89
56
93
66
Average Queue (ft)
30
88
122
151
190
79
76
32
3
42
18
95th Queue (ft)
82
217
244
248
276
178
179
73
29
82
51
Link Distance (ft)
411
411
1064
1064
450
229
Upstream Blk Time (%)
0
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
190
330
330
50
50
Storage Blk Time (%)
1
0
0
9
0
17
3
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
0
2
2
0
5
2
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 456
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 2
SimTraffic Post -Processor Las Gallinas / Manuel Freitas Pkwy Intersection Improvement
Average Results from 30 Runs Existing - Alternative 2 (8 Phase)
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Las Gallinas Ave/Manuel T Freitas Pkwy Signal
Intersection 2 Las Gallinas Ave/Nova Albion Way -1-80 EB On-ramp Signal
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
GEH
Average
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
LOS
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
155
148
95.3%
12.1
128
160
0.6
48.7
3.5
39.8
51.5
D
NB
Through
258
240
93.1%
21.6
205
272
1.1
28.4
2.3
24.5
32.4
C
Right Turn
324
305
94.0%
17.9
282
327
1.1
10.4
0.9
8.4
11.8
B
Second Right
Subtotal
737
692
94.0%
19.8
658
723
1.7
24.8
F.2
22.3
26.5
C
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
125
118
94.4%
8.9
103
131
0.6
50.3
2.3
46.7
53.4
D
SB
Through
158
148
93.9%
9.6
135
160
0.8
27.7
2.5
24.4
31.8
C
Right Turn
24
21
86.4%
2.4
18
25
0.7
5.9
1.6
4.4
9.1
A
Second Right
Subtotal
307
287
93.5%
13.9
271
311
1.2
�35.4
1.8
32.8
38.7
D
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
38
34
89.9%
6.2
25
43
0.6
54.1
5.5
41.3
60.8
D
EB
Through
413
397
96.0%
20.4
369
435
0.8
32.3
1.3
30.2
34.2
C
Right Turn
56
55
98.6%
5.1
48
63
0.1
8.5
1.6
6.3
11.8
A
Second Right
Subtotal
507
486
95.8%
20.9
461
530
0.9
31.2
1.0
29.9
32.9
C
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
277
275
99.2%
16.1
248
302
0.1
51.8
3.8
46.7
58.3
D
WB
Through
413
408
98.9%
14.8
391
439
0.2
19.1
1.8
16.1
21.2
B
Right Turn
177
175
98.8%
15.5
153
197
0.2
5.7
0.9
4.2
6.8
A
Second Right
Subtotal
867
858
99.0%
20.2
832
899
0.3
26.9
1.7
25.1
30.7
C
Total
2,418
2,324
96.1%
27.9
2,285
2,361
1.9
28.2
0.7
27.0
29.0
C
Intersection 2 Las Gallinas Ave/Nova Albion Way -1-80 EB On-ramp Signal
Fehr & Peers 12/30/2014
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
GEH
Average
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
LOS
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
143
142
99.4%
9.6
127
158
0.1
35.4
3.9
28.3
40.6
D
NB
Through
217
201
92.4%
11.6
183
218
1.1
16.8
1.3
14.8
19.1
B
Right Turn
2
2
96.0%
1.8
0
6
0.1
4.7
5.1
0.0
16.3
A
Second Right
Subtotal
362
345
95.2%
7.9
332
353
0.9
24.4
2.0
20.4
27.7
C
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
SB
Through
113
111
98.4%
6.3
104
120
0.2
27.8
2.1
24.3
31.7
C
Right Turn
295
283
95.9%
13.3
252
300
0.7
7.2
1.0
5.8
8.7
A
Second Right
Subtotal
408
394
96.6%
10.4
372
412
0.7
13.0
1.0
11.7
14.2
B
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
400
378
94.4%
21.3
338
420
1.1
31.3
5.7
24.3
42.0
C
EB
Through
1
1
67.2%
0.8
0
2
0.4
8.6
15.2
0.0
42.0
A
Right Turn
205
203
99.0%
16.5
177
228
0.1
11.4
3.5
8.1
18.5
B
Second Right
Subtotal
606
581
95.9%
28.3
534
637
1.0
24.3
5.0
18.1
34.0
C
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
7
6
89.1%
2.9
3
11
0.3
35.3
7.9
25.7
47.0
D
WB
Through
36
35
96.5%
5.0
28
42
0.2
31.9
3.2
24.9
35.3
C
Right Turn
8
8
98.4%
2.1
5
12
0.0
14.9
5.5
7.5
23.6
B
Second Right
Subtotal
51
49
95.8%
6.4
37
58
0.3
29.5
3.2
24.1
34.7
C
Total
1,427
1,369
95.9%
24.6
1,321
1,403
1.6
21.3
2.7
18.2
26.9
C
Fehr & Peers 12/30/2014
SimTraffic Post -Processor
Average Results from 10 Runs
Volume and Delay by Movement
Intersection Northgate Drive/Las Gallinas Ave
Las Gallinas / Manuel Freitas Pkwy Intersection Improvement
Existing - Alternative 2 (8 Phase)
PM Peak Hour
Signal
Fehr & Peers 12/30/2014
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
GEH
Average
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
LOS
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
41
37
89.2%
6.6
25
45
0.7
36.1
4.3
28.9
43.7
D
NB
Through
21
22
103.8%
4.3
14
28
0.2
39.0
6.4
30.4
52.7
D
Right Turn
136
135
99.5%
6.2
125
142
0.1
3.3
0.2
3.0
3.6
A
Second Right
Subtotal
198
194
97.8%
5.6
186
204
0.3
6
15.7
B
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
63
62
98.9%
6.9
51
71
0.1
39.2
2.8
33.7
41.8
D
SB
Through
21
21
101.5%
3.6
16
26
0.1
37.8
6.0
26.3
47.8
D
Right Turn
40
40
100.3%
5.0
33
48
0.0
2.2
0.3
1.8
3.0
A
Second Right
Subtotal
124
124
99.8%
9.4
111
139
0.0
26.8
1.8
NOW
28.7
C
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
25
23
93.7%
3.9
16
28
0.3
59.6
7.4
51.6
72.2
E
EB
Through
968
927
95.7%
17.8
897
954
1.3
26.3
2.4
21.9
29.4
C
Right Turn
39
38
97.2%
7.0
25
45
0.2
22.2
4.4
16.2
30.8
C
Second Right
Subtotal
1,032
988
95.7%
18.5
954
1,012
1.4
27.0
2.3
22.8
29.8
C
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
447
420
94.0%
22.2
383
444
1.3
51.9
3.8
46.1
58.8
D
WB
Through
941
914
97.2%
22.4
872
939
0.9
11.8
1.2
9.4
13.5
B
Right Turn
71
67
94.6%
7.2
60
80
0.5
8.9
2.3
6.3
13.8
A
Second Right
Subtotal
1,459
1,402
96.1%
36.3
1,353
1,454
1.5
23.7
1.9
20.3
25.3
C
Total
2,813
2,707
96.2%
43.5
2,656
2,786
2.0
24.3
1.6
21.0
26.1
C
Fehr & Peers 12/30/2014
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existinq PM - Alt 2 (8 Phase) 12/30/2014
Intersection: 1: Las Gallinas Ave & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
NB
Directions Served
L
T
T
R
L
L
T
T
R
L
T
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
130
236
219
120
204
212
199
182
133
170
231
170
Average Queue (ft)
37
141
111
36
92
108
69
74
28
112
144
112
95th Queue (ft)
93
213
199
92
168
175
151
146
77
183
241
195
Link Distance (ft)
0
1107
1107
2
623
623
1
192
2
Upstream Blk Time (%)
5
Queuing Penalty (veh)
40
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
150
60
250
250
150
110
110
Storage Blk Time (%)
0
8
23
1
0
0
1
0
14
15
4
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
3
13
1
0
0
1
0
81
71
15
Intersection: 1: Las
Gallinas
Ave
& Manuel T Freitas
Pkwy
Movement
SB
SB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
176
229
72
Average Queue (ft)
93
94
13
95th Queue (ft)
154
182
50
Link Distance (ft)
142
627
31
Upstream Blk Time (%)
89
75
82
Queuing Penalty (veh)
196
412
69
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
120
150
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
7
5
288
Queuing Penalty (veh)
13
7
156
Intersection: 2: Las
Gallinas Ave & Nova Albion Way
Movement
EB
EB
WB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served
L
TR
LTR
L
TR
LT
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
169
466
95
181
214
186
178
Average Queue (ft)
142
170
31
91
89
75
82
95th Queue (ft)
196
412
69
156
170
150
155
Link Distance (ft)
677
288
836
156
156
Upstream Blk Time (%)
0
0
1
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
1
1
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
110
140
Storage Blk Time (%)
27
0
3
2
Queuing Penalty (veh)
55
1
8
2
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 1
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existing PM - Alt 2 (8 Phase) 12/30/2014
Intersection: 3: Northgate Drive & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
SB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
TR
L
L
T
TR
LT
R
L
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
230
389
414
291
318
270
315
137
107
101
119
Average Queue (ft)
31
240
260
170
209
122
146
47
31
44
23
95th Queue (ft)
109
359
380
264
289
236
272
96
98
86
72
Link Distance (ft)
411
411
1064
1064
450
229
Upstream Blk Time (%)
0
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
1
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
190
330
330
50
50
Storage Blk Time (%)
16
0
0
0
15
0
17
3
Queuing Penalty (veh)
4
0
2
0
21
0
11
2
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 353
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 2
SimTraffic Post -Processor Las Gallinas / Manuel Freitas Pkwy Intersection Improvement
Average Results from 30 Runs Existing Plus Alternative 4 (6 Phase)
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Las Gallinas Ave/Manuel T Freitas Pkwy Signal
Intersection 2 Las Gallinas Ave/Nova Albion Way -1-80 EB On-ramp Signal
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
GEH
Average
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
LOS
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
43
44
101.6%
4.0
36
49
0.1
60.2
19.0
45.8
108.4
E
NB
Through
120
113
94.3%
9.1
102
129
0.6
26.0
2.6
21.0
29.3
C
Right Turn
213
205
96.2%
13.6
181
222
0.6
9.7
1.1
8.4
11.8
A
Second Right
Subtotal
376
362
96.2%
13.7
348
394
0.7 011IFFEW"i
17.8
29.0
C
72.2
U Turn
U Turn
Second Left
Second Left
Left Turn
237
221
93.2%
13.5
200
245
1.1
68.9
16.0
49.4
97.2
E
SB
Through
327
310
94.8%
18.9
268
336
1.0
52.7
14.7
31.1
75.9
D
54.3
Right Turn
34
34
98.5%
7.3
20
48
0.1
25.2
13.3
8.6
52.4
C
5.7
Second Right
Second Right
Subtotal
598
564
94.4%
23.8
523
593
1.4
57.4
15.0
36.5
83.3
-
20.5
U Turn
U Turn
Second Left
Second Left
Left Turn
40
38
95.3%
6.1
30
50
0.3
63.3
11.6
46.2
84.2
E
EB
Through
654
655
100.2%
24.8
601
684
0.0
46.9
8.8
35.2
63.8
D
39.8
Right Turn
71
68
96.4%
6.5
58
81
0.3
21.4
6.7
13.6
36.2
C
7.5
Second Right
Second Right
Subtotal
765
762
99.6%
23.9
711
795
�5.4
537
8.5
_4.0
61.8
D
13.9
U Turn
U Turn
Second Left
Second Left
Left Turn
343
334
97.3%
14.3
322
356
0.5
56.2
9.6
46.1
74.2
E
WB
Through
571
552
96.8%
19.9
527
585
0.8
20.4
0.8
19.3
21.4
C
84.9
Right Turn
93
89
95.9%
10.2
70
105
0.4
3.9
0.3
3.6
4.5
A
39.9
Second Right
Second Right
Subtotal
1,007
975
96.9%
23.3
934
1,012
1.0
31.2
3.6
27.7
38.1
C
66.2
Total
2,746
2,663
97.0%
23.9
2,628
2,700
1.6
39.5
5.5
32.1
48.2
D
Intersection 2 Las Gallinas Ave/Nova Albion Way -1-80 EB On-ramp Signal
Fehr & Peers 2/23/2015
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
GEH
Average
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
LOS
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
119
114
96.1%
16.1
92
141
0.4
66.6
10.4
55.5
85.7
E
NB
Through
55
54
99.0%
6.7
45
64
0.1
35.1
4.3
28.2
40.4
D
Right Turn
4
5
120.0%
1.9
3
8
0.4
9.5
6.2
2.1
18.3
A
Second Right
Subtotal
178
174
97.5%
14.5
149
195
0.3
55.2
-9.4
44.5
72.2
E
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
2
2
86.4%
1.0
0
3
0.2
50.9
38.5
0.0
99.9
D
SB
Through
222
222
100.0%
9.6
202
233
0.0
51.9
2.1
48.6
54.3
D
Right Turn
512
488
95.2%
22.9
431
510
1.1
5.0
0.4
4.5
5.7
A
Second Right
Subtotal
736
711
96.6%
22.9
655
735
0.9
19.7
18.8
20.5
B
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
316
304
96.1%
18.4
281
340
0.7
16.5
1.2
14.9
18.0
B
EB
Through
2
2
100.8%
1.3
0
4
0.0
11.2
12.3
0.0
39.8
B
Right Turn
183
178
97.5%
12.5
159
195
0.3
6.4
0.7
5.8
7.5
A
Second Right
Subtotal
501
484
96.6%
25.8
454
537
0.8
12.8
0.9
11.6
13.9
B
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
7
7
105.6%
2.6
3
12
0.1
64.3
12.7
44.5
81.9
E
WB
Through
21
20
96.0%
4.2
13
26
0.2
61.5
12.4
47.5
84.9
E
Right Turn
5
5
101.8%
2.5
2
11
0.0
21.4
11.0
7.6
39.9
C
Second Right
Subtotal
33
33
98.9%
4.2
23
37
0.1
56.2
8.0
42.0
66.2
E
Total
1,448
1,402
96.8%
37.4
1,342
1,460
1.2
22.6
1.5
20.9
25.9
C
Fehr & Peers 2/23/2015
SimTraffic Post -Processor
Average Results from 10 Runs
Volume and Delay by Movement
Intersection Northgate Drive/Las Gallinas Ave
Las Gallinas / Manuel Freitas Pkwy Intersection Improvement
Existing Plus Alternative 4 (6 Phase)
AM Peak Hour
Signal
Fehr & Peers 2/23/2015
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
GEH
Average
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
LOS
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
25
25
98.7%
3.9
16
32
0.1
46.2
7.3
29.4
54.0
D
NB
Through
5
5
99.8%
2.0
1
9
0.0
42.0
14.1
19.4
70.0
D
Right Turn
25
21
85.2%
4.3
16
30
0.8
2.2
0.4
1.7
2.9
A
Second Right
Subtotal
55
51
92.7%
5.7
40
60
0.6
27.1
4.4
17.6
34.0
C
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
46
45
97.3%
7.9
34
59
0.2
42.4
3.0
37.4
46.5
D
SB
Through
17
17
98.8%
4.6
9
26
0.0
40.0
10.3
24.1
55.0
D
Right Turn
11
12
105.6%
4.7
8
22
0.2
1.9
0.3
1.5
2.3
A
Second Right
Subtotal
74
73
98.9%
10.6
59
91
0.1
35.7
3.4
31.0
40.3
D
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
28
29
103.2%
5.1
21
36
0.2
45.4
4.3
39.7
52.9
D
EB
Through
1,172
1,141
97.3%
18.1
1,113
1,167
0.9
8.0
0.5
7.1
8.9
A
Right Turn
31
33
105.3%
8.1
18
43
0.3
5.7
2.0
3.3
10.5
A
Second Right
Subtotal
1,231
1,202
97.7%
22.4
1,172
1,247
0.8
8.8
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
348
326
93.7%
9.9
312
345
1.2
45.7
2.1
42.1
49.3
D
WB
Through
993
959
96.6%
21.7
923
997
1.1
6.6
0.6
5.4
7.5
A
Right Turn
83
81
97.0%
7.4
70
91
0.3
3.9
0.6
3.2
5.0
A
Second Right
Subtotal
1,424
1,366
95.9%
20.0
1,339
1,392
1.6
15.7
0.5
15.2
17.0
B
Total
2,784
2,692
96.7%
32.9
2,642
2,745
1.8
13.4
0.4
13.0
14.4
B
Fehr & Peers 2/23/2015
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existinq AM - Alt 4 (6 Phase) 2123/2015
Intersection: 1: Las Gallinas Ave & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
NB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
T
R
L
T
T
R
L
T
R
L
Maximum Queue (ft)
210
480
445
210
486
426
414
179
131
197
165
180
Average Queue (ft)
43
236
207
50
251
137
141
13
42
62
66
154
95th Queue (ft)
134
403
377
159
425
343
317
92
98
145
135
215
Link Distance (ft)
0
1106
1106
0
623
623
19
1
199
6
0
Upstream Blk Time (%)
1
0
1
Queuing Penalty (veh)
3
0
3
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
150
150
450
140
110
110
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
0
29
20
0
4
0
4
0
2
3
2
32
Queuing Penalty (veh)
1
12
14
0
11
0
4
0
7
8
3
117
Intersection: 1: Las
Gallinas
Ave
& Manuel T Freitas
Pkwy
Movement
SB
SB
Directions Served
T
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
597
170
Average Queue (ft)
312
34
95th Queue (ft)
621
123
Link Distance (ft)
630
225
Upstream Blk Time (%)
7
103
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
106
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
159
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
29
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
79
0
Intersection: 2: Las
Gallinas Ave & Nova Albion Way
Movement
EB
EB WB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served
L
TR
LTR
L
TR
LT
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
169
287
95
192
229
225
226
Average Queue (ft)
103
68
29
106
61
159
78
95th Queue (ft)
181
199
71
182
172
238
180
Link Distance (ft)
677
288
836
149
149
Upstream Blk Time (%)
19
2
Queuing Penalty (veh)
71
6
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
110
140
Storage Blk Time (%)
10
0
9
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
19
1
6
0
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 1
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existinq AM - Alt 4 (6 Phase) 2123/2015
Intersection: 3: Northgate Drive & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
SB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
TR
L
L
T
TR
LT
R
L
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
78
211
236
219
253
236
200
78
33
95
77
Average Queue (ft)
27
88
117
111
161
94
69
28
2
37
16
95th Queue (ft)
63
163
191
208
233
194
157
67
20
77
54
Link Distance (ft)
411
411
1064
1064
450
229
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
190
330
330
50
50
Storage Blk Time (%)
0
7
0
12
2
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
2
0
3
1
Intersection: 12: Manuel T Freitas
Pkwy
Movement
WB
NB
SB
Directions Served
T
R
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
3
152
28
Average Queue (ft)
0
66
8
95th Queue (ft)
5
122
25
Link Distance (ft)
411
236
232
Upstream Blk Time (%)
0
3
Queuing Penalty (veh)
1
20
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
70
Storage Blk Time (%)
6
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
Intersection: 15: Las
Gallinas Ave
Movement
NB
SB
SB
Directions Served
T
L
T
Maximum Queue (ft)
52
45
315
Average Queue (ft)
3
2
57
95th Queue (ft)
34
23
214
Link Distance (ft)
149
199
Upstream Blk Time (%)
0
3
Queuing Penalty (veh)
1
20
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
70
Storage Blk Time (%)
6
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
Network Summary
Network wide Queuing Penalty: 392
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 2
SimTraffic Post -Processor Las Gallinas / Manuel Freitas Pkwy Intersection Improvement
Average Results from 30 Runs Existing Plus Alternative 4 (6 Phase)
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Las Gallinas Ave/Manuel T Freitas Pkwy Signal
Intersection 2
Las Gallinas Ave/Nova Albion Way -1-80 EB On-ramp
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Signal
Demand
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
GEH
Average
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
LOS
Std. Dev. Minimum Maximum
U Turn
U Turn
Second Left
SB Through
Second Left
108
95.2%
10.4
93
124
0.5
Left Turn
143
140
98.1%
15.4 121
167
0.2
Left Turn
155
148
95.3%
17.1
111
175
0.6
44.0
5.7
36.8
51.7
D
NB
Through
258
249
96.4%
11.0
236
270
0.6
28.5
2.5
25.5
33.0
C
94.5%
Right Turn
324
308
95.1%
17.5
277
331
0.9
9.4
0.7
7.8
10.4
A
Second Right
Second Left
Subtotal
737
705
95.6%
17.6
684
727
1.2
23.5
2.1
1.5
25.8
C
404
U Turn
29.9
4.8
20.7
36.1
C
EB Through
1
1
96.0%
0.8
0
2
0.0
Second Left
13.6
0.0
34.2
B
Right Turn
205
197
95.9%
15.5
170
221
0.6
11.8
Left Turn
125
117
93.6%
8.2
99
128
0.7
56.5
10.2
44.4
77.2
E
SB
Through
158
149
94.6%
10.6
133
167
0.7
26.3
2.8
22.0
30.9
C
16.5
Right Turn
24
26
106.8%
6.2
15
35
0.3
6.1
1.8
4.1
9.2
A
Second Right
Second Left
Subtotal
307
292
95.2%
16.4
263
322
0.9
36.
11.5
29.5
47.2
D
WB Through
U Turn
35
96.0%
5.3
28
45
0.2
30.5
4.0
25.5
36.6
C
Right Turn
8
Second Left
92.4%
2.6
3
12
0.2
11.4
4.6
5.9
20.7
B
Second Right
Left Turn
38
32
83.9%
4.7
25
41
1.0
50.8
3.9
44.5
57.8
D
EB
Through
413
396
95.8%
19.0
368
420
0.9
29.0
1.3
27.1
31.3
C
45.8
Right Turn
56
50
89.5%
9.1
38
69
0.8
8.6
1.1
6.8
10.8
A
Second Right
Subtotal
507
478
94.2%
18.0
459
504
1.3
28.3
'11'
27.1
30.5
C
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
277
269
97.3%
16.5
245
293
0.5
45.0
5.8
38.3
54.4
D
WB
Through
413
393
95.1%
14.3
374
415
1.0
20.5
1.4
18.4
22.8
C
Right Turn
177
168
95.2%
8.9
156
182
0.6
3.7
0.1
3.6
4.0
A
Second Right
Subtotal
867
831
95.8%
24.9
797
885
1.2
25.1
1.8
21.7
28.2
C
Total
2,418
2,305
95.3%
23.5
2,262
2,341
2.3
26.7
1.1
24.0
28.0
C
Intersection 2
Las Gallinas Ave/Nova Albion Way -1-80 EB On-ramp
Signal
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Second Left
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Dev. Minimum
Maximum
GEH
Average
Std. Dev. Minimum Maximum
LOS
U Turn
Second Left
SB Through
113
108
95.2%
10.4
93
124
0.5
Left Turn
143
140
98.1%
15.4 121
167
0.2
34.7
8.0 29.3 54.7
C
NB Through
217
208
96.0%
10.3 187
220
0.6
16.4
2.0 13.9 20.5
B
Right Turn
2
4
182.4%
2.1 1
8
1.0
8.5
6.7 0.4 19.6
A
Second Right
Subtotal
408
386
94.5%
16.5
360
408
1.1
11.1
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
SB Through
113
108
95.2%
10.4
93
124
0.5
26.2
3.1
21.9
30.9
C
Right Turn
295
278
94.2%
15.9
251
303
1.0
5.3
0.6
4.4
6.6
A
Second Right
Subtotal
408
386
94.5%
16.5
360
408
1.1
11.1
1.0
9.3
12.5
B
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
400
375
93.7%
22.0
345
404
1.3
29.9
4.8
20.7
36.1
C
EB Through
1
1
96.0%
0.8
0
2
0.0
14.9
13.6
0.0
34.2
B
Right Turn
205
197
95.9%
15.5
170
221
0.6
11.8
3.1
7.7
16.1
B
Second Right
Subtotal
606
572
94.4%
26.7
535
614
1.4
23.7
4.1
16.5
28.8
C
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
7
6
83.7%
2.1
2
9
0.5
29.0
11.5
10.8
55.7
C
WB Through
36
35
96.0%
5.3
28
45
0.2
30.5
4.0
25.5
36.6
C
Right Turn
8
7
92.4%
2.6
3
12
0.2
11.4
4.6
5.9
20.7
B
Second Right
Subtotal
51
48
93.7%
6.3
42
61
0.5
27.2
4.2
21.2
34.7
C
Total
1,427
1,358
95.2%
45.8
1,294
1,441
1.9
20.2
2.5
16.5
25.8
C
Fehr & Peers 2/23/2015
SimTraffic Post -Processor
Average Results from 10 Runs
Volume and Delay by Movement
Intersection Northgate Drive/Las Gallinas Ave
Las Gallinas / Manuel Freitas Pkwy Intersection Improvement
Existing Plus Alternative 4 (6 Phase)
PM Peak Hour
Signal
Fehr & Peers 2/23/2015
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
GEH
Average
Std. Dev.
Minimum Maximum
LOS
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
41
40
97.2%
6.7
25
50
0.2
34.5
5.0
24.9 43.1
C
NB
Through
21
20
95.5%
4.5
12
26
0.2
34.0
5.1
25.9 44.5
C
Right Turn
136
134
98.5%
9.1
123
147
0.2
3.4
0.5
2.8 4.6
A
Second Right
Subtotal
198
194
97.9%
14.0
177
216
�.6
10.2
B
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
63
64
100.9%
7.8
49
72
0.1
34.7
2.0
31.5 38.3
C
SB
Through
21
20
96.9%
3.2
15
25
0.1
31.9
5.4
21.1 37.5
C
Right Turn
40
42
105.4%
6.7
31
51
0.3
2.0
0.2
1.7 2.3
A
Second Right
Subtotal
124
126
101.7%
11.4
108
140
0.2
23.4
1.8
20.7100NIPW
C
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
25
23
91.8%
6.4
12
33
0.4
51.0
4.3
42.6 56.1
D
EB
Through
968
933
96.4%
35.0
888
991
1.1
21.1
3.0
17.3 28.5
C
Right Turn
39
35
90.3%
9.8
19
50
0.6
14.9
1.7
11.5 17.0
B
Second Right
Subtotal
1,032
991
96.1%
36.5
945
1,046
1.3
21.6
2.9
17.7 28.8
C
U Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
447
434
97.1%
11.1
411
444
0.6
45.2
1.4
43.1 47.4
D
WB
Through
941
901
95.7%
27.8
865
958
1.3
12.0
1.8
9.1 14.7
B
Right Turn
71
64
89.9%
7.2
57
79
0.9
8.7
1.8
6.0 11.2
A
Second Right
Subtotal
1,459
1,399
95.9%
28.3
1,367
1,455
1.6
22.1
1.3
20.1 24.8
C
Total
2,813
2,710
96.3%
51.5
2,629
2,793
2.0
21.4
1.4
19.6 24.5
C
Fehr & Peers 2/23/2015
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existinq PM - Alt 1 (6 Phase) 2123/2015
Intersection: 1: Las Gallinas Ave & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
NB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
T
R
L
T
T
R
L
T
R
L
Maximum Queue (ft)
90
215
194
108
345
168
178
38
170
232
170
170
Average Queue (ft)
27
120
88
19
186
78
88
1
101
141
104
87
95th Queue (ft)
65
189
163
61
313
142
151
20
176
235
195
151
Link Distance (ft)
1106
1106
623
623
193
Upstream Blk Time (%)
4
Queuing Penalty (veh)
30
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
150
150
450
140
110
110
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
0
3
1
0
1
12
15
3
9
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
1
0
0
2
72
73
12
17
Intersection: 1: Las
Gallinas
Ave
& Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
SB
SB
Directions Served
T
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
241
75
Average Queue (ft)
83
15
95th Queue (ft)
166
51
Link Distance (ft)
630
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
2
Queuing Penalty (veh)
4
Intersection: 2: Las
Gallinas
Ave
& Nova Albion
Way
Movement
EB
EB
WB
NB
NB
SB
SB
Directions Served
L
TR
LTR
L
TR
LT
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
169
535
89
174
197
128
181
Average Queue (ft)
139
167
30
89
88
55
68
95th Queue (ft)
198
432
67
157
167
106
136
Link Distance (ft)
677
288
836
155
155
Upstream Blk Time (%)
0
0
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
0
1
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
110
140
Storage Blk Time (%)
24
0
4
2
Queuing Penalty (veh)
49
1
9
2
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 1
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existing PM - Alt 1 (6 Phase) 2123/2015
Intersection: 3: Northgate Drive & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
SB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
TR
L
L
T
TR
LT
R
L
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
153
376
411
284
313
269
318
140
106
102
75
Average Queue (ft)
27
175
205
156
199
121
144
49
28
43
16
95th Queue (ft)
87
320
348
254
284
240
280
109
93
86
52
Link Distance (ft)
411
411
1064
1064
450
229
Upstream Blk Time (%)
0
1
Queuing Penalty (veh)
1
3
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
190
330
330
50
50
Storage Blk Time (%)
7
0
0
13
0
15
2
Queuing Penalty (veh)
2
0
0
18
0
9
1
Intersection: 12: Manuel T Freitas
Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
NB
SB
Directions Served
T
T
R
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
4
9
187
32
Average Queue (ft)
0
0
82
10
95th Queue (ft)
6
7
156
29
Link Distance (ft)
623
623
236
232
Upstream Blk Time (%)
1
1
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
5
0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
70
Storage Blk Time (%)
1
Queuing Penalty (veh)
3
Intersection: 15: Las
Gallinas Ave
Movement
WB
NB
SB
SB
Directions Served
R
T
L
T
Maximum Queue (ft)
138
168
83
12
Average Queue (ft)
56
30
35
0
95th Queue (ft)
112
117
72
10
Link Distance (ft)
171
155
193
Upstream Blk Time (%)
1
1
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
5
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
70
Storage Blk Time (%)
1
Queuing Penalty (veh)
3
Network Summary
Network wide Queuing Penalty: 318
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 2
SimTraffic Post -Processor
Average Results from 10 Runs
Volume and Delay by Movement
Intersection 1 Las Gallinas Ave/Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Las Gallinas / Freitas Parkway
Existing Plus Alternative 6
AM Peak Hour
Signal
Fehr & Peers 51512015
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
I Average
Percent
I Average
Std. Dev.
LOS
Left Turn
43
41
95.6%
66.8
10.6
E
Through
120
117
97.5%
51.4
5.6
D
NB
Right Turn
213
202
95.0%
12.6
2.0
B
Subtotal
I 376
I 360
95.9%
I 31.3
2.1
C
Left Turn
237
226
95.4%
121.4
27.7
F
Through
327
299
91.5%
86.7
23.1
F
SB
Right Turn
34
30
87.0%
57.9
18.5
E
Subtotal
I 598
I 555
92.8%
I 99.3
24.9
F
Left Turn
40
39
98.6%
79.9
17.5
E
Through
654
628
96.0%
64.6
19.6
E
EB
Right Turn
71
63
89.2%
31.9
14.6
C
Subtotal
I 765
I 731
95.5%
I 62.7
18.9
E
Left Turn
343
329
95.8%
68.4
6.5
E
Through
571
550
96.3%
22.3
1.8
C
WB
Right Turn
93
92
98.9%
4.0
0.6
A
Subtotal
1,007
970
96.3%
36.3
3.1
D
Total
2,746
2,616
95.3%
56.3
8.4
E
Intersection 2
Las Gallinas Ave/Nova Albion
Way -1-80 EB On-ramp
Signal
Demand
I Served Volume
(vph)
I Total
Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Average
Std. Dev.
LOS
Left Turn
119
119
99.8%
58.6
4.1
E
Through
55
56
101.6%
32.2
5.3
C
NB
Right Turn
4
4
88.8%
10.5
9.8
B
Subtotal
I 178
I 178
100.1%
I 49.4
3.8
D
Left Turn
2
1
62.4%
36.2
34.1
D
Through
222
215
97.0%
60.1
2.3
E
SB
Right Turn
512
474
92.5%
4.6
0.4
A
Subtotal
I 736
I 690
93.8%
I 22.0
1.0
C
Left Turn
316
300
95.1%
15.8
1.3
B
Through
2
2
91.2%
17.1
13.3
B
EB
Right Turn
183
171
93.4%
6.0
0.9
A
Subtotal
I 501
I 473
94.4%
I 12.3
1.0
B
Left Turn
7
6
86.4%
56.1
19.1
E
Through
21
22
107.0%
64.4
5.1
E
WB
Right Turn
5
4
86.4%
18.5
15.3
B
Subtotal
33
33
99.5%
57.3
4.6
E
Total
1,448
1,374
94.9%
23.0
0.8
C
Fehr & Peers 51512015
SimTraffic Post -Processor
Average Results from 10 Runs
Volume and Delay by Movement
Intersection 3 Northgate Drive/Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Las Gallinas / Freitas Parkway
Existing Plus Alternative 6
AM Peak Hour
Signal
Fehr & Peers 51512015
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
I Average
Percent
I Average
Std. Dev.
LOS
Left Turn
25
25
101.0%
40.7
4.4
D
Through
5
5
97.9%
36.4
13.8
D
NB
Right Turn
25
24
96.8%
2.1
0.2
A
Subtotal
I 55
I 54
98.8%
I 23.2
3.2
C
Left Turn
46
45
97.9%
42.8
6.8
D
Through
17
15
90.4%
39.3
7.0
D
SB
Right Turn
11
12
104.7%
2.0
0.5
A
Subtotal
I 74
I 72
97.2%
I 35.3
4.1
D
Left Turn
28
27
98.1%
51.3
7.6
D
Through
1,172
1,131
96.5%
12.6
1.5
B
EB
Right Turn
31
30
97.5%
10.0
2.2
A
Subtotal
I 1,231
I 1,189
96.6%
I 13.4
1.5
B
Left Turn
348
334
95.9%
46.7
1.3
D
Through
993
954
96.1%
6.6
0.6
A
WB
Right Turn
83
82
99.4%
3.9
0.6
A
Subtotal
1,424
1,371
96.3%
16.2
1.1
B
Total
2,784
2,686
96.5%
15.6
1.1
B
Fehr & Peers 51512015
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existing AM - Alternative 6 5/5/2015
Intersection: 1: Las Gallinas Ave & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
NB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
T
R
L
T
T
R
L
T
R
L
Maximum Queue (ft)
209
731
702
210
491
393
361
160
133
213
169
180
Average Queue (ft)
54
303
275
59
291
128
129
14
40
85
70
169
95th Queue (ft)
152
609
584
183
464
291
260
98
94
172
144
212
Link Distance (ft)
0
1106
1106
0
623
623
16
1
199
4
0
Upstream Blk Time (%)
1
0
0
0
2
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
0
0
0
6
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
150
150
450
140
110
110
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
0
37
28
2
6
1
10
3
55
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
15
20
7
6
3
26
4
199
Intersection: 1: Las
Gallinas
Ave
& Manuel T Freitas
Pkwy
Movement
SB
SB
Directions Served
T
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
676
180
Average Queue (ft)
505
28
95th Queue (ft)
798
110
Link Distance (ft)
630
234
Upstream Blk Time (%)
30
102
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
108
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
169
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
31
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
84
0
Intersection: 2: Las
Gallinas Ave & Nova Albion Way
Movement
EB
EB WB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served
L
TR
LTR
L
TR
LT
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
168
303
88
194
202
234
217
Average Queue (ft)
102
60
30
108
56
169
58
95th Queue (ft)
177
186
70
178
143
245
162
Link Distance (ft)
677
288
836
149
149
Upstream Blk Time (%)
27
1
Queuing Penalty (veh)
100
4
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
110
140
Storage Blk Time (%)
9
0
6
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
16
1
4
0
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 1
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existing AM - Alternative 6 5/5/2015
Intersection: 3: Northgate Drive & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
SB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
TR
L
L
T
TR
LT
R
L
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
177
397
422
226
268
236
221
76
30
88
86
Average Queue (ft)
32
162
190
120
168
89
74
27
2
36
15
95th Queue (ft)
102
338
359
219
242
187
169
65
23
74
51
Link Distance (ft)
411
411
1064
1064
450
229
Upstream Blk Time (%)
0
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
1
2
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
190
330
330
50
50
Storage Blk Time (%)
5
0
6
0
14
2
Queuing Penalty (veh)
1
0
2
0
4
1
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 509
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 2
SimTraffic Post -Processor
Average Results from 10 Runs
Volume and Delay by Movement
Intersection 1 Las Gallinas Ave/Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Las Gallinas / Freitas Parkway
Existing Plus Alternative 6
PM Peak Hour
Signal
Intersection 2 Las Gallinas Ave/Nova Albion Way -1-80 EB On-ramp
Signal
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
I Average
Percent
I Average
Std. Dev.
LOS
Left Turn
155
146
94.1%
62.0
4.5
E
Through
258
241
93.5%
29.7
1.8
C
NB
Right Turn
324
308
95.0%
10.2
1.0
B
Subtotal
I 737
I 695
94.3%
I 27.9
1.1
C
Left Turn
125
117
93.8%
55.9
4.5
E
Through
158
150
94.7%
29.3
2.7
C
SB
Right Turn
24
23
96.4%
6.6
0.9
A
Subtotal
I 307
I 290
94.5%
I 38.2
2.6
D
Left Turn
38
33
87.7%
51.3
5.5
D
Through
413
391
94.7%
35.5
1.5
D
EB
Right Turn
56
55
98.7%
9.3
1.5
A
Subtotal
I 507
I 480
94.6%
I 33.6
1.6
C
Left Turn
277
266
95.9%
64.3
6.5
E
Through
413
401
97.0%
24.2
1.6
C
WB
Right Turn
177
166
93.8%
3.8
0.2
A
Subtotal
867
832
96.0%
32.9
2.2
C
Total
2,418
2,297
95.0%
32.2
0.9
C
Intersection 2 Las Gallinas Ave/Nova Albion Way -1-80 EB On-ramp
Signal
Fehr & Peers 51512015
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
I Average
Percent
I Average
Std. Dev.
LOS
Left Turn
143
137
95.6%
34.5
2.9
C
Through
217
208
96.0%
17.9
1.6
B
NB
Right Turn
2
2
91.2%
7.2
5.4
A
Subtotal
I 362
I 347
95.8%
I 24.4
1.4
C
Left Turn
Through
113
108
95.5%
25.5
1.7
C
SB
Right Turn
295
288
97.5%
5.5
0.5
A
Subtotal
I 408
I 395
96.9%
I 10.9
1.0
B
Left Turn
400
382
95.5%
33.0
5.1
C
Through
1
1
96.0%
18.0
30.4
B
EB
Right Turn
205
194
94.8%
12.9
3.7
B
Subtotal
I 606
I 577
95.2%
I 26.2
4.5
C
Left Turn
7
6
79.5%
29.0
4.4
C
Through
36
34
94.4%
30.3
3.7
C
WB
Right Turn
8
8
102.0%
11.7
6.0
B
Subtotal
51
48
93.6%
27.0
3.3
C
Total
1,427
1,367
95.8%
21.4
2.1
C
Fehr & Peers 51512015
SimTraffic Post -Processor
Average Results from 10 Runs
Volume and Delay by Movement
Intersection 3 Northgate Drive/Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Las Gallinas / Freitas Parkway
Existing Plus Alternative 6
PM Peak Hour
Signal
Fehr & Peers 51512015
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
I Average
Percent
I Average
Std. Dev.
LOS
Left Turn
41
40
97.2%
37.2
5.4
D
Through
21
19
91.0%
39.4
8.8
D
NB
Right Turn
136
131
96.5%
3.4
0.9
A
Subtotal
I 198
I 190
96.0%
I 14.0
2.5
B
Left Turn
63
64
101.8%
34.4
3.6
C
Through
21
20
95.1%
29.4
5.9
C
SB
Right Turn
40
39
97.7%
2.2
0.3
A
Subtotal
I 124
I 123
99.3%
I 23.4
2.6
C
Left Turn
25
22
87.9%
50.0
4.2
D
Through
968
923
95.4%
23.9
3.9
C
EB
Right Turn
39
40
101.4%
17.3
5.0
B
Subtotal
I 1,032
I 985
95.4%
I 24.2
3.8
C
Left Turn
447
441
98.6%
46.3
2.3
D
Through
941
901
95.7%
11.5
1.3
B
WB
Right Turn
71
66
92.8%
7.5
1.5
A
Subtotal
1,459
1,408
96.5%
22.2
1.4
C
Total
2,813
2,705
96.2%
22.4
1.7
C
Fehr & Peers 51512015
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existinq PM - Alt 6 5/5/2015
Intersection: 1: Las Gallinas Ave & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
NB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
T
R
L
T
T
R
L
T
R
L
Maximum Queue (ft)
144
230
199
77
416
202
210
137
170
246
170
173
Average Queue (ft)
30
133
104
20
215
79
87
7
125
159
120
95
95th Queue (ft)
83
198
179
53
360
156
162
66
187
256
204
158
Link Distance (ft)
1106
1106
623
623
193
Upstream Blk Time (%)
8
Queuing Penalty (veh)
60
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
150
150
450
140
110
110
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
5
2
0
2
23
17
3
8
Queuing Penalty (veh)
2
1
0
4
132
81
12
15
Intersection: 1: Las
Gallinas
Ave
& Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
SB
SB
Directions Served
T
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
211
99
Average Queue (ft)
95
16
95th Queue (ft)
178
63
Link Distance (ft)
630
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
5
Queuing Penalty (veh)
8
Intersection: 2: Las
Gallinas
Ave
& Nova Albion
Way
Movement
EB
EB
WB
NB
NB
SB
SB
Directions Served
L
TR
LTR
L
TR
LT
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
170
517
89
191
224
143
183
Average Queue (ft)
144
178
29
89
88
58
74
95th Queue (ft)
196
444
67
156
168
119
148
Link Distance (ft)
677
288
836
155
155
Upstream Blk Time (%)
0
1
Queuing Penalty (veh)
1
1
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
110
140
Storage Blk Time (%)
28
0
3
2
Queuing Penalty (veh)
58
2
6
3
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 1
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existing PM - Alt 6 5/5/2015
Intersection: 3: Northgate Drive & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
SB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
TR
L
L
T
TR
LT
R
L
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
167
380
400
304
325
238
314
144
108
95
112
Average Queue (ft)
28
199
224
161
203
111
142
47
25
46
21
95th Queue (ft)
103
343
365
262
288
219
267
107
91
87
75
Link Distance (ft)
411
411
1064
1064
450
229
Upstream Blk Time (%)
0
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
2
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
190
330
330
50
50
Storage Blk Time (%)
0
11
0
0
14
0
15
2
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
3
0
1
19
0
9
1
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 421
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 2
SimTraffic Post -Processor Freitas Parkway Las Gallinas Intersection Improvements
Average Results from 10 Runs 2020 No Project
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Las Gallinas Avenue/Manuel T Freitas Parkway Signal
Fehr & Peers 51612015
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
I Average
Percent
I Average
Std. Dev.
LOS
Left Turn
52
45
87.3%
51.2
10.7
D
Through
152
150
98.4%
24.5
2.5
C
NB
Right Turn
184
178
96.9%
10.8
0.7
B
Subtotal
I 388
I 373
96.2%
I 21.2
2.2
C
Left Turn
400
286
71.4%
139.3
9.1
F
Through
434
312
71.9%
118.0
4.8
F
SB
Right Turn
35
21
59.2%
85.0
8.2
F
Subtotal
I 869
I 619
71.2%
I 126.8
6.8
F
Left Turn
36
32
88.0%
133.0
38.2
F
Through
755
691
91.5%
123.4
39.2
F
EB
Right Turn
81
80
98.3%
86.0
39.8
F
Subtotal
I 872
I 802
91.9%
I 120.0
39.1
F
Left Turn
355
331
93.4%
161.7
53.5
F
Through
487
482
99.0%
18.5
1.4
B
WB
Right Turn
178
173
97.3%
4.9
0.4
A
Subtotal
1,020
987
96.8%
64.2
18.1
E
Total
3,149
2,780
88.3%
88.4
7.2
F
Intersection 2
Las Gallinas Parkway/Nova Albion Way -1-80 EB On-ramp
Signal
Demand
I Served Volume
(vph)
I Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Average
Std. Dev.
LOS
Left Turn
160
153
95.8%
76.9
17.5
E
Through
105
102
97.6%
28.8
5.9
C
NB
Right Turn
3
3
108.8%
18.7
12.6
B
Subtotal
I 268
I 259
96.6%
I 57.4
13.6
E
Left Turn
6
5
88.0%
50.0
12.7
D
Through
387
320
82.8%
49.1
1.4
D
SB
Right Turn
472
400
84.7%
5.1
0.4
A
Subtotal
I 865
I 726
83.9%
I 24.9
0.7
C
Left Turn
279
268
96.1%
23.0
2.1
C
Through
3
3
105.6%
16.0
12.6
B
EB
Right Turn
254
244
95.9%
9.7
1.0
A
Subtotal
I 536
I 515
96.1%
I 16.7
1.4
B
Left Turn
14
13
94.6%
55.6
15.6
E
Through
38
36
95.5%
63.1
4.9
E
WB
Right Turn
4
4
91.2%
18.9
17.5
B
Subtotal
56
53
95.0%
58.4
4.7
E
Total
1,725
1,553
90.0%
28.7
2.5
C
Fehr & Peers 51612015
SimTraffic Post -Processor Freitas Parkway Las Gallinas Intersection Improvements
Average Results from 10 Runs 2020 No Project
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Northgate Drive/Manuel T Freitas Parkway Signal
Fehr & Peers 51612015
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
I Average
Percent
I Average
Std. Dev.
LOS
Left Turn
48
48
99.0%
41.2
4.4
D
Through
27
26
96.0%
40.3
5.5
D
NB
Right Turn
73
75
102.3%
3.7
0.9
A
Subtotal
I 148
I 148
100.1%
I 22.0
2.3
C
Left Turn
76
74
97.8%
38.3
3.0
D
Through
29
27
92.4%
37.4
4.1
D
SB
Right Turn
22
21
95.1%
2.7
1.3
A
Subtotal
I 127
I 122
96.1%
I 32.0
2.8
C
Left Turn
63
52
82.6%
49.3
5.0
D
Through
1,285
1,127
87.7%
13.6
1.1
B
EB
Right Turn
118
106
90.1%
10.7
1.2
B
Subtotal
I 1,466
I 1,286
87.7%
I 14.8
1.2
B
Left Turn
475
453
95.4%
68.8
14.1
E
Through
972
953
98.0%
13.9
2.7
B
WB
Right Turn
175
171
97.6%
9.1
2.0
A
Subtotal
1,622
1,577
97.2%
29.3
5.2
C
Total
3,363
3,133
93.1%
23.1
2.8
C
Fehr & Peers 51612015
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existing AM 2/3/2015
Intersection: 1: Las Gallinas Ave & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
NB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
T
R
L
T
T
R
L
T
R
L
Maximum Queue (ft)
200
916
892
130
210
694
610
117
160
205
166
180
Average Queue (ft)
60
510
488
62
205
511
287
6
48
87
72
177
95th Queue (ft)
175
960
928
163
234
856
653
63
112
174
140
194
Link Distance (ft)
1
1120
1120
1
623
623
33
4
212
25
1
Upstream Blk Time (%)
1
1
34
0
1
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
0
171
2
3
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
140
70
150
140
110
110
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
61
66
1
69
0
2
2
5
2
62
Queuing Penalty (veh)
22
54
2
168
1
4
6
13
4
293
Intersection: 1: Las
Gallinas
Ave
& Manuel T Freitas
Pkwy
Movement
SB
SB
Directions Served
T
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
682
148
Average Queue (ft)
652
15
95th Queue (ft)
682
94
Link Distance (ft)
631
228
Upstream Blk Time (%)
73
114
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
140
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
199
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
44
263
Queuing Penalty (veh)
193
296
Intersection: 2: Las
Gallinas Ave & Nova Albion Way
Movement
EB
EB WB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served
L
TR
LTR
L
TR
LT
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
169
344
124
199
361
228
215
Average Queue (ft)
114
109
50
140
112
199
58
95th Queue (ft)
188
263
102
213
296
252
154
Link Distance (ft)
677
288
836
149
149
Upstream Blk Time (%)
38
1
Queuing Penalty (veh)
167
4
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
110
140
Storage Blk Time (%)
13
1
23
1
Queuing Penalty (veh)
33
4
25
1
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 1
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existing AM 2/3/2015
Intersection: 3: Northgate Drive & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
SB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
TR
L
L
T
TR
LT
R
L
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
153
326
338
311
367
450
355
166
106
103
136
Average Queue (ft)
47
132
163
204
241
166
151
63
19
51
30
95th Queue (ft)
106
245
271
325
354
353
291
127
81
93
93
Link Distance (ft)
411
411
1064
1064
450
229
Upstream Blk Time (%)
0
0
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
1
0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
190
330
330
50
50
Storage Blk Time (%)
0
2
1
3
0
22
0
21
5
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
1
3
16
2
16
0
11
4
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 1223
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 2
SimTraffic Post -Processor Freitas Parkway Las Gallinas Intersection Improvements
Average Results from 10 Runs 2020 No Project
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Las Gallinas Avenue/Manuel T Freitas Parkway Signal
Intersection 2 Las Gallinas Parkway/Nova Albion Way -1-80 EB On-ramp Signal
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
I Average
Percent
I Average
Std. Dev.
LOS
Left Turn
173
163
94.2%
38.4
3.4
D
Through
327
308
94.2%
25.7
1.4
C
NB
Right Turn
353
335
94.9%
10.6
1.2
B
Subtotal
I 853
I 806
94.5%
I 22.0
1.8
C
Left Turn
167
153
91.5%
97.8
29.3
F
Through
181
176
97.0%
43.9
19.4
D
SB
Right Turn
26
29
112.2%
22.9
19.5
C
Subtotal
I 374
I 358
95.6%
I 65.4
24.2
E
Left Turn
62
56
90.6%
47.8
3.9
D
Through
467
445
95.3%
30.0
1.4
C
EB
Right Turn
92
90
97.7%
4.6
1.2
A
Subtotal
I 621
I 591
95.1%
I 27.8
1.2
C
Left Turn
302
288
95.2%
51.1
10.1
D
Through
571
549
96.1%
21.3
0.9
C
WB
Right Turn
300
286
95.3%
5.8
0.7
A
Subtotal
1,173
1,122
95.7%
25.1
3.2
C
Total
3,021
2,877
95.2%
29.7
3.6
C
Intersection 2 Las Gallinas Parkway/Nova Albion Way -1-80 EB On-ramp Signal
Fehr & Peers 51612015
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
I Average
Percent
I Average
Std. Dev.
LOS
Left Turn
167
156
93.2%
45.5
6.0
D
Through
304
290
95.3%
20.0
2.4
B
NB
Right Turn
6
5
89.6%
12.7
7.4
B
Subtotal
I 477
I 451
94.5%
I 28.7
3.7
C
Left Turn
6
6
104.0%
32.2
9.9
C
Through
223
217
97.3%
28.3
2.6
C
SB
Right Turn
263
244
92.9%
5.2
0.7
A
Subtotal
I 492
I 467
95.0%
I 16.2
1.3
B
Left Turn
422
395
93.7%
54.0
20.1
D
Through
6
6
97.6%
49.7
27.2
D
EB
Right Turn
171
161
94.2%
27.6
17.6
C
Subtotal
I 599
I 562
93.9%
I 46.4
19.4
D
Left Turn
16
17
108.0%
33.1
6.2
C
Through
56
55
98.4%
34.5
3.2
C
WB
Right Turn
15
15
99.8%
17.6
3.8
B
Subtotal
87
87
100.4%
31.3
2.7
C
Total
1,655
1,568
94.7%
31.5
8.1
C
Fehr & Peers 51612015
SimTraffic Post -Processor Freitas Parkway Las Gallinas Intersection Improvements
Average Results from 10 Runs 2020 No Project
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Northgate Drive/Manuel T Freitas Parkway Signal
Fehr & Peers 51612015
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
I Average
Percent
I Average
Std. Dev.
LOS
Left Turn
173
167
96.5%
34.7
2.6
C
Through
66
64
96.6%
36.0
2.3
D
NB
Right Turn
208
200
96.3%
11.2
1.6
B
Subtotal
I 447
I 431
96.4%
I 23.9
1.8
C
Left Turn
114
110
96.6%
29.1
2.5
C
Through
40
38
95.0%
25.9
3.5
C
SB
Right Turn
52
54
103.6%
2.7
0.6
A
Subtotal
I 206
I 202
98.1%
I 21.4
2.6
C
Left Turn
43
38
87.7%
58.5
5.7
E
Through
1,023
972
95.1%
53.2
8.1
D
EB
Right Turn
91
85
93.6%
46.6
9.2
D
Subtotal
I 1,157
I 1,095
94.7%
I 52.9
7.8
D
Left Turn
500
456
91.2%
46.9
2.8
D
Through
1,103
1,048
95.0%
27.8
2.9
C
WB
Right Turn
141
134
95.3%
27.0
5.0
C
Subtotal
1,744
1,639
94.0%
33.1
2.3
C
Total
3,554
3,367
94.7%
37.7
3.3
D
Fehr & Peers 51612015
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existing PM 2/3/2015
Intersection: 1: Las Gallinas Ave & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
NB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
T
R
L
T
T
R
L
T
R
L
Maximum Queue (ft)
145
236
220
130
210
437
390
198
169
240
170
179
Average Queue (ft)
54
139
117
36
174
198
167
34
114
171
129
134
95th Queue (ft)
111
208
200
127
244
397
328
155
188
260
204
209
Link Distance (ft)
1
1120
1120
6
623
623
78
3
206
22
10
Upstream Blk Time (%)
6
Queuing Penalty (veh)
55
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
140
70
150
140
110
110
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
0
9
22
0
24
2
4
1
13
20
4
40
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
6
21
0
68
5
13
3
86
106
21
82
Intersection: 1: Las
Gallinas
Ave
& Manuel T Freitas
Pkwy
Movement
SB
SB
Directions Served
T
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
543
144
Average Queue (ft)
206
9
95th Queue (ft)
495
69
Link Distance (ft)
631
217
Upstream Blk Time (%)
5
158
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
113
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
116
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
7
641
Queuing Penalty (veh)
14
263
Intersection: 2: Las
Gallinas Ave & Nova Albion Way
Movement
EB
EB WB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served
L
TR
LTR
L
TR
LT
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
170
636
125
198
335
217
149
Average Queue (ft)
158
302
52
113
137
116
60
95th Queue (ft)
197
641
103
189
263
196
119
Link Distance (ft)
677
288
836
155
155
Upstream Blk Time (%)
6
4
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
11
0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
110
140
Storage Blk Time (%)
44
1
7
6
Queuing Penalty (veh)
78
3
22
10
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 1
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existing PM 2/3/2015
Intersection: 3: Northgate Drive & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
SB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
TR
L
L
T
TR
LT
R
L
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
250
501
505
310
375
596
554
404
110
108
186
Average Queue (ft)
80
355
382
163
214
241
314
183
87
63
44
95th Queue (ft)
232
534
551
262
318
446
498
336
150
107
130
Link Distance (ft)
411
411
1064
1064
450
229
Upstream Blk Time (%)
8
14
0
0
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
47
80
0
0
0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
190
330
330
50
50
Storage Blk Time (%)
43
0
0
1
46
0
23
4
Queuing Penalty (veh)
18
0
1
6
96
1
21
5
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 881
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 2
SimTraffic Post -Processor Freitas Parkway Las Gallinas Intersection Improvements
Average Results from 10 Runs 2020 Plus Alt 3 w LPI
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Las Gallinas Avenue/Manuel T Freitas Parkway Signal
Fehr & Peers 51612015
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
I Average
Percent
I Average
Std. Dev.
LOS
Left Turn
52
46
89.0%
57.9
17.5
E
Through
152
157
103.3%
25.8
2.2
C
NB
Right Turn
184
173
93.9%
10.7
1.1
B
Subtotal
I 388
I 376
96.9%
I 23.1
3.2
C
Left Turn
400
239
59.8%
178.6
8.2
F
Through
434
261
60.1%
142.8
7.0
F
SB
Right Turn
35
21
59.0%
107.7
14.0
F
Subtotal
I 869
I 521
59.9%
I 157.9
7.9
F
Left Turn
36
34
94.7%
100.3
24.7
F
Through
755
727
96.3%
88.4
20.1
F
EB
Right Turn
81
82
101.1%
52.3
16.4
D
Subtotal
I 872
I 843
96.7%
I 85.3
19.5
F
Left Turn
355
335
94.3%
102.3
39.9
F
Through
487
465
95.5%
17.7
1.1
B
WB
Right Turn
178
170
95.3%
5.2
0.4
A
Subtotal
1,020
969
95.0%
44.6
13.6
D
Total
3,149
2,709
86.0%
76.1
3.9
E
Intersection 2
Las Gallinas Parkway/Nova Albion Way -1-80 EB On-ramp
Signal
Demand
I Served Volume
(vph)
I Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Average
Std. Dev.
LOS
Left Turn
160
148
92.8%
71.7
12.1
E
Through
105
104
99.2%
29.2
4.1
C
NB
Right Turn
3
3
115.2%
12.7
9.5
B
Subtotal
I 268
I 256
95.5%
I 53.7
8.6
D
Left Turn
6
6
94.4%
43.5
14.3
D
Through
387
306
79.0%
48.4
2.4
D
SB
Right Turn
472
370
78.3%
4.9
0.7
A
Subtotal
I 865
I 681
78.7%
I 24.7
1.0
C
Left Turn
279
269
96.5%
22.0
1.3
C
Through
3
3
105.6%
18.5
14.4
B
EB
Right Turn
254
246
96.8%
9.1
0.6
A
Subtotal
I 536
I 518
96.7%
I 15.9
0.8
B
Left Turn
14
15
107.0%
64.1
9.1
E
Through
38
33
87.2%
65.1
7.4
E
WB
Right Turn
4
4
100.8%
20.8
19.5
C
Subtotal
I 56
I 52
93.1%
I 61.1
6.2
E
Total
1,725
1,507
87.4%
27.8
1.3
C
Fehr & Peers 51612015
SimTraffic Post -Processor Freitas Parkway Las Gallinas Intersection Improvements
Average Results from 10 Runs 2020 Plus Alt 3 w LPI
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Northgate Drive/Manuel T Freitas Parkway Signal
Fehr & Peers 51612015
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
I Average
Percent
I Average
Std. Dev.
LOS
Left Turn
48
46
96.8%
39.8
3.7
D
Through
27
30
111.3%
42.1
6.2
D
NB
Right Turn
73
72
98.6%
4.0
1.0
A
Subtotal
I 148
I 149
100.3%
I 23.0
2.5
C
Left Turn
76
73
95.6%
40.2
4.6
D
Through
29
28
95.3%
33.9
4.8
C
SB
Right Turn
22
23
103.0%
2.3
0.5
A
Subtotal
I 127
I 123
96.8%
I 31.7
2.6
C
Left Turn
63
55
86.7%
50.7
4.1
D
Through
1,285
1,115
86.8%
13.5
1.1
B
EB
Right Turn
118
103
87.0%
10.2
1.5
B
Subtotal
I 1,466
I 1,272
86.8%
I 14.8
1.1
B
Left Turn
475
451
95.1%
68.4
12.2
E
Through
972
931
95.8%
13.0
2.0
B
WB
Right Turn
175
171
97.9%
8.8
0.9
A
Subtotal
1,622
1,554
95.8%
28.8
3.9
C
Total
3,363
3,098
92.1%
22.9
2.0
C
Fehr & Peers 51612015
Queuing and Blocking Report
2020 AM - Alt 1 (6 Phase) with LPI Phase 213/2015
Intersection: 1: Las Gallinas Ave & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
NB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
T
R
L
T
T
R
L
T
R
L
Maximum Queue (ft)
210
718
693
210
509
554
478
132
130
204
162
180
Average Queue (ft)
71
396
373
102
336
220
156
32
44
83
61
179
95th Queue (ft)
205
701
684
249
564
634
425
88
104
166
130
188
Link Distance (ft)
2
1106
1106
1
623
623
31
4
199
20
1
Upstream Blk Time (%)
11
0
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
57
1
2
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
150
150
450
150
110
110
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
0
54
48
0
20
0
1
0
2
5
2
75
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
20
39
1
47
0
2
0
8
12
4
354
Intersection: 1: Las
Gallinas
Ave
& Manuel T Freitas
Pkwy
Movement
SB
SB
Directions Served
T
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
678
167
Average Queue (ft)
649
30
95th Queue (ft)
667
122
Link Distance (ft)
627
232
Upstream Blk Time (%)
80
110
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
133
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
196
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
40
235
Queuing Penalty (veh)
172
260
Intersection: 2: Las
Gallinas Ave & Nova Albion Way
Movement
EB
EB WB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served
L
TR
LTR
L
TR
LT
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
169
310
141
196
332
232
202
Average Queue (ft)
110
99
47
133
100
196
55
95th Queue (ft)
181
235
101
205
260
249
145
Link Distance (ft)
677
288
836
149
149
Upstream Blk Time (%)
36
1
Queuing Penalty (veh)
154
2
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
110
140
Storage Blk Time (%)
12
2
18
1
Queuing Penalty (veh)
31
4
20
1
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 1
Queuing and Blocking Report
2020 AM - Alt 1 (6 Phase) with LPI Phase 213/2015
Intersection: 3: Northgate Drive & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
SB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
TR
L
L
T
TR
LT
R
L
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
161
314
336
331
366
488
510
169
108
105
140
Average Queue (ft)
49
131
161
198
238
155
148
64
21
52
31
95th Queue (ft)
111
239
264
314
350
350
333
128
87
96
94
Link Distance (ft)
411
411
1064
1064
450
229
Upstream Blk Time (%)
0
0
0
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
1
0
0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
190
330
330
50
50
Storage Blk Time (%)
1
0
3
0
23
0
22
5
Queuing Penalty (veh)
1
2
15
1
17
0
11
4
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 983
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 2
SimTraffic Post -Processor Freitas Parkway Las Gallinas Intersection Improvements
Average Results from 10 Runs 2020 Plus Alt 3 w LPI
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 1 Las Gallinas Avenue/Manuel T Freitas Parkway Signal
Intersection 2 Las Gallinas Parkway/Nova Albion Way -1-80 EB On-ramp Signal
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
I Average
Percent
I Average
Std. Dev.
LOS
Left Turn
173
169
97.6%
53.6
10.8
D
Through
327
303
92.5%
32.9
2.8
C
NB
Right Turn
353
331
93.9%
13.1
0.5
B
Subtotal
I 853
I 803
94.1%
I 29.1
3.6
C
Left Turn
167
137
82.2%
265.9
91.5
F
Through
181
151
83.4%
156.6
69.7
F
SB
Right Turn
26
22
84.6%
115.5
73.7
F
Subtotal
I 374
I 310
83.0%
I 203.2
82.9
F
Left Turn
62
59
95.7%
47.5
4.2
D
Through
467
440
94.2%
29.8
1.7
C
EB
Right Turn
92
90
97.8%
10.4
1.4
B
Subtotal
I 621
I 589
94.9%
I 28.6
1.5
C
Left Turn
302
287
95.0%
55.7
14.7
E
Through
571
561
98.3%
21.5
1.1
C
WB
Right Turn
300
297
99.1%
11.3
1.3
B
Subtotal
1,173
1,146
97.7%
27.4
4.0
C
Total
3,021
2,848
94.3%
46.3
6.7
D
Intersection 2 Las Gallinas Parkway/Nova Albion Way -1-80 EB On-ramp Signal
Fehr & Peers 51612015
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
I Average
Percent
I Average
Std. Dev.
LOS
Left Turn
167
158
94.9%
46.0
5.0
D
Through
304
284
93.4%
23.7
2.7
C
NB
Right Turn
6
6
97.6%
15.6
8.8
B
Subtotal
I 477
I 448
94.0%
I 31.5
3.6
C
Left Turn
6
5
84.8%
23.8
9.0
C
Through
223
205
92.1%
27.6
2.2
C
SB
Right Turn
263
237
90.0%
5.6
0.6
A
Subtotal
I 492
I 447
90.9%
I 15.9
1.1
B
Left Turn
422
401
95.1%
89.1
34.1
F
Through
6
6
97.6%
78.9
39.6
E
EB
Right Turn
171
155
90.9%
53.0
24.8
D
Subtotal
I 599
I 563
93.9%
I 79.0
31.3
E
Left Turn
16
16
100.2%
32.2
4.2
C
Through
56
54
96.0%
34.3
3.2
C
WB
Right Turn
15
15
103.0%
17.1
4.0
B
Subtotal
I 87
I 85
98.0%
I 30.9
2.6
C
Total
1,655
1,543
93.3%
44.0
11.0
D
Fehr & Peers 51612015
SimTraffic Post -Processor Freitas Parkway Las Gallinas Intersection Improvements
Average Results from 10 Runs 2020 Plus Alt 3 w LPI
Volume and Delay by Movement PM Peak Hour
Intersection 3 Northgate Drive/Manuel T Freitas Parkway Signal
Fehr & Peers 51612015
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
I Average
Percent
I Average
Std. Dev.
LOS
Left Turn
173
169
97.4%
34.1
3.3
C
Through
66
62
94.1%
35.5
2.9
D
NB
Right Turn
208
205
98.4%
10.9
3.3
B
Subtotal
I 447
I 435
97.4%
I 23.4
3.0
C
Left Turn
114
103
90.4%
29.1
3.3
C
Through
40
37
93.1%
23.8
3.0
C
SB
Right Turn
52
54
103.0%
2.5
0.4
A
Subtotal
I 206
I 194
94.1%
I 20.7
2.5
C
Left Turn
43
40
92.2%
54.2
5.5
D
Through
1,023
948
92.6%
48.9
8.7
D
EB
Right Turn
91
86
94.6%
42.0
9.7
D
Subtotal
I 1,157
I 1,073
92.8%
I 48.5
8.6
D
Left Turn
500
468
93.5%
48.7
2.9
D
Through
1,103
1,076
97.5%
30.3
3.3
C
WB
Right Turn
141
142
100.4%
29.8
3.9
C
Subtotal
1,744
1,685
96.6%
35.4
2.9
D
Total
3,554
3,387
95.3%
37.2
3.4
D
Fehr & Peers 51612015
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existinq PM - Alt 1 (6 Phase) 213/2015
Intersection: 1: Las Gallinas Ave & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
NB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
T
R
L
T
T
R
L
T
R
L
Maximum Queue (ft)
141
236
211
121
420
307
303
209
170
257
170
180
Average Queue (ft)
49
126
102
31
218
132
141
86
127
184
137
168
95th Queue (ft)
104
199
180
78
381
275
265
187
201
260
212
215
Link Distance (ft)
1
1106
1106
8
623
623
103
3
193
25
14
Upstream Blk Time (%)
0
0
15
Queuing Penalty (veh)
1
0
125
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
150
150
450
150
110
110
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
0
4
1
0
2
3
1
23
27
6
82
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
2
1
0
5
10
3
155
140
32
170
Intersection: 1: Las
Gallinas
Ave
& Manuel T Freitas
Pkwy
Movement
SB
SB
Directions Served
T
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
658
173
Average Queue (ft)
482
25
95th Queue (ft)
844
95
Link Distance (ft)
627
206
Upstream Blk Time (%)
51
163
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
116
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
109
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
16
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
30
0
Intersection: 2: Las
Gallinas Ave & Nova Albion Way
Movement
EB
EB WB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served
L
TR
LTR
L
TR
LT
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
170
713
124
199
399
206
174
Average Queue (ft)
163
448
50
116
149
109
65
95th Queue (ft)
190
840
96
195
299
186
133
Link Distance (ft)
677
288
836
155
155
Upstream Blk Time (%)
24
3
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
8
1
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
110
140
Storage Blk Time (%)
58
1
8
8
Queuing Penalty (veh)
103
3
25
14
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 1
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existing PM - Alt 1 (6 Phase)
Intersection: 3: Northgate Drive & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
Directions Served
L
T
TR
L
L
T
Maximum Queue (ft)
249
485
490
293
378
614
Average Queue (ft)
61
322
350
169
220
264
95th Queue (ft)
184
518
536
263
327
495
Link Distance (ft)
411
411
22
1064
Upstream Blk Time (%)
20
7
12
Queuing Penalty (veh)
43
70
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
190
330
330
Storage Blk Time (%)
35
0
0
2
Queuing Penalty (veh)
15
0
2
12
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 1090
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement
SF14-0781
WB
NB
NB
SB
TR
LT
R
L
649
367
110
108
343
178
85
58
575
331
151
105
1064
450
0
0
50
50
45
0
22
94
1
20
2/3/2015
SB
TR
178
40
118
229
0
0
4
4
SimTraffic Report
Page 2
SimTraffic Post -Processor Freitas Parkway Las Gallinas Intersection Improvements
Average Results from 10 Runs 2020 Plus Alternative 4 (8 Phase)
Volume and Delay by Movement AM Peak Hour
In[ersec[ion1
Las Gallinas Ave nue/Manuel T Freitas Parkway
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Signal
Delay (sec/veh)
Demand
Movement
Volume (vph)
Served Volume
(vph)
Std. Dev
Minimum
Maximum
Total
Delay (sec/veh)
Std. Dev.
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Dev
Minimum Maximum
GEH
Average
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
LOS
U Turn
Second Left
Second Left
Left Turn
48
44
92.2%
7.8
30
57
0.6
40.1
5.6
30.8
Left Turn
52
50
96.9%
7.3
39
60
0.2
76.1
18.2
50.6
101.2
E
NB
Through
152
151
99.6%
10.9
132
17I
0.0
54.5
4.3
48.2
59.5
D
2.7
Right Turn
184
181
98.2%
12.8
154
192
0.2
15.9
1.4
13.9
18.7
B
hecond Right
Subtotal
148
141
95.4%
9.6
127
154
0.6
22.1
2.6
1].]
A Subtotal
388
383
98.6%
10.1
363 ,
396
0.3
39.2
3.9
33.2
43.9
D
"U Turn
Second Left
Second Left
Lek Turn
]6
67
88.5%
7.4
53
79
1.0
38.2
2.5
33.0
Left Turn
400
230
57.6%
13.8
206
250
9.6
190.8
12.9
169.0
210.3
F
SB
Through
434
236
54.3%
18.4
208
263
30.8
145.0
12.5
127.6
164.9
F
2.0
Right Turn
35
18
51.8%
4.8
30
26
3.3
108.2
8.0
96.7
125.5
F
hecond Right
Subtotal
127
120
94.6%
8.1
107
130
0.6
31.3
2.2
28.2
Subtotal
869
484
55.7%
31.6
434
535
14.8
165.4
11.6
146.0
183.3
F
L Turn
Second Left
Second Left
Lek Turn
63
53
84.0%
7.5
36
60
1.3
47.6
2.7
42.5
Left Turn
36
30
83.7%
6.7
18
38
1.0
205.6
32.8
152.7
247.5
F
EB
Through
755
725
96.1%
44.9
636
]]4
1.1
192.7
29.9
124.1
228.0
F
15.3
Right Turn
81
78
96.096
9.4
59
92
0.4
160.5
35.8
87.9
213.8
F
hecond Right
L Subtotal
1,466
1,270
86.6%
47.6
1,210
1,336
5.3
21.6
1.6
19.4
Subtotal
872
833
95.5%
56.8
712
900
1.3
190.1
30.1
121.6
227.2
F
11 Turn
Second Lek
Second Left
Left Turn
4
452
95.2%
22.0
424
494
1.1
65.8
9.6
54.4
Left Turn
355
344
96.9%
11.7
332
367
0.6
87.6
17.3
68.9
129.1
F
WB
Through
487
465
95.5%
21.2
429
489
1.0
21.0
1.9
18.8
25.4
C
7.0
Right Turn
178
169
94.9%
13.9
150
191
0.7
3.9
0.2
3.7
4.2
A
Second Right
Subtotal
1,622
1,564
96.4%
42.6
1,508
1,620
1.4
2].1
3.4
22.9
Subtotal
1,020
9]8
95.9%
17.3
953
999
1.3
41.4
5.8
34.8
55.1
D
22.8
Total
3,149
2,6]8
85.0%
56.]
2,604
2,]82
8.]
109.5
10.0
8].8
119.8
F
Inter section2
Las Gallinas Parkway/Nova
Albion Way -1-80 EB On-ramp
Signal
Demand
Served Volume
(vph)
Total
Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Dev
Minimum Maximum
GEH
Average
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
LOS
UT r.
Second Left
Left Turn
160
154
96.1%
10.4
135
164
0.5
71.1
7.1
63.1
83.3
E
NB
Through
105
108
102.8%
11.2
89
131
0.3
29.2
3.0
24.3
34.8
C
Right Turn
3
3
102.4%
1.7
1
6
0.0
15.1
10.0
1.2
37.8
B
hecond Right
Subtotal
268
265
98.8%
16.8
237
296
0.2
53.4
5.2
46.9
63.0
D
11 Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
6
5
81.6%
1.3
3
]
0.5
54.0
13.7
35.1
79.6
D
SB
Through
387
291
75.3%
12.8
272
314
5.2
55.6
2.7
52.4
61.2
E
Right Turn
472
360
76.3%
22.3
330
389
5.5
4.4
0.5
3.8
5.4
A
hecond Right
Subtotal
865
657
75.9%
23.3
620
691
7.6
27.5
1.2
26.1
11 Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
279
268
96.1%
17.5
245
306
0.7
22.0
2.1
19.1
25.2
C
EB
Through
3
3
86.4%
1.9
0
6
0.2
26.8
19.3
0.0
51.0
C
Right Turn
254
245
96.3%
17.1
212
264
0.6
9.3
1.4
7.6
12.4
A
hecond Right
Subtotal
536
515
96.2%
25.7
483
561
0.9
16.0
1.6
13.9
1�
11 Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
14
1510].0%
4.3
9
21
0.3
64.1
6.1
56.0
75.9
E
WB
Through
38
32
83.4%
5.5
22
39
1.1
61.5
4.5
56.0
69.8
E
Right Turn
4
4
110.4%
1.8
2
8
0.2
25.7
12.3
8.4
44.9
C
Second Right
Subtotal
5651
91.2%
].]
35
63
0.]
59.0
4.2
54.3
66.6
E
Total
1,725
1,488
86.2%
46.9
1,410
1,560
5.9
29.2
1.3
27.2
32.0
C
Intersection3
Northgate Drive/Manuel
T Freitas Parkway
Signal
2123/2015
Demand
Served Volume (vph)
Total
Delay (sec/veh)
Direction
Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent
Std. Dev
Minimum
Maximum
GEH
Average
Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum
LOS
UT r.
Second Left
Left Turn
48
44
92.2%
7.8
30
57
0.6
40.1
5.6
30.8
48.4
D
NB
Through
27
269].1%
5.0
21
36
0.2
41.2
6.3
33.2
53.4
D
Right Turn
73
73
96.8%
].]
60
88
0.3
3.8
0.8
2.7
5.5
A
hecondRight
Subtotal
148
141
95.4%
9.6
127
154
0.6
22.1
2.6
1].]
"U Turn
Second Left
Lek Turn
]6
67
88.5%
7.4
53
79
1.0
38.2
2.5
33.0
41.7
D
SB
Through
29
31
106.3%
3.7
24
36
0.3
36.9
5.2
27.2
42.4
D
Right Turn
22
22
99.9%
3.7
15
28
0.0
2.3
0.3
2.0
2.8
A
hecond Right
Subtotal
127
120
94.6%
8.1
107
130
0.6
31.3
2.2
28.2
"U Turn
Second Left
Lek Turn
63
53
84.0%
7.5
36
60
1.3
47.6
2.7
42.5
52.5
D
EB
Through
1,285
1,118
87.0%
42.4
1,062
1,184
4.8
20.8
1.9
18.1
24.0
C
Right Turn
118
98
83.5%
10.0
84
113
1.9
16.9
1.5
15.3
19.6
B
Second Right
L Subtotal
1,466
1,270
86.6%
47.6
1,210
1,336
5.3
21.6
1.6
19.4
24.6
C
11 Turn
Second Lek
Left Turn
4
452
95.2%
22.0
424
494
1.1
65.8
9.6
54.4
84.7
E
WB
Through
972
941
96.8%
21.5
915
971
1.0
11.9
0.9
10.4
13.4
B
Right Turn
175
172
98.0%
13.5
155
198
0.3
8.5
1.1
7.0
30.7
A
Second Right
Subtotal
1,622
1,564
96.4%
42.6
1,508
1,620
1.4
2].1
3.4
22.9
33.2
C
Total
3,363
3,095
92.0%
60.4
3,010
3,214
4.]
24.8
1.9
22.8
28.5
C
2123/2015
Queuing and Blocking Report
2020 AM - Alternative 4 (8 Phase) 2120/2015
Intersection: 1: Las Gallinas Ave & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
NB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
T
R
L
T
T
R
L
T
R
L
Maximum Queue (ft)
210
1137
1139
210
506
594
501
138
149
216
170
180
Average Queue (ft)
54
792
769
105
344
164
138
7
55
118
83
177
95th Queue (ft)
170
1309
1301
258
540
493
382
66
125
210
171
195
Link Distance (ft)
1
1106
1106
1
623
623
32
4
199
22
2
Upstream Blk Time (%)
19
19
3
0
4
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
0
15
1
18
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
150
150
450
140
110
110
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
0
68
67
0
10
0
3
5
20
2
70
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
24
54
1
25
0
6
17
47
5
329
Intersection: 1: Las
Gallinas
Ave
& Manuel T Freitas
Pkwy
Movement
SB
SB
Directions Served
T
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
676
138
Average Queue (ft)
648
13
95th Queue (ft)
693
68
Link Distance (ft)
630
235
Upstream Blk Time (%)
78
112
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
138
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
199
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
28
255
Queuing Penalty (veh)
123
260
Intersection: 2: Las
Gallinas Ave & Nova Albion Way
Movement
EB
EB WB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served
L
TR
LTR
L
TR
LT
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
169
339
122
199
332
235
180
Average Queue (ft)
112
100
46
138
112
199
37
95th Queue (ft)
186
255
97
210
260
250
114
Link Distance (ft)
677
288
836
149
149
Upstream Blk Time (%)
42
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
181
0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
110
140
Storage Blk Time (%)
12
1
19
1
Queuing Penalty (veh)
32
4
22
2
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 1
Queuing and Blocking Report
2020 AM - Alternative 4 (8 Phase) 2120/2015
Intersection: 3: Northgate Drive & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
SB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
TR
L
L
T
TR
LT
R
L
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
234
476
494
320
352
435
336
159
108
102
135
Average Queue (ft)
62
240
270
193
230
151
146
61
23
48
31
95th Queue (ft)
163
461
488
306
337
356
288
120
89
90
84
Link Distance (ft)
411
411
0
1064
1064
450
Intersection: 15: Las
229
Upstream Blk Time (%)
2
2
Movement
NB
0
SB
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
11
18
0
0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
190
330
330
50
50
Storage Blk Time (%)
12
0
2
0
20
0
19
7
Queuing Penalty (veh)
8
2
12
0
15
0
10
5
Intersection: 12: Manuel T Freitas
Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
WB
WB
NB
SB
Directions Served
T
T
T
T
R
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
44
64
36
17
236
30
Average Queue (ft)
2
3
5
2
102
7
95th Queue (ft)
21
35
46
25
196
25
Link Distance (ft)
623
623
411
411
236
232
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
1
1
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
0
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
0
Intersection: 15: Las
Gallinas Ave
Movement
NB
SB
SB
Directions Served
T
L
T
Maximum Queue (ft)
135
68
328
Average Queue (ft)
13
4
136
95th Queue (ft)
74
31
321
Link Distance (ft)
149
199
Upstream Blk Time (%)
0
14
Queuing Penalty (veh)
2
126
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
70
Storage Blk Time (%)
25
Queuing Penalty (veh)
1
Network Summary
Network wide Queuing Penalty: 1114
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 2
Si -fait Post -Processor
Average Results ftom 10 Runs
Volume and Delay by Movem
IntersettionI
Las Gallinas Avenue/Manuel T Freitas Parkway
1 4
93.1%
297
Demand
853
Served Volume(vph)
30.9
24
Dnectmn Movement
Volume(vph)
Average
Percent Std. Dev.
Minimum
Maximum GEH
UT ,
Volume (vph)
Average
Left Turn
167159
GEH
Second Lek
NB Through
304
291
Second Left
Right Turn
Left Turn
173
156
899% 135
139
175 14
NB Through
32]
304
92.9%2]8
323 1.3
Right Turn
353
335
94 8% 17 3
306
360 10
fiecpnd Rieht
I1
16.8
56.8
114.9
F
Freitas Parkway Las Gallinas In[ersettion Improvements
2020 Plus Alternative 4 (8 Phase)
PM Peak Hour
signal
Total Delay (sedven)
Average Std. Dev. Minimum Maximum LOS
624 80487 729 E
33.1 2.3 29.1 37.6 C
141 15 12 2 12.2 B
Subtotal
853
1 4
93.1%
297
750
853
21
30.9
24
225
UT n
c
V Turn
Total Delay (sec/,,h)
5ecand Lek
Dnecbon Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Left Turn
167159
GEH
95.0% 11.9 144 176 07
NB Through
304
291
Second Left
Right Turn
6
7
115.2% 3.2 2 12 0.4
5ecand -ht
5ecand Lek
Left Turn
167
153
91.8%
].9
140
168
1.1
I1
16.8
56.8
114.9
F
SB Through
181
166
92.0%
14.8
143
183
11
362
11.2
287
66.1
D
Right Turn
26
26
99.7%
5.8
19
36
0.0
13.1
11.0
].1
42.3
B
5ecand Right
Subtotal
374
346
92.4%
18.9
317
378
1.5
53.9
12.6
40.1
84.9
D
V Turn
Second eft
Left Turn62
43
60
M.
6.6
51
69
0.3
53.5
4.7
43.9
59.6
D
EB Through
467
469
100.4%
27.5
437
530
0.1
39.4
2.5
35.1
44.9
D
Right Turn
92
88
95.6%
8.2
78
103
04
11.6
1.6
8.0
13.0
B
5ecand Right
Subtotal
621
616
99.2%
23.8
588
661
02
36.8
22
334
41.6
D
V Turn
Second Left
Lek Turn
302
291
96.4%
13.0
275
311
0.6
84.0
19.7
56.2
119.2
F
WB Through
521
54]
95.8%
29.2
502
585
30
27.4
15
25.1
29.3
C
Right Turn
300
294
98.1%
12.8
279
319
0.3
7.0
1.2
5.3
9.0
A
Second Not
Subtotal
1,173
1,132
96.5%
20.2
1,102
1,165
1.2
36.8
5.8
28.5
46.6
D
Total
3,021
2,888
95 6%
45 ]
2,824
2,9]6
2.4
323
2.8
330
42.5
D
InterSettion2
Las Gallinas Parkway/Nova
Albion Way -I-80 EB On -romp
958%
Demand
429
Served Volume(vph)
Dnettmn Movement
Volume(vph)
Average
Percent Std. Dev. Minimum Maximum GEH
UT n
c
V T-
urnSecond
Total Delay (sec/,,h)
5ecand Lek
Dnecbon Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Left Turn
167159
GEH
95.0% 11.9 144 176 07
NB Through
304
291
95.9% 12.8 278 324 0.7
Right Turn
6
7
115.2% 3.2 2 12 0.4
5ecand -ht
5ecand Lek
Total Delay (sec/,,h)
Average Std. Dev. Minimum Maximum LOS
473 52 384 54.4 D
28.0 5.4 21.9 40.5 C
17.5 8.2 5.4 31.6 B
5ubtotal
477
457
958%
125
429
476
09
34.6
46
305
44.1
c
V T-
urnSecond
Total Delay (sec/,,h)
Dnecbon Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent Std. Dev. Minimum
Maximum
GEH
Average Std.Dev.
Minimum Maximum
LOS
U Turn
5 .... dLeft
5ecand Lek
Lek Turn
6
5
84.8%
2.5
2
10
0.4
30.9
14.1
12.6
64.3
C
SB Through
223
217
97.5%
9.5
202
231
14
28.4
18
25.8
31.8
C
Right Turn
263
245
93.0%
8.3
229
256
1.2
5.6
0.6
4.7
6.6
A
Second Right
Subtotal
492
467
94.9%
12.9
449
486
1.1
16.5
1.1
14.9
18.9
B
V Turn
Second eft
Lek Turn422
43
392
92.9%
18.0
360
414
15
102.9
21.7
637
143 5
F
EB Through
6
4
68.8%
1.]
2
7
0.8
97.1
27.5
63.8
148.5
F
Right Turn
171
156
91.5%
12.8
133
176
1 1
657
20.2
29 2
1028
E
jecand Righttota
Subl
599
553
912%
262
516
584
19
924
21.3
537
1322
F
V Turn
Second Left
Lek Turn
16
17
104.4%
4.0
12
23
0.2
33.2
5.6
24.4
44.5
C
WB Through
56
57
101.1%
7.7
44
67
0.1
35.6
3.4
29.0
41.1
D
Right Turn
SS
15
99.2%
2.8
12
20
0.0
22.9
6.5
13.5
31.9
C
Second Not
Subtotal
87
88
101.4%
10.2
73
107
0.1
32.9
3.0
27.1
37.8
C
Total
1,655
1,565
946%
314
1,516
1,605
2.2
495
8.1
349
66.8
D
Intersettion3
Northgate Drive/Manuel
T Frekas Parkway
966%
200
409
470
Signal
236
Demand
18.2
Served Volume(vph)
V T-
urnSecond
Total Delay (sec/,,h)
Dnecbon Movement
Volume (vph)
Average
Percent Std. Dev. Minimum
Maximum
GEH
Average Std.Dev.
Minimum Maximum
LOS
U Turn
5 .... dLeft
5ecand Lek
Left Turn
114
108
94.7%
Left Turn
173
166
96.1% 12.3 148
182
05
342 44
284 39.8
C
NB Through
66
61
92.9% 6.0 53
69
0.6
36.2 5.2
26.6 46.2
D
Right Turn
d Riots
208
204
98.1% 11.0 189
223
03
112 3.1
6.5 17.1
B
5ubtotal
447
432
966%
200
409
470
07
236
39
18.2
29.7
V T-
urnSecond
5 .... dLeft
Left Turn
114
108
94.7%
10.0
B]
125
0.6
28.1
2.5
25.1
32.4
C
SB Through
40
37
92.4%
42
31
45
0.5
24.3
4.2
15.7
31.6
C
Right Turn
52
52
100.2%
].2
38
63
0.0
2.8
0.4
2.1
3.3
A
Second Right
Subtotal
206
197
95.6%
11.9
181
220
0.6
20.7
2.1
18.4
26.0
C
V Turn
5ecand Left
Left Turn
43
36
83.9%
5.0
30
44
1.1
55.3
6.6
46.0
66.3
E
EB Through
1,023
986
96.4%
19.9
964
1,031
1.2
56.3
8.0
46.1
66.0
E
Right Turn
91
87
96.0%
9.9
69
107
04
50.8
9.0
40.1
62.6
D
5ecand Right
Subtotal
1,157
1,109
95.9%
19.1
1,082
1,148
14
558
78
458
V Turn
Second Left
Left Turn
500
486
97.2%
27.6
437
526
0.6
50.9
3.7
47.1
S7.]
D
WB Through
1,103
1,059
96.096
213
1,024
1,099
1.3
281
2.3
245
31.6
C
Right Turn
141
131
92.J%
7.0
118
138
0.9
27.1
3.1
22.7
32.2
C
Second Not
Subtotal
1,744
1,675
96.1%
32.2
1,629
1,713
1.7
34.7
2.0
32.0
38.3
C
Total
3,554
3,413
%096
411
3,365
3,490
2.4
393
3.1
343
43.4
D
Fehr& Peers 112112-
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existing PM - Alt 1 (6 Phase) 2120/2015
Intersection: 1: Las Gallinas Ave & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
NB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
T
R
L
T
T
R
L
T
R
L
Maximum Queue (ft)
164
265
246
170
479
353
338
199
170
250
170
179
Average Queue (ft)
51
160
137
35
276
134
136
42
134
195
143
133
95th Queue (ft)
116
235
220
99
458
296
268
173
195
260
215
198
Link Distance (ft)
1
1106
1106
12
623
623
108
3
193
24
20
Upstream Blk Time (%)
0
0
18
Queuing Penalty (veh)
1
0
150
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
150
150
450
140
110
110
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
0
11
6
3
7
3
26
28
7
30
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
7
6
9
22
9
176
150
35
63
Intersection: 1: Las
Gallinas
Ave
& Manuel T Freitas
Pkwy
Movement
SB
SB
Directions Served
T
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
392
141
Average Queue (ft)
158
21
95th Queue (ft)
361
80
Link Distance (ft)
630
218
Upstream Blk Time (%)
0
165
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
120
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
115
120
Storage Blk Time (%)
8
882
Queuing Penalty (veh)
15
343
Intersection: 2: Las
Gallinas Ave & Nova Albion Way
Movement
EB
EB WB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served
L
TR
LTR
L
TR
LT
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
170
722
144
199
425
218
170
Average Queue (ft)
165
505
54
120
163
115
64
95th Queue (ft)
187
882
110
202
343
195
128
Link Distance (ft)
677
288
836
155
155
Upstream Blk Time (%)
34
0
4
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
0
9
1
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
110
140
Storage Blk Time (%)
61
1
8
12
Queuing Penalty (veh)
108
3
24
20
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 1
Queuing and Blocking Report
Existing PM - Alt 1 (6 Phase) 2120/2015
Intersection: 3: Northgate Drive & Manuel T Freitas Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
WB
WB
WB
WB
NB
NB
SB
SB
Directions Served
L
T
TR
L
L
T
TR
LT
R
L
TR
Maximum Queue (ft)
250
496
497
320
371
608
557
379
110
109
176
Average Queue (ft)
77
374
398
185
224
242
319
181
80
60
35
95th Queue (ft)
229
520
538
286
325
456
517
333
150
104
109
Link Distance (ft)
Gallinas Ave
411
411
Movement
1064
1064
450
SB
229
Upstream Blk Time (%)
10
16
0
0
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
56
95
0
0
0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
190
330
330
50
50
Storage Blk Time (%)
47
0
0
1
45
1
23
4
Queuing Penalty (veh)
20
0
3
5
93
1
21
4
Intersection: 12: Manuel T Freitas
Pkwy
Movement
EB
EB
EB
NB
SB
Directions Served
T
T
R
R
R
Maximum Queue (ft)
88
99
16
274
34
Average Queue (ft)
9
13
1
177
10
95th Queue (ft)
57
65
16
312
30
Link Distance (ft)
623
623
10
236
232
Upstream Blk Time (%)
0
77
36
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
70
0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
2
0
100
Storage Blk Time (%)
0
1
Queuing Penalty (veh)
1
Intersection: 15: Las
Gallinas Ave
Movement
WB
NB
SB
SB
Directions Served
R
T
L
T
Maximum Queue (ft)
187
193
101
117
Average Queue (ft)
95
110
41
6
95th Queue (ft)
193
227
77
45
Link Distance (ft)
171
155
193
Upstream Blk Time (%)
16
10
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
0
77
0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
70
Storage Blk Time (%)
2
0
Queuing Penalty (veh)
10
0
Network Summary
Network wide Queuing Penalty: 1196
Freitas Pkwy / Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement SimTraffic Report
SF14-0781 Page 2
RESOLUTION NO. 14090
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL
APPROVING THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE
FREITAS AND LAS GALLINAS INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 11171; AND AUTHORIZING
THE CITY CLERK TO CALL FOR BIDS
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 13821 on October 6, 2014,
authorizing the Director of Public Works to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with
CSW/Stuber-Stroeh Engineering Group, Inc. for design services for a project to make
improvements to the intersection of Manuel T. Freitas Parkway/Las Gallinas Avenue, City
Project No. 11171 (the "Project"); and
WHEREAS, the Bicycle Pedestrian Master Plan 2011 Update specifically lists
pedestrian related improvements at the intersection of Manual T. Freitas Parkway/Los Gamos
Drive; and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 13908 on April 20, 2015,
authorizing an amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with CSW/Stuber-Stroeh
Engineering Group, Inc. to expand the scope of services to include design services for the
intersection of Manuel T. Freitas Parkway/Los Gamos Drive as part of the Project; and
WHEREAS, the plans, specifications, and estimate have been completed for the
Project's proposed intersection improvements and the City is ready to call for bids on the Project;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of San
Rafael hereby approves the plans and specifications for the Project for advertisement, and
authorizes the City Clerk to call for bids.
I, ESTHER C. BEIRNE, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the
foregoing resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the
Council of said City held on the 21 st day of March, 2016, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Bushey, Colin, Gamblin and Mayor Phillips
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: McCullough
ESTHER C. BEIRNE, City Clerk
File No.: 18.01.73
CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
AMENDED NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
You are invited to attend the upcoming City Council hearing on the following project:
PROJECT:
HEARING DATE:
LOCATION:
WHAT WILL
HAPPEN:
IF YOU CANNOT
ATTEND:
MANUEL T. FREITAS PARKWAY AND LAS GALLINAS AVENUE
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. The City is planning to construct
intersection improvements at Manuel T. Freitas Parkway and Las Gallinas Avenue
which will involve widening the intersection and installing a new traffic signal
system to improve the traffic operations, close the gap in a heavily traveled bike route
and improve American with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessibility through the
intersection.
Consistent with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guidelines, this project is subject to environmental review and an Initial Study/Mitigated
Negative Declaration has been prepared. The Initial Study and supportive appendices
have been posted on the City of San Rafael website and can be accessed via the following
link.- htti)://www.citvofsanrafael.org/vubworks-Droi-freitasL'allinas/. Hard copies of
the Initial Study are available for review at the Department of Public Works, 111 Morphew
Street, San Rafael or at the San Rafael City Library, 1100 E Street, San Rafael
Previously published hearing date of Monday, March 7, 2016 has been changed to
Monday. March 21. 2016 at 7:00 P.M.
San Rafael City Hall — City Council Chambers
1400 Fifth Avenue at "D" Street
San Rafael, California
The City Council will review and consider action to: a) adopt the Manuel T. Freitas
and Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration; b) adopt the plans and specifications for construction and authorize the
City Clerk to call for bids.
You may comment on the project. The City Council will consider all public testimony and
decide whether to take the proposed actions.
You may send a letter to the City Clerk, City of San Rafael, 1400 Fifth Avenue, San
Rafael, CA 94901. You can also hand deliver it prior to the meeting.
FOR MORE For information on the design, permitting and on the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
INFORMATION: Declaration, contact Jeff Stutsman, Assistant Civil Engineer at (415) 485-3342 or
i effrev.stutsmannu,citvofsanrafael.org.
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL
/s/ Esther C. Beime
City Clerk
At the above time and place, all letters received will be noted and all interested parties will be heard. If you challenge in court the matter
described above, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this
notice, or in written correspondence delivered at, or prior to, the above referenced public hearing (Government Code Section 65009 (b)
(2))•
Sign Language and interpretation and assistive listening devices may be requested by calling (415) 485-3085 (voice) or (415) 485-3198
(TDD) at least 72 hours in advance. Copies of documents are available in accessible formats upon request.
Public transportation to City Hall is available through Golden Gate Transit, Line 22 or 23. Para -transit is available by calling
Whistlestop Wheels at (415) 454-0964.
To allow individuals with environmental illness or multiple, chemical sensitivity to attend the meeting/hearing, individuals are requested
to refrain from wearing scented products.
North San Rafael Coalition of Residents
Celebrating Our 30" Year
www. 94903Co-nmu,,tv ora
Post Office Box 6642. San Rafael. Calfomla. 94903
February 6, 2016
"A, LA
Jeff Stutsman, P,E,Assistant Civil Engineer
City of San Rafael, Dept. of Puialic Works
Re: Freitas and Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement project
Dear Mr. Stutsman:
Thank you for the notice of the comment period related to the above project and for the two public
meetings to accept community input.
We write to bring to mind the North San Rafael Vision and the Conceptual Plan (attached). More
than 700 residents of north San Rafael worked long and hard on this City process. The intersection is
a part of the area scheduled for traffic safety improvements: the North San Rafael Promenade.
While the community is eager for improved traffic/cycling/pedestrian safety, we urge that the project
be designed and completed within these larger area pre-existing plans.
Please ask the design/engineers to review the attached materials and affirmatively indicate that the
proposed improvements are not incompatible with the Promenade conceptual plan.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
NORTH SAN RAFAEL COALITION OF RESIDENTS
Bv
Caroli S. Lenert, Chair
KQ�
North San Rafael Vision Promenade
Conceptual Plan
Prepared for
The City of San Rafael
The North San Rafael Vision In
Action Committee
By
Wittenkeller and Associates
of
Brian Powell & Associates
November 2002
0
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
NORTH SAN RAFAEL VISION IN ACTION COMMITTEE
.Jennifer Ciccone
Shirley Fischer
Henri K. Lese
Lloyd Liebes
Cecil Neilsen
Kay Noguchi
Larry A. Paul
Mike Mc Guire
Angela Risdon
Kirk Rockwell
Annie Sterling
Amanda Staller
STAFF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Dave Bernardi, San Rafael Public Works Director
With special thanks to Shirley Fischerand Kay Noguchi who were invaluable
to the planning process and outcome of this project.
CONSULTANTS
Brian Wittenkeller, Wittenkeller & Associates
Brian Powell, Brian Powell & Associates
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LExecutive Summary.... ........................ . ....................................................... 4
II. Introduction................................................................................................. 6
III. The Promenade........................................................................................... 9
A. Criteria...................................................................................... 9
B. Recommendations.................................................................... 10
C. Unifying Promenade Themes ................... .....................,..... 10
IV. Impfementation Priorities ........................... .................... 25
V. Appendix.................................................................................................... 27
A. Minutes of Public Meetings...................................................... 27
B. Bibliography............................................................................. 32
C. Information Matrix from VIA Committee .................................. 33
D. Site Plan................................................................................... 36
3
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The North San Rafael Vision Promenade Conceptual Plan is a vital element of the
community's Vision North San Rafael In The Year 2010 report. The Promenade Plan
proposes:
• Improved bicycle and pedestrian linkages between the Terra Linda Recreation Center and
Lagoon Park at the Marin County Civic Center.
• Much-needed amenities such as improved public parks and new plazas.
• A repeating and unifying theme which reflects cultu4 elements, people, local natural
history and expresses the community identity of North San Rafael through use of
consistent "theme details"
Please refer to the site plan shown inside the back cover for a graphic guide to the proposed
improvements.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BIKEWAYS AND PEDESTRIAN WAYS
• Create new pedestrian connections between the Terra Linda Recreation Center, Freitas
Parkway and the Terra Linda Shopping Center.
• Revise parking in front of Scotty's Market to create a new pedestrian -only plaza for
seating, gathering and expanded produce display.
• On Freitas Parkway, replace the existing pathway on the north and south sides of the
street with a six -foot -wide concrete pathway with theme details and a two -foot -wide,
soft -surface jogging path. Eliminate parking on each side of the street and install Class II
bike lanes in each direction. Add park type pathway lighting along the new pathways.
Add new landscaping along the shoulders of the creek and at the unplanted areas along
the walkways.
• At Freitas Parkway and Las Gallinas Avenue, the pedestrian element of the Promenade
splits into two parts, with one part heading down Las Gallinas Avenue and the other into
the Northgate One Shopping Center. Along the south side of Las Gallinas Avenue, a new
six -foot -wide walkway with theme details should be installed to accommodate strollers
and small children on bicycles. Work with the Northgate One Shopping Center to
accomplish the various proposals shown in this Conceptual Plan.
• Las Gallinas Avenue is part of the identified north/south bicycle connection between
Novato and downtown San Rafael, but new development goals at The Mall could cause
four lanes of auto traffic to be constructed on Las Gallinas Avenue, eliminating bicycle
traffic. If four lanes of auto traffic should occur, the city should negotiate with The Mall
to develop new bicycle routes through this area.
• The community and City of San Rafael should negotiate with The Mall to include
pedestrian circulation improvements in their expansion plans.
• New Class II bike lanes should be constructed on both sides of Northgate Drive between
Freitas Parkway and Los Ranchitos.
• On Las Gallinas Avenue at Northgate Three, a new vehicular entry with a new signalized
intersection should be constructed.
• >From the intersection at Las Gallinas Avenue and Merrydale Road, Class II bike lanes
and pedestrian ways should continue east of Mt. Olivet Cemetery to the Northwestern
Pacific Railroad right-of-way.
• A multi-purpose pathway with a two -foot -wide jogging path on each side should be
constructed parallel to the railroad tracks under US 101 from Merrydale Road (east of
Guide Dogs for the Blind) to Civic Center Drive.
• At Civic Center Drive, the proposed multi-purpose pathway will intersect with the existing
Class II bike lanes on Civic Center Drive. From this point, new Class II bike lanes and
minimum six -foot -wide sidewalks (in each direction) should connect to Lagoon Park.
11
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PROMENADE AMENITIES
• Develop thematic design details that reflect the North San Rafael community identity and
consistently repeat them throughout the Promenade. These thematic details would
include features, such as colored paving, historical markers, and trellises with wisteria
vines.
• At Munson Park add game tables, additional seating, a "petanque" court (informal bocce
ball), a trellis with wisteria vines, and a restroom.
• At Hillview and Arbor Parks, add game tables and trellises with wisteria vines.
• Northgate One: At the western sign wall, create a new pedestrian entry by adding a new
sign wall, trellis, and pathways into the site. In front of Safeway, widen the existing
pedestrian zone by relocating the existing curb four feet into the driveway; this would
widen the existing walkway to eight feet and narrow the existing driveway to 22 feet.
Relocate the existing steel pedestrian control guardrails as needed.
• At the "Central Plaza" (between Starbucks and Kinko's), work with Northgate One to
incorporate optimum seating and thematic details into the space. Add new sycamore
trees along the central vehicular entry to create an "allee" on each side of the road. Add
a cluster of flowering shade trees at the south end of the lawn area.
• The Mall at Northgate: At the intersection of Las Gallinas Avenue and Northgate Drive,
create a new entry and entertainment plaza when the new Rite-Aid facility is constructed.
Create new pedestrian ways from the Rite-Aid plaza to Macy's and, if parking can be
accommodated, from the Rite-Aid plaza eastbound along the south side of Las Gallinas
Avenue to the Merrydale Overcrossing. At Las Gallinas and Merrydale Road, create a new
vehicular entry with low walls and new seating areas on each side of the road entering
The Mall property.
• At Lagoon Park, create a new entry walkway that emphasizes the view to the lagoon and
accommodates crosswalks across Civic Center Drive, pedestrian ways and bicycle access.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR UNIFYING PROMENADE THEMES
Concerned citizens have stated a keen interest in expressing the community's identity along The
Promenade through use of architectural details. These details should reflect cultural elements,
people and even local natural history. Even though more study is required to formulate the
identity and theme, this plan recognizes the community's significant interest in the Santa
Margarita Creek by using symbolic patterns in the new walkways that suggest watercourses.
Future study will refine this detail and other theme features.
II. INTRODUCTION
'A vision is a dream about the future, shared by the community. It paints a picture of the type of
place in which we want to live, work and play. Our vision is more than just a description of what
we hope to see in North San Rafael k also describes the legacy we hope to achieve and defines
the way we want to work together to create a more livable community. "—Vision North San Rafael
In The Year 2010.
The Vision North San Rafael report, completed in 1997, summarizes the community's vision for
business vitality, beautification, gathering places, community services, and pedestrian/bicycles
linkages. The North San Rafael lesion Promenade Conceptual Plan expands the goal of
pedestrian/bicycle linkages into a linear parkway that connects the Terra Linda Recreation Center
to Lagoon Park at the Marin County Civic Center. The improved walkways and bicycle lanes
create the "spine" of this pian and provide the context for new amenities, such as plazas, public
art, landscaping, cultural/historical markers, and public park improvements.
Over a six month period, concerned citizens, city staff, commercial interests and consultants
worked to develop the goals, objectives and design proposals that would make The Promenade a
reality. On three occasions community meetings were held to solicit input and feedback from the
community. Formal meetings with the Planning Commission and City Council further allowed City
officials and the public to get involved with the process and to voice important feedback,
The result of this interactive process is an enthused community with a plan of specific strategies
for developing The Promenade. This report outlines the details of the process, the Conceptual
Plan and the design features that were created. A fold -out plan of the entire Promenade is
located at the back of the report and should be used while reading this report.
BACKGROUND
This Conceptual Plan incorporates the previous and ongoing accomplishments made by the
community. Since the Las Gallinas Valley was developed in the late 1950's, Tena Linda residents
have been active in City planning processes. In the 1970's residents taxed themselves to
purchase the surrounding hills for open space. From 1994 to 1997, citizens worked with the city
to develop the Vision North San Rafael in the Year 2010 report. Since then, the North San Rafael
Vision in Action (VIA) Committee has facilitated the implementation of many parts of the report,
including renovation of Freitas Park and the Terra Linda pool; new landscaping and property
improvements at the Freitas Parkway entryway (The Gateway Project); approval of acceptable
land usage on the Fairchild, PG&E, and Marin Ranch Airport properties; development of
community events such as 'Surfin' Safari' and good neighbor awards, and funding of this North
San Rafael Vision Promenade Conceptual Plan.
The residents near Santa Margarita Creek adjacent to Del Ganado Road are developing a plan for
landscape enhancement of the concrete creek channel. Plans call for the removal of several feet
of asphalt paving and installation of appropriate plantings. This project is currently in the final
design and funding stage.
The San Rafael Bicycle Master Plan includes a North/South bicycle connection along Las Gallinas
and an East/West bicycle connection along Freitas Parkway to the existing Fawn Drive path in
Sleepy Hollow. The plan also includes a future North/South bicycle connection along the
Northwestern Pacific Railroad right-of-way shown on this on map. A proposed rail transit station
in the vicinity of the Marin County Civic Center is proposed in the Sonoma -Marin Rail Transit
(SMART) Plan.
Future development goals at The Mall at Northgate may change the character of Las Gallinas
Avenue and the City's ability to accommodate bike facilities on the street. If development is to
proceed, the traffic engineers at the City of San Rafael recommend that Las Gallinas from
Merrydale to Freitas be reconfigured to four lanes of traffic, two in each direction. If Las Gallinas
Avenue is converted to four lanes of traffic, then alternative bicycle facilities through the area
must be developed.
MISSION STATEMENT, GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Mission. To develop a bicycle/ pedestrian Promenade that connects the east and west
sides of North San Rafael and offers new recreational opportunities and enhanced
community identity.
Goals
•
To provide safe outdoor recreation
facilities for active and passive uses.
t;
•
To create a safe, cohesive, bicycle
f
pathway system that connects the `
Terra Linda neighborhoods to the
Marin County Civic Center.
�
•
To provide safe pedestrian ways for
strolling, jagging and seating which
connect the parks, neighborhoods and
"�-
} "
commercial centers of Terra Linda to
the Marin County Civic Center.x-
•
To reflect local history and geography
including watershed, creek and
neighborhood identity.
•
To create a landscape identity along Detail from Vision North San Rafael report in the year 2010.
the Promenade by using consistent Drawing by Ian MacLeod
theme plantings, appropriate
aL, rcLa x pe elements, shade trees and color plantings.
•
To encourage citizen interaction by developing new
opportunities for gatherings,
displays, seating and other recreational pursuits.
•
To engage people, schools and neighborhoods by providing opportunities for individual
and group expression.
DESIGN INTENT FOR BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION
It is the intent of the Conceptual Plan to enhance the enjoyment and safety of pedestrians and
cyclists who use the Promenade route. Recommendations in this plan are intended to be
implemented over a period of time by various private and public efforts. In order for this plan to
be considered successful, not every recommendation must be completed. However, there must
be a continuous, recognizable and safe system of travel for both bicycles and pedestrians
throughout the Promenade corridor.
DESIGN INTENT FOR AMENITIES ALONG THE PROMENADE
Existing features along the Promenade include the broad, landscaped areas along Freitas
Parkway, views to the western hills, Munson Park, Hillview Park, Northgate One, The Mail at
Northgate, Northgate Three and the Marin County Civic Center Lagoon Park. This Plan makes
recommendations for the enhancement, improved usability and access to these facilities as well
as recommendations for new amenities.
DESIGN INTENT FOR EXPRESSING COMMUNITY IDENTITY AND
PROMENADE THEM95
The North San Rafael Vision Promenade has an opportunity to express the pride and history of
the community in North San Rafael, A process needs to be undertaken to identify the most
significant community elements that reflect local culture, people and even natural history. These
elements then can be communicated in an understandable fashion along the Promenade through
signage and architectural details. These details not only will be a reflection of the community
culture but they will provide continuity and identity to the Promenade route itself.
III. THE PROMENADE
There are three basic components to the Promenade: bikeways and pedestrian ways, project
amenities, and unifying Promenade themes. The Conceptual Plan describes the criteria used to
develop these components, provides recommendations for their improvement, and proposes a
uniform Promenade theme.
CRITERIA
The formulation of a plan for pedestrian and bicycle facilities must comply with the Bikeway
Planning and Design Manual (chapter 1000 of the California Streets and Highways Code).
Understanding the various types of bikeway facilities and minimum standards required for each is
critical to the success of this plan.
BIKEWAYS:
Class I Bikeways: "Generally, f bikeways] should be used to serve corridors not served by
streets and highways or where wide rights-of-way exist, permitting such facilities to be
constructed away from the influence of parallel streets. Bike paths should offer opportunities not
provided by the road system. The most common applications are along rivers, oceanfronts,
canals, utility rights-of-way, and abandoned railroad rights-of-way, within college campuses or
within and between parks. The minimum paved width for a two-way bike path is 7.8 feet. An
additional 3 -foot graded area is recommended to provide clearance from poles, trees, walls,
fences, guardrails or other lateral obstructions. A wider graded area also serves as a jogging
path. Dual use by pedestrians and bicycles is undesirable, and should be separated wherever
possible."—Bikeway Planning and Design Manual.
Sidewalk facilities are not considered Class I facilities because they are primarily intended to
serve pedestrians, generally cannot meet the design standards for Class I bikeways, and do not
minimize interferences with motorists. In residential areas such as Terra Linda, sidewalk bicycle
riding by young children is acceptable. With lower bicycle speeds and lower auto speeds,
potential conflicts are somewhat lessened. Even though this type of bicycle use on sidewalks is
acceptable, it is inappropriate to sign these facilities as Class I Bikeways. A more appropriate
designation for these sidewalks would be "multipurpose pathway."
Class Ii Bike Lanes: "[Bike lanes] for preferential use by bicycles are established within the
paved area of highways. Bike lane stripes are intended to promote an orderly flow of traffic by
establishing specific lines of demarcation between areas reserved for bicycles and lanes to be
occupied by motor vehicles."—Bikeway Planning and Design Manual. Bike lane signs and
pavement markings support this effect. Bike lane stripes can increase bicyclists' confidence that
motorists will not stray into their path of travel if they remain within the bike lane. Class II bike
lanes are one-way facilities and move with the flow of the traffic. The recommended width for a
class II bike lane is 4.9 feet where the lane is adjacent to parked cars and four feet where the
lane is at the edge of pavement. When at the edge of a curb and gutter the width is to be 4.9
feet with a minimum of 2.9 feet beyond the concrete gutter. Traffic lanes as discussed in the
highway design manual are typically 11.8 to 12 feet wide, Where favorable conditions exist,
traffic lanes of 10.8 to 11 feet may be feasible.
Class III Bike Routes: "[Bike routes] are intended to provide continuity to the bikeway system.
Bike routes are established along through -routes not served by Class I or Class II bikeways or
they are used to connect discontinuous segments of bikeway. Class III facilities are shared
facilities, either with motor vehicles on the street or with pedestrians on sidewalks and in either
case bicycle usage is secondary. Class III facilities are established by placing bike route signs
along roadways."—Bikeway Planning and Design Manual
PEDESTRIAN WAYS:
The pedestrian ways should be safe, convenient and designed to encourage use. Dimensions
should be adequate to allow pedestrians and strollers to pass without conflict. To ensure safe
street crossings and continuity along the Promenade, the walkway details (color and texture)
should be continued into the crosswalks. The City of San Rafael is experimenting with audio
alerts at some intersections that can further increase safety at intersections.
Concrete is the most practical and durable material for public walkways and ramps, But concrete
pavers and colored, stamped asphalt provide good alternatives to concrete. All pedestrian
surfaces are not necessarily hard. The multipurpose pathways can include a soft -surface jogging
paths, similar to those along the Tiburon and Corte Madera Creek bikeways.
UNIFYING PROMENADE THEMES:
This plan recognizes the value of promoting community identity in the Promenade project. A
process will be undertaken to identify key elements of the North San Rafael community and to
determine the best way to express those elements on the Promenade route. Signage, "signature"
details and plant selections, and historical markers will contribute in expressing the Promenade
theme.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations for improvement are presented in sequence starting at the Terra
Linda Recreation Center and proceeding east to the Lagoon Park at the Marin County Civic
Center. Please consult the scaled drawing inside the back cover for reference to the Promenade
route.
TERRA LINDA RECREATION CENTER (WESTERN TERMINUS)
The Terra Linda Recreation Center should be clearly marked as the start of The Promenade.
Signature details developed in the project theme process should be displayed prominently here
and repeated through the project. It is important to integrate these improvements with the
Recreate the Creek project already underway.
Del Ganado Road should be re -striped to include a Class II bike lane in each direction and to
accommodate the widened creek landscaping proposed in the Recreate the Creek plan, A new
six -foot -wide sidewalk with signature details should extend along each side of Del Ganado
Avenue from the Recreation Center to Freitas Parkway. A signature crosswalk should be installed
across Del Ganado Road from the Recreation Center to the Terra Linda Shopping Center and a
route should be developed from this crosswalk to Scotty's Market. Additional crosswalks with
theme details should be installed across Del Ganado Road at Freitas Parkway and across Freitas
Parkway to the south side of the street.
10
^r I `kms �M�unib `wssII ' `'
wg
r
+��e4 owe rrrov ULawwc r
�+awr rowu,nt
.,a elNa FPD1
Recommendation; Re -stripe Del Ganado from the RecrWdOn Center to Freltas
Parkway to acraomrnodate Class II bike lanes and additional landscaping at the
creek. Add new sidewalk with theme details to each side of the sbwt Add
new crmwwalks widr theme details across Del Ganado at the Recreation
Center and at Freitas Parkway. Coordinate improvements with die Recreate
the Creek plan. Develop connections to the Terra Linda Shopping Center,
ENTRY TO TERRA LINDA SHOPPING CENTER
The northwest corner of the Del Ganado Road and Freitas Parkway intersection is considered by
many to be the entry to the Terra Linda Shopping Center. At this corner, an opportunity exists for
improved signage and new accent plantings that reflect the Promenade design themes.
Recommendation; Work with the ownership of the Terra Linda Shopping
Center and the community to determine opportunities and constraints and to
refine the design details and cast of this project proposal
11
eR nwo4r �
VLFRQEj
A _
SCOTTY'S MARKET
The community has expressed a �� ��. ""w
desire to have a public plaza in or v' ' Nff"�1"P6
Sri
around the Terra Linda Shopping
Center for informal gatherings or
simply relaxing with a cup of coffee.owj. ���A5►r
The area in front of Scotty's Market ^� r-.� y•
is particularly attractive for this
purpose due to the existing -
Ks
pedestrian activity and the great
potential of a slightly reorganized
space. This space is achieved by
reconfiguring the parking and t �'kr
roadway nearest to the front door. 4444
Angled parking with one driveway is more convenient but causes a net loss of four parking stalls.
Ninety degree parking and one driveway result in no net loss of parking. Once the parking
realignment is achieved, important connections need to be made to the Terra Linda Recreation
Center and to the new walkways on Freitas Parkway,
Recommendation: Work with the ownership of Scotty's Market, the Terra
Linda Shopping Center and the community to develop a new pedestrian plaza,
a realigned parking lot and new pedestrian connections to Freitas Parkway
and the Terra Linda Recreadion Center.
FREiTAS PARKWAY: PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS
The existing five -foot -wide concrete sidewalk
along the south side of Freitas from Del
Ganado Road to Las Gallinas should be
removed and replaced with a six -foot -wide
concrete path and a two -foot -wide soft -surface
jogging path along the south side of the
sidewalk edge, creating a new multipurpose
pathway reflecting consistent signature
Promenade details.
Z
--.,w.Nli.
-*Wv 00awn
Q'.e.to cam
rte"
r.
M C1+r
A similar multipurpose pathway should be installed on the north side of Freitas Parkway. The
existing four -foot -wide concrete sidewalk in this area is in need of repair and/or replacement. In
most locations, the multi-purpose pathway is easily accommodated. However, in a few locations
grade differences along the pathway will require low retaining walls. In at least one area a
surface storm drain Swale is very close to the pathway. It is recommended that this drain be
placed underground. It is also recommended that short segments of safety railing be installed
where the pathway is in close proximity to the roadway. The new pathway should be studied
carefully to see if proposed improvements at Munson Park and the "Pork Chop Islands" would
cause an adjustment to the pathway's alignment.
12
The existing sidewalks along Freitas Parkway are un -lighted and dark. It is recommended that
new park - type light standards, 12 to 18 feet tall, be installed along with the new pathways to
enhance user safety.
When completed, the pathways will provide joggers and walkers with a loop path just over one
mile long. The jogging path opens this area to a new user group. These wider multi-purpose
pathways will make pedestrian and bike travel for young children and families more inviting and
safer than current conditions.
6e=rc6u_Kdm4 sm - lllmit wr% r
�+a ww'w
Recommendation:
Remove existing walkways on the north and south sides of Freitas
Parkway between Diel Ganado Road and Las Gallinas Avenue and
replace with six-foot wide concrete walkways, two -foot- wide jogging
paths and pathway fighting. Include Promenade theme details
FREITAS PARKWAY: BICYCLE IMPROVEMENTS
The existing arrangement of two 12 -foot traffic lanes and one eight -foot -wide parking lane along
the south side of Freitas Parkway does not provide enough width for a designated Class II
bikeway. However, by removing the parking along the south side of Freitas from Del Ganado to
Las Gallinas Avenue there is adequate room for the Class II bike lane. Currently, much of the
commuter parking along Freitas Parkway is west of Del Ganado and should not be changed. The
parking east of the Del Ganado bus stop and at the Las Pavadas bus stop should be relocated to
side streets. Parking along the north side of Freitas Parkway between Del Ganado and Las
Gallinas should also be eliminated. Each side of the street should be striped and signed for Class
II bike lanes.
Recommendation: Eliminate parking on the north and south sides of Freitas
Parkway between Del Ganado and Las Gallinas and create Class II bike lanes
in each direction.
13
FREITAS PARKWAY: LANDSCAPING
In addition to the pathway widening
and Class II bikeway improvements,
the landscaped areas along each side
of Freitas Parkway and those adjacent
to the creek should be improved. On
the north and south side of Freitas,
areas of bare land would benefit from
accent, shade, erosion -control and
theme plant materials.
The landscaped areas at the creek
adjacent to each curb are between
four and six feet wide. Additional
plantings of liquidambar trees and
other appropriate vegetation in this sr�rirri h?
■w..r
corridor will enhance the visual
character of Freitas Parkway. The plant palette and landscaping should
design of the Recreate the Creek and Gateway projects.
r_AEE r
be coordinated with the
During the course of public meetings a number of residents expressed the desire to eliminate the
concrete channel and re-establish a more natural creek environment along Freitas Parkway.
While this idea has some appeal (and considerable expense), it is outside the scope of this plan.
Several creek reclamation projects have taken place in the East Bay, which could provide
valuable information in assessing the feasibility of improving Las Gallinas Creek.
Recommendation: Work wiHr the community and city staff to develop goals
for improved landscaping and to identify areas that need improvement
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES
Undergrounding of utilities along Freitas Parkway is one of the City's long-term goals. Participants
at the community workshops were strongly in favor of identifying the locations of future
underground utilities (potentially at the edge of the roadway) in the Conceptual Plan so that
Promenade features will not be disrupted when utility work occurs. The possibility of providing
conduits for future utility work can be considered as Promenade features are built.
Recommendation: Work with community, City staff, and utility companies to
designate locations of future underground utilities and possibilities for
coordinating work with Promenade consfrucoon.
14
POCKET PARKS
Munson Park
The neighbors of Munson Park and other community members visualize modest improvements at
this quiet neighborhood park. The amenities currently existing at the Park consist of three picnic
tables, one large bench, and an open turf area punctuated by numerous mature shade trees.
Proposed amenities include a new restroom and a small grouping of game tables for checkers,
chess or a casual lunch. An optional area for the informal court game called "petanque" (a French
version of bocce ball) is also shown. The community would like to see public art in the park. This
expression can take many forms, from freestanding pieces prepared by local artists to an art wall
where local children could attach ceramic tiles.
The landscape improvements to Munson Park should be consistent with the new landscaping
proposed for Freitas Parkway. New ground covers, flowering shrubs, perennials and accent trees
would add greatly to the appearance of the park.
Hillview Park and Arbor Park
The pathways, jogging path and bike lanes should all integrate with the pocket parks to
encourage easy access. Hillview and Arbor Parks are perfect areas for rest stops and should be
studied for new opportunities, such as additional seating, game tables, and public art.
Recommendation: Work with the community and the City of San Rafael to
refine the goals for Munson Party Hillview Park and Arbor Park to establish the
types of amenities, design details and construction costs that would be
appropriate.
PORK CHOP ISLAND
Located at the intersection of Freitas Parkway
and Las Pavadas is a "leftover" piece of land
where the right turn lane cuts diagonally from
Freitas to Las Pavadas. Community input
regarding this area, called "Pork Chop Island"
is mixed. Some public participants feel that the
space should be closed off and converted to a
small park with the right turn lane moved onto
Freitas Parkway. Others feel that the current
configuration of the right turn lane is quite
useful.
One proposal shown in this plan converts the existing turn lane into a passive park that would be
quite compatible with the other pocket parks along Freitas Parkway. The plan shows a space with
gentle mounding, shade trees, perennial beds, park benches, and a more direct pathway
connection from the north side pathway to the intersection at Las Pavadas. At this intersection of
Las Pavadas and Freitas, a new crosswalk with theme details should be constructed.
Recommendation; Work with the community and the City of San Rafael to
refine the goals for the Pork Chop Islands as well as Me traffic constraints,
design details and cost of the proposal.
E
LAS GALLINAS AVENUE: PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS (Freitas Parkway to Merrydale
Road)
At the intersection of Las Gallinas Avenue and Freitas Parkway, the Promenade splits into two
routes that offer different experiences. One route enters the Northgate One Shopping Center and
provides new pedestrian opportunities and safety features (see "Northgate One" below). The
other route continues along Las Gallinas and extends the bicycle and pedestrian facilities
recommended for Freitas Parkway.
South Side of Las Gallinas Avenue
It is recommended that the existing four-foot-wide sidewalk be widened to a minimum of six
feet. The new sidewalk should contain colored markings and/or pavement insets consistent with
the Promenade theme. At the intersection with Nova Albion, the crosswalk should again be
identified by color and/or texture. Continuing east past Nova Albion the existing four-foot-wide
sidewalk can be widened in most locations to six feet. Where trees and other obstacles are
present, the sidewalk may be narrower. The existing sidewalk on the north side of Las Gallinas
between Nova Albion and Northgate Drive is quite narrow and interrupted by many driveways,
making sidewalk widenings along the north side impractical.
Northgate One to The Mall at Northgate
The western sidewalk on Northgate Drive between Freitas Parkway and Las Gallinas Avenue
should be widened for safety and convenience and should include signature Promenade details.
It is the main pedestrian connection between Northgate One and The Mall.
At the intersection of Northgate Drive and Las Gallinas Avenue, the pedestrian way from
Northgate One should cross Las Gallinas in a signature crosswalk and rejoin the Las Gailinas
Avenue sidewalk on the south side of the street. Here, the reunited pedestrian Promenade
crosses Northgate Drive in a signature crosswalk and enters a new public plaza being planned by
Rite-Aid and the Northgate Mall. This plaza should be an entertainment and gathering space as
well as a confluence for the following pedestrian routes:
Rgute to Macv'q: One pedestrian route from this plaza goes southeast through a reconstructed
parking lot to the north side of Macy's. This route provides convenient access to shopping and
refreshment opportunities. The route then continues to the east side of Macy's and beyond to a
proposed plaza at the intersection of Las Gallinas Avenue and Merrydale Road.
Route Parallel to Las Gallinas Avenue: Another pedestrian route parallels the south side of Las
Gallinas. The existing four-foot-wide sidewalk adjacent to the curb along the south side of Las
Gallinas cannot be widened due to grade differential and large existing trees, The opportunity
exists, however, to provide a new six-foot-wide (minimum) pedestrian pathway located along the
northern edge of the Macy's parking lot. The existing parking area would need to be re-striped
and some parking spaces would be lost. However, the loss of parking spaces may be replaced by
the proposed parking structures under consideration on The Mall property. If this multi-purpose
path were installed, a cost/benefit analysis would have to be conducted to see if the existing four
foot sidewalk could be converted to traffic or bike lanes.
Route Alona Northoate Drive: A third pedestrian route continues along each side of Northgate
Drive to where it intersects Los Ranchitos, then north on Los Ranchitos to Merrydale Road. A
"missing" section of sidewalk on the south side of Northgate Drive should be installed to create a
continuous walkway.
16
All three new pedestrian pathways would connect the "Rite-Aid" plaza with the small seating
plaza at the intersection of Las Gallinas and Merrydale Road.
Recommendations.
• Remove the existing walkway on the south side of Las Gallinas
between Freitas and Rite-Aid Plaza and replace it with a six -loot -wide
(minimum) walkway with theme details
• Install a new 5' wide sidewalk on the west side of Northgate Dave
between Freitas Parkway and Las Gallinas Avenue
• Work with The Mall at Northgate and Rite-Aid management to develop
a pedestrian way through The Mall or parallel to las Gallinas A venue
that connects Rite-Aid Plaza to the Las Gallinas/Merrydale Avenue
intersection.
• Complete the sidewalk on the south side of Northgate Drive.
LAS GALLINAS AVENUE: BICYCLE IMPROVEMENTS
At the intersection of Freitas Parkway and Las Gallinas, the bikeway portion of the Promenade
turns south onto Las Gallinas Avenue The San Rafael Bicycle Plan calls for Las Gallinas to be the
north/south connector between Novato and downtown San Rafael. Traffic engineers with the City
of San Rafael have indicated that four lanes of vehicular traffic may be required along Las
Gallinas from Freitas Parkway to Merrydale Road, if development goals at The Mall are realized.
This increase in traffic lanes would eliminate all parking along both sides of Las Gallinas as well
as any room for Class II bike lanes.
If expansion at The Mall takes place, the City of San Rafael should work with The Mall to
negotiate construction of Class Ilbike lanes on or near Las Gallinas If development pressures do
not require four lanes of traffic, then a Class I1 bicycle facility can be accommodated as follows:
Freitas Parkway to Northgate Drive
This portion of Las Gallinas currently includes two eight -foot -wide parking lanes, two 12 -foot -
wide traffic lanes, and a left turn lane with a short median at the Nova Albion intersection. If four
lanes of traffic are not required, then one lane of parking could be eliminated and the street
could be re -striped to accommodate two 12 -foot traffic lanes, one lane of parking and two Class
II bike lanes.
Northgate Drive to Merrydale Road
This part of Las Gallinas currently has two lanes of traffic, one lane for left turns, and one lane of
parking. If four lanes of traffic are not required, then the one lane of parking could be removed
to provide for two traffic lanes, one left turn lane and two Class II bike lanes.
Alternative Route
As an alternate route, Class II bicycle lanes could be extended east along Freitas Parkway from
Las Gallinas to Northgate Drive. At this point, the Class II bike lanes turn right and head south to
Las Gallinas. This alternative is not ideal due to the traffic congestion at the Freitas/Northgate Dr.
intersection, but it might serve an interim need.
FA
Class II Bike Lanes at Northgate Drive
Class II bike lanes should be provided in each direction along Northgate Drive from Las Gallinas
to Los Ranchitos. At Los Ranchitos, the cyclists have the choice of heading south on existing bike
routes to central San Rafael or north to the Merrydale Overcrossing and beyond.
Recommendations:
• If four lanes of traffic are required on Las Gallinas Avenue, then the City
should construct Class III bike lanes from Freitas to Northgate Drive, then
negotiate new Class II bike lanes through the mall property.
• If four lanes are not required on Las Gallinas,
-West of Northgate Drive, one lane of parking should be eliminated and
the street should be re -striped to accommodate two 12 -foot traffic lanes,
one lane of parking and two Class II bike lanes
-East ofNordrgalfe Drive, one lane afparldng should 6e remto ed to provide
for two traffic lanes, one left tura lane and two Class II bike lanes.
• Regardless of the bikeway development along Las Gallinas Avenue, Class
11 bike lanes should be provided in each direction along Northgate Drive
from Las Gallinas to Las Ranchitos
NORTHGATE ONE
New Entry
As earlier stated, the pedestrian element of the Promenade splits in two at the Las
Gallinas/Freitas Parkway intersection with one route going along Las Gallinas Avenue (see "Las
Gallinas Avenue: Pedestrian Improvements" above for detail) and the other heading into the
Northgate One Shopping Center. At the western corner of the shopping center an improved
pedestrian entry into Northgate One should occur. New walkways would bring pedestrians
around each side of the existing lawn to a new sign wall and a large shade trellis with wisteria
vines. A break in the existing wall would be aligned with the new expanded walkway in front of
Safeway.
Y � l
ate' M
_-M
1-.0 ---1
18
�„Fli�<5:... 1.71 \Il'.1 �I�' I•I�t•.•.f�•I i
Circulation at Safeway
fay
-.6+-moi •r r••wv t -
Y .e w 441.a� • f` - �
5c G1Y� °,A @ a -Few.'?
The narrow walkway in front of Safeway is
under-utilized by most shoppers who prefer
walking directly into the roadway to get to
their parked cars. Because the
pedestrian/vehicle conflicts in front of
Safeway are significant and because this
area is such a key link in the pedestrian
Promenade, an opportunity exists to create a
new, safe pedestrian facility for shoppers as
well as for pedestrians just passing through.
The two-way driveway in front of Safeway is 26 feet wide. This plan proposes to narrow the
driveway to two 11 -foot -wide drive lanes and move the curb line four feet away from the
building.. This reduction of street width will slow the traffic and increase sidewalk width. The
existing rails along the back of the curb could be moved to the new edge of curb. Moving the
curb north almost doubles the pedestrian space and allows for much safer pedestrian movement
through the area.
Central Plaza
Members of the community have a great deal
of interest in the existing plaza between
Starbuck's and Kinko's. It is centrally located,
receives great sunlight and is a pleasant place
to relax and visit with friends. They have
expressed a number of ideas for improving the
space, such as adding more comfortable
seating, high -branching light -textured shade
trees, and a crosswalk to the lawn median
north of the plaza.
•� �yrr�
.•o=n•s.� we
Main Vehicular Entry
Mature sycamore trees exist on the east side of the center island at the main vehicle entry and
young sycamore trees exist on the west side. This plan calls for additional sycamores to be
planted on each side of the center island to create an allee of trees that people would drive
through upon entering or leaving the property. At the south end of the center island, several
people feel that the lawn area could provide an informal seating area if Flowering deciduous
trees, like crape myrtles, were added. Pedestrian access to this space should be studied carefully
with the city traffic engineer.
Recommendabion. The community should work dosely with the city staff and
the owners of Northgate One to improve the safety of the pedestrian
circulation and to identify opportunities to carry the Promenade theme
throughout the center.
I
THE MALL AT NORTHGATE
Rite-Aid Plaza
The Las Gallinas Avenue/Northgate Drive
intersection is the grand entry to The Mall at
Northgate. Vehicles coming off Freitas
�---
Parkway and pedestrians coming from
Northgate One and Nova Albion Drive must
r as
pass this corner to get to The Mall. Currently,only
signage exists at this corner of the
property, but The Mall and Rite-Aid are
,1 �—/ •_�
planning to construct a new Rite-Aid store in
this area that includes inviting architecture
"
and a dynamic public plaza. Features of this
k,; Q +
plaza might include an entry court with a
� E) 0 O CJ
large, colorful paving pattern at the center of
the space, which draws the pedestrians to a
large shade trellis covered with wisteria. At this point, a passageway is formed by the close
proximity of the buildings. Where the visitor emerges, he passes through a bosque of flowering
shade trees and is greeted with a full view of
the plaza in all of its detail. A circular fountain
provides the sound and movement of water plus informal seating. Numerous shade trees cool the
paving and create an interesting overstory. Informal steps surround an elevated space that can
be used as a performance area.
Recommendation: Work with the ownership of The Mall at Northgate, Rite-Aid
and the community to develop the details for this plaza.
NORTHGATE THREE CENTER: NEW INTERSECTION AT LAS GALLINAS AVENUE
The Northgate Three Shopping Center has a southern vehicular entry near the Las
Gallinas/Merrydale intersection and another entry near to but not aligned with a Mall entry road
that runs by the north side of Macy's. In order to simplify the circulation in this area, the two
existing Northgate Three entries should be closed and a new, signalized entry should be
constructed where The Mall entry road near Macy's intersects Las Gallinas.
Recommendation: Work with the city traffic engineers, ownership of The Mall
at Northgate and ownership of Northgate Three to close the two existing
entries and build a new signalized entry where Macy's access road intersects
Las Gallinas
20
FAST PORTAL: LAS GALLINAS AVENUE AND MERRYDALE OVERCROSSING INTERSECTION
All pedestrian and bicycle improvements lead to the Las Gallinas/Merrydale Overcrossing
intersection. This intersection requires improvement due to its significance as the east portal of
The Mall and hub for bike and pedestrian travels east and south. New, low seat walls on each
side of the entry drive create a more formal appearance and provide an informal rest area for
pedestrians and cyclists. Special paving in front of the walls complete and define the small
seating space. Accent lighting highlights existing trees and new, low level signage for the center.
1 fjf.••^:r•K1
Recommendation: Work with the ownership of The Mall at Northgate to develop the
details for this new entry.
MERRYDALE OVERCROSSING
The bicycle and pedestrian connection between the Las Gallinas/Merrydale Overcressing
intersection and the Marin County Civic Center can be accommodated in more than one way.
Existing bicycle lanes occur on both sides of the Merrydale Overcrossing and a pedestrian
sidewalk is provided on the north side of the Overcrossing as well.
Preferred Route to Civic Center
The safer and more appealing route for the pedestrian and bicycle connection to the Civic Center
is located on the west side of Highway 101 behind the Mt. Olivet Cemetery and Guide bogs for
the Blind. From the "East Portal" described above, existing sidewalks and bicycle lanes extend
over the overcrossing. In the preferred route, just before the overcrossing the eastbound cyclists
would exit to the right and continue on the existing street behind the Cemetery. Pedestrians
would follow the same route on a new concrete sidewalk to be built at the back of the existing
curb. Westbound pedestrians could also use this same sidewalk or could use the existing sheet to
cross under the overcrossing to connect with the existing west bound sidewalks there. All
westbound cyclists would use he same existing sheet to cross under the overcrossing and
connect with the existing westbound Class II bike lane coming off the Merrydale Overcrossing.
21
Where the road behind the Cemetery (Merrydale Road) intersects with the Northwestern Pacific
Railroad right-of-way, the Promenade facilities turn east and utilize the existing train
undercrossing to connect with the existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities on Civic Center Drive.
The existing single railroad track is south of the undercrossing's center line, leaving adequate
space for the installation of a multi-purpose pathway, which should be a 10 -foot -wide concrete
path with an adjacent two -foot -wide soft -surface jogging path.
This connection under the freeway is considered highly desirable as it reduces the conflict
between automobiles and multi -use pathway users. It is worth pursuing at an early date. Any
improvements in this area would need to be coordinated with transit officials, the County of
Marin, the City of San Rafael, utility districts and adjacent private landowners. Improvements for
pedestrians and bicycles under the freeway would need to have appropriate safety and security
provisions built into their design. Proper lighting for evening use and adequate access for police
patrol is a necessity.
Additional Routes to Civic Center
Additional connections between Los Ranchitos Drive and the railroad undercrossing should be
explored. Other possible connections to the railroad right-of-way are:
• Along the paved road within the Cemetery property at its southern border.
• Along the southern boundary of the Guide Dogs for the Blind property.
• Along the existing creek/flood control right-of-way approximately 100 feet south
of the Los Ranchitos and Constance Drive intersection. The existing concrete -
lined channel could be covered with a boardwalk and used as a pedestrian and
bicycle connection.
• The existing connection at Walter Place just south of Los Ranchitos and
Constance Drive.
Any connection to private property would need the full consent of the property owners.
Recommendations.
• Install a Class II hike lane and sidewalk along the eastbound street
next to the Merrydale Overcrossing.
• Install a westbound Class II hike lane and sidewalk along the existing
street under the Merrydale Overr mssing, which connects to the
westbound bike lane and sidewalk on Merrydale Overcrossing.
• Install a 10 -foot wide multi-purpose pathway wide an adjacent two -
foot -wide jogging path from Menydale Road (parallel to the railroad
tracks through the underr%sing the freeway) to the Class II hike
lanes and sidewalks on Civic Center Drive.
CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
From the Merrydale Overcrossing on the east side of US 101, existing Class II bike lanes continue
south along each side of Civic Center Drive to the railroad crossing. From this point, no bicycle or
pedestrian facilities exist along Civic Center Drive. This plan recommends that Class II bike lanes
and six -foot -wide sidewalks should be continued on both sides of Civic Center Drive from the
railroad crossing to North San Pedro Road. A new Promenade crosswalk would carry pedestrians
across Civic Center Drive and orient them to a new entry to Lagoon Park.
22
Install much-needed landscaping on the east side of Civic Center Drive, south of the McInnis One
office building.
Recommendadons:
• Install a Class II billre lane and a six -foot -wide sidewalk on eadr side of
Civic Center Drive from the railroad crossing to North San Pedro Road.
• Install landscaping on the east side of Civic Center Drive, south of the
McInnis One o>i`ice building
LAGOON PARK (EASTERN TERMINUS)
The new entry to lagoon Park should focus the visitor's view on the lagoon and should integrate
with the existing park conditions. A new pathway should extend from the Promenade crosswalk
to the shady lawn area near the existing lagoon pathway. At the lawn area, a small plaza and
trellis with wisteria vines and informal seating should mark the Eastern Terminus of the
Promenade. A walkway should connect this seating area to the walkway around the lagoon.
Recommendations.
• Install a new walkway, new seating, and a new trellis with wisteria
vines at the entry to Lagoon Park.
• Install new walkway connections from the new entry to the pathway
around the lagoon.
TRANSIT CENTER NEAR CIVIC CENTER
As the proposed transit center at the intersection of McInnis Parkway and Civic Center Drive is
developed, it should utilize consistent Promenade details and should connect easily and safely to
the bikeways and pedestrian ways. A Promenade crosswalk should be utilized.
UNIFYING PROMENADE THEMES
The project theme is an expression of the cultural and historical elements of north San Rafael.
The theme and all of it elements are intended to convey local history in a permanent, outdoor
format that can be viewed with convenience any hour of the day. Providing theme elements
along the Promenade will give pedestrians and cyclists places to stop and rest, and opportunities
to learn about the community's history.
A community workshop should be undertaken to identify the people, places, historical events and
natural history that make North San Rafael what it is today. The historic significance of the Terra
Linda valley can be categorized into four general periods; The pre -history Native American
habitation; the Spanish Land Grant period; the Freitas ranch period and the Developmental
period from 1945 to present. Each of these distinct periods is unique and worthy of researching
and documenting for community interest and education. Historic markers of plaques should be
developed and located to chronologically tell the story of the people who lived, worked and loved
the community known to us as Terra Linda (beautiful €and).
23
The markers could begin at the Terra Linda Recreation Center with a historical presentation on
the Native American era. Each period may require several markers. As on moves eastward
along the Promenade, the historic periods can be presented in chronological order. The marker
for the most recent development period would be located in the vicinity of The Northgate Mall. A
marker in the vicinity of the railroad could highlight the railroad and tunnel development and a
marker at Lagoon Park could highlight and Civic Center development.
The project theme should be expressed with an architectural style that matches the overall
design intent of the Promenade. The style might reflect the area's Spanish heritage or might
symbolically represent the significance of the stream courses in the Terra Linda watershed. Once
the style is established the elements themselves (i.e, kiosks, markers, signage, paving details,
etc.) can be designed. For example, a blue or teal color could be applied to the surface of the
concrete walkways to symbolize local hydrology.
Throughout the Promenade, and especially at the end points, it is important to show a map of
the Promenade within the context of North San Rafael, On these maps, "You Are Here" labels
would be helpful to orient first time visitors. These maps could also show locations of historical
events in the area.
The project theme and style should use consistent detailing in all of the graphic and architectural
elements along the Promenade. Signage, low wails, paving details, crosswalks, benches, trellises,
guard rails, accent lighting and even planting materials should reflect the designated motif.
24
IV. IMPLEMENTATION PRIORITIES
The North San Rafael Vision Promenade reaches almost two miles and extends through public
and private lands, Implementation of the improvements recommended in this plan requires a
concerted effort between the City of San Rafael, private landowners and concerned citizens.
To help guide the implementation process, a brief discussion of financing and an outline of the
community's priorities has been prepared.
FINANCING
As stated earlier, this project will be implemented over time, and in phases, as funding becomes
available. Funding sources may include: private sector contributions, grants from various
sources, and new development contributions. City funds, most likely, will not be available for the
foreseeable future given the current State -funding crisis and its impact on local government
finances.
Private landowners can undertake improvements on private land at any time, providing necessary
City approvals are acquired. Additionally, the City of San Rafael can require the construction of
specific improvements when a landowner submits an application for facility expansion or
improvements.
PRIORITIES
Whether the improvements are on public land or private land, a public communication process
needs to occur for every project to ensure the public's needs are satisfied. Goals and objectives
need to be drafted for each project to identify priorities, limits of work and scheduling.
Developing a strategy for getting started is one of the most useful endeavors the community can
undertake, The following list of construction priorities outlines a reasonable approach for realizing
the goats established in this plan.
1A. Bike Lanes: Eliminate parking where specified on Freitas Parkway and construct
Class II bike lanes in each direction from the Terra Linda Recreation Center to
Las Gallinas Avenue. Construct Class II bike lanes in each direction on Northgate
Drive from Las Galiinas to Los Ranchitos. Continue existing Class II bike lanes on
Civic Center Drive from the railroad crossing to Lagoon Park,
1B. Themes: Work with the community and VIA committee to develop project
themes and details for historical markers, signature crosswalks, trellises, and
sidewalks.
1C. Railroad Riaht-Df-Way: The City of San Rafael must begin the process of
establishing a multi-purpose pathway adjacent to the railroad tracks that cross
under US 101.
25
2A. Del Ganado Road: Construct the walkway, jogging path and crosswalk
improvements specified in this plan for Del Ganado Road between the Terra
Linda Recreation Center and Freitas Parkway. This construction should
accommodate the widened landscape zone at Santa Margarita Creek specified in
the "Recreate the Creek" plan,
2B. Freitas P rk : Construct the walkway, jogging path, crosswalks, planting,
irrigation and lighting improvements specified in this plan for each side of Freitas
Parkway from Del Ganado to Las Gallinas. Prepare for future undergrounding of
utilities as needed.
2C. Joyoina Path & Sidewalk: Construct jogging path on Freitas Parkway from Del
Ganado to Monticello. Construct the un -built portion of sidewalk on the south
side of Northgate Drive to create a continuous sidewalk.
2D. Terra Linda Sh000ing Center: Construct signage and landscaping improvements
at the southeast corner of the Terra Linda Shopping Center. Construct the new
parking and pedestrian plaza in front of Scotty's Market. Construct a pedestrian
connection between the Terra Linda Recreation Center, Scotty's Market and
Freitas Parkway.
3A. Pprk Amenities: Construct park amenities at Munson, Niliview and Arbor Parks.
3B. Pork Choo Island: Construct improvements to the pork chop island at Las
Pavadas and Freitas Parkway.
3C. Commercial Centers: Develop the suggested improvements at Northgate One,
The Mall at Northgate and Northgate Three. Strategize implementation of the
improvements with the ownership of the centers.
3D. Las_ Gallinas__Ayenue: Work with the City of San Rafael to develop interim and
future alternates for bike and pedestrian ways on Las Gallinas Avenue.
Consider the extension of the Promenade west up Freitas Parkway from the Terra Linda Shopping
Center to the open space areas beyond.
26
VI. APPENDIX
MINUTES FRAM PUBLIC MEETINGS
Meeting minutes July 17, 2002
Meeting held at Terra Linda Recreation Center
Meeting opened by Dave Bernardi, San Rafael public Works director at approximately 7:45 PM.
Project background was given by Kay Noguchi. Kay introduced project landscape architects Brian
Powell and Brian Wittenkeller. Brian Wittenkeller reviewed consultant's approach to project and
indicated that the primary purpose of meeting was to receive input from the public in attendance.
Brian Powell presented preliminary concepts for the Promenade development from Scotty's
Market to the Marin County Civic Center. The meeting was then opened to the general public.
Approximately 40 people were in attendance. The public was asked for their input, comments
and suggestions. Shirley Fischer recorded public comments.
Following is a listing of public comments:
• Intersections in area are not safe for pedestrians.
• Consider possible pedestrian overpass at The Mall corner.
• Continue Promenade north on Redwood Highway to Smith Ranch Rd.
• Freitas Interchange is most dangerous in all of Marin County per Caltrans.
• 8 -foot -wide concrete sidewalks not desirable, provide soft surface for runners.
• Continue bike lanes along Freitas to Northgate One as alternative to Las Gallinas.
• San Rafael bike plan calls for a bike path on railroad right-of-way and Merrydale.
Think more of historic context of Creek, community interest in restoring Las Gallinas
Creek.
• State and federal grants are available for creek restoration.
Include creek restoration in Promenade plan.
• Add quality of life as a goal for the Promenade plan.
• Undergrounding utilities along Promenade should be significant part of project.
• Eliminate parking on south side of Freitas or provide indented parking for four or five
cars.
Likes the way the north side path meanders.
• Extend Promenade to Terra Linda Recreation Center.
• Provide pedestrian walkways that are wheelchair accessible particularly at Safeway and
Starbuck's Plaza.
• San Rafael charette included water features, fountain, and waterways as part of
walkway.
• Reclaimed water currently available along Freitas Parkway to Terra Linda Recreation
Center?
Put pedestrians adjacent to new creek.
• Like autumn color of trees along Freitas Parkway, especially liquidambers on south side.
• Locate pedestrian walkway where one can look down into creek.
• Straight drive-through in front of Safeway is dangerous. Widening sidewalk is good idea.
• Few people use small parks along Freitas. Could parks be enhanced with water features?
Could there be a Class I bikeway on one side of Freitas and pedestrian pathway on the
other side?
• Theme and focal point of Promenade and community are the creek system; native
plants, habitat, signs. Enhance creek and watershed all the way to bay.
• Look at entire watershed system. There are people in the state ready to provide grant
money.
27
• Connect bike route from Freitas Parkway to Sleepy Hollow.
• Perhaps ecological theme for north side and historic theme for south side.
• Find a better name for Starbuck's Plaza.
• Prefer north side for walking and jogging because south side is shady (others prefer
south side for walking).
• Use native plantings along creek and Promenade.
• Creek is center of the community.
• Need buffer for reduction of traffic noise, put walkway near creek.
• Use less asphalt and paving and lessen automobile 'influence.
• Why aren't pocket parks used? No protection or separation from cars?
• Need plaza near coffee shop in 'Scotty's Market' shopping center.
• Greenbrae walkway under freeway is well done with adequate lighting and not scary.
• When re -striping parking spaces make more room for standard size automobiles.
• Experience walking through rich riparian area along creek in Lucas Valley.
• Remnants of riparian habitat remain in Terra Linda, could be again?
• What do we want to see as we walk and bike home? Native plants that tie-in with the
hills.
• Create better separations between pedestrians and cars/driveways.
• Pork Chop Islands contain electric and telephone equipment boxes. Can they be located
in less visible areas? Are they proliferating? Can they be consolidated and landscaped.
• Create slow water in the channel, small waterfalls, and ponds to help keep sediment out
of Bay.
• Create tree canopy. Studies show tree canopy slows traffic.
• Las Gallinas unsafe for bikes, 4 lanes of traffic will make it worse.
• Bridge over creek between Scotty's and Las Gallinas?
• Permanent bike lane (Class II) south side of Freitas Parkway.
• Parking along Las Gallinas slows traffic, creates buffer effect for pedestrians.
• Intersections should be wider for pedestrians with countdown signals.
• Create walkway between Guide Dogs and cemetery property.
• Existing pathway between Los Ranchitos and San Rafael Meadows.
• Would be great to connect to Freitas open space, Civic Center, China Camp with soft
surface jogging path.
• People won't let kids use Class II or Class III bike links, as these are not separated from
cars.
• Can accommodate kids on multi -use path with pedestrians. Want majority of adult
cyclists to stay on bike lane however.
• Could we do full multi -use path as in Greenbrae and Mill Valley?
• Multi -use path 8 ft. paving, 2 ft. soft surface each side equals 12 feet. Could possibly do
on South side of Freitas.
• Bicycle parking? Where and how many. Drinking water available? At Munson and
Hillside Park.
Possible traffic circle at Monticello and Freitas. Current stop signs in some directions
make intersection confusing.
• Create'oases' along the way, with palm trees. 'Not! Bathrooms? Terra Linda Recreation
Center and The Mall.
• In favor of parking for commuters who take bus to work. Provide 15 to 18 spaces at
Scotty's and five or so at other bus stop.
• Like idea of parking bays for commuter parking. Check for off-road parking at Christ
Presbyterian Church or other nearby parking areas.
• Feng Shui. Could someone look at the project for health and safety? (Was done at Corte
Madera Town Center)
The meeting concluded at approximately 9:45 PM.
28
• Could public area be widened where Class III bike route is? May be able to use some of
private landscape strips? Remove parking?
• Parking space is major issue with shopping centers.
• Narrowing Class II to Class III with 11 ft. traffic lane decreases safety for bikers; doesn't
match bike plan routes for Las Gallinas
Possibly Class II on Freitas to Northgate and try to make changes on Northgate also.
• Decrease traffic lanes on Freitas, 12 feet to 11 feet such as on a Highway 101 HOV lane,
to create more bicycle/pedestrians space.
Parking pockets, increase 1 ft. of pavement on a door side instead of jogging lane.
• Look at space requirements for future Creek restoration project.
• Designate bike racks and water fountains along Promenade.
• Provide chess tables by Starbucks. In the past there have been policing issues in that
location.
• Caution about water features -- fountains near Big Five and Starbuck's were removed
because of vandalism. Design of water feature important.
• Like gathering place near Scotty's.
• Like simplest design for Terra Linda Shopping Center signage.
Trellises are more windproof than umbrella tables, maybe a combination?
• Incorporate swings at Munson Park, losing them in other areas such as Santa Margarita
Park.
• Like water feature at Munson Park. Kids will like it also.
Problem with health regulations for kids' water area, had to remove water feature at
Freitas Park.
• Munson Park lovely now, hate to see it developed and fenced near road., would be less
attractive.
No parking on Freitas except near bus stops.
Keep Munson Park and Pork Chop Islands simple.
• Fewer bus parking spaces on Freitas; use some on other adjacent side streets.
• Big money projects, move roads to one side of Creek. Box culvert under roadway.
• What is lime frame for implementing Promenade improvements.
• Only need jogging path on one side of walkway.
• Keep Creek in middle, visually divides the four lanes of roadway.
• Pork Chop Island parks are impractical, a lot of pocket parks already exist, people use
right turn lane, just add landscaping.
• Merrydale Road, not wide enough for five-foot-wide bike lanes. Overcrossing currently
has four-foot-wide bike lanes.
• Pursue possible right-of-way between Guide Dogs and Cemetery.
• If Las Gallinas is converted to two lanes of traffic in each direction with no parking,
people will not want to walk or bike there, Promenade will not be complete without this
connection.
• If The Mall is going to expand, housing, etc. They will need to accommodate cars but
also create a bike and pedestrian solution. Create bike lanes along Las Gallinas to
Merrydale, may need to lose some parking that could be replaced elsewhere on the site.
• Create crosswalks and pedestrian barrier between Starbuck's Plaza and the green grass
circle.
• Plant a few trees in grass circle.
• Use paving pattern as visual indication to slow down at intersection.
The meeting concluded at approximately 9:45 p.m.
30
Muting minutes September 18, 2002.
Meeting held at Terra Linda Recreation Center
• Designate which lane scooters are to use.
• Specify bus stop locations.
• Consider fewer than 4 lanes on Las Gallinas. Widen entrances/intersections to get people into
The Mall.
• Safety problem with pedestrian crossings at Las Gallinas/Northgate needs resolution.
• Reconsider entering Northgate Mall from Del Presidio or direct entry to Mall other way.
• City needs to pull all plans together into one plan—bikeway, Mall plans, transit stops
(overlays) --so environmental impacts can be evaluated and public can see the whole
project—also consider factors like restoring Gallinas Creek.
• Definite recommendation to connect through the railroad tunnel (next to Guide Dogs most
direct --best for bikes, doesn't bring people back into congested area).
• Concern about tree roots where parking bays are proposed—tree roots extensive; trees are
important for street ambiance.
• Suggest alternative—remove all parking on Freitas along Promenade and find other locations
for commuter parking (side streets? Terra Linda Shopping Center?)
• Will new meandering pathways encroach on tree roots? Don't encroach with new path any
closer than edge of existing sidewalk.
• Don't realign sidewalk closer to street in Munson Park.
• Neighbors in the past didn't like the noise associated with the proposed children's playground
at Munson Park.
• Consider renaming Munson Park/western terminus to reflect Spanish/Indian heritage. "No".
• Need restrooms—Scotty's? Munson Park?
• Don't want Munson Park plan to detract from priority on Promenade. Put in the back of the
report as possible future improvement, not primary recommendation.
• Possible bike/pedestrian route through Mall instead of Las Gallinas bank stretch.
• Strong recommendation that if 4 lanes are required on Las Gallinas that development needs
to accommodate/replace Class II bike lane.
• Construct Class ti bike lane on Las Gallinas now.
• Do not want to trade off Class II functionality for more congestion—bikeway meets
community needs; giving it away to increase congestion is against community needs.
• Las Gallinas from Northgate Drive to Freitas is a key link in a north -south bikeway and critical
safe infrastructure for bicycle commuting from Novato to San Rafael.
• What are the options for mitigating parking needs if you remove one lane of parking on Las
Gallinas?
• Need connection to Los Gamos (pedestrian).
• Speeding and congestion at intersection of Las Pavadas and Freitas (traffic to private
schools}—U turns, etc.—is a problem. Conditions at intersection need a closer look.
• 4 -way -stop needed at intersection road near lagoon and Civic Center Drive.
• Re-create the creek.
• At Del Ganado and Freitas intersection replace old yellow brick near bridges with red cinder
block like that used on the Fre Station and Espresso Express—repeat use of similar materials
along Freitas.
• Coordinate finishes (materials and design) of signage at Terra Linda Shopping Center, the
Northgate shopping centers, bridges over Freitas, and the Gateway Project.
• Repeating theme along Promenade—wisteria trellises (already at Hillview Park, Northgate
near Macy's}—specify other locations.
• Specify how you get through parking lot to plaza in front of Scotty's.
• Like using the grass circle at Northgate One as a passive grassy area.
• Like the idea of an avenue of trees along the entry way at the grass circle at Northgate One.
• Keep plans simple so as not to put off property owners,
• Problem with people double parking for Starbuck's—maybe designate a 5 -minute parking
zone.
• Consider a wisteria trellis at the curb in front of Northgate One plaza. Repeat at entry of
Northgate One (Freitas/Las Gallinas).
3I
BIBLIOGRAPHY
California, State of, Highway Design Manual, Chapter 1000, Bikeway Planning
and Design. February 1, 2001.
San Rafael, City of, Bicycle and Pedestrian MasterPlan. San Rafael Community
Development Department.
San Rafael, Qty of, Vision North San Rafael. San Rafael Community
Development Department, 1997.
32
North San Rafael Promenade Improvements
Area Improvement
Segment 1: Freitas from Del 1. 8 -foot bike lane/parking lane on south side of
Ganado to Las Gallinas Freitas
2. 4 to 5 -foot bike lane on north side of Freitas
3. Sidewalk on the north side of Freitas.
4, Intersection improvements
S. Pocket park improvements
6. Spurs
Segment H: Freitas at Las 7. Bike route continues right onto Las Gallinas,
Gallinas to Northgate Drive right onto Northgate Drive, and left onto Los
Ranchitos to Merrydale Overcrossing.
8. Crosswalks bring the walkway across Freitas
to the south side of Freitas.
9. A pedestrian entry into Northgate One to
include a wide sidewalk to bring people from
Freitas into the shopping center.
10. Extend the walkway from the vicinity of
Starbucks along the storefronts of Northgate
One to the sidewalk along Northgate Drive,
and south to the Mali.
Phase Comment
One Consider parking bays at Maria B. Freitas Senior Housing
and the Freitas bus stops, with an 8' bike/parking lane.
One Consider eliminating parking along this segment, and
adding a 4' to 5' bike lane.
One Walkway is widened and improved, and includes
distinctive crosswalk treatment at crosswalks.
One At Las Pavadas and Montecillo, consider creating larger
pedestrian areas at the intersection by closing the right -turn
lanes and attaching the islands to the promenade walkway.
One Add benches, game board tables, public art.
One Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan includes the following:
• Provide a bike lane on both sides of Freitas to the Open
Space.
• Provide a bike lane on both sides of Del Ganado to the
Open Space.
One In Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan.
One Include distinctive crosswalk treatment.
Longer Work with Northgate One to make promenade
-term improvements to the auto entry on Freitas.
Longer Work with Northgate One to include the promenade
-term within the site design.
Include distinctive crosswalk treatment.
ISegment 3: Northgate Drive j 11. At the Northwest corner of the Mall, add (in I Two f Work with Macerich to bring pedestrian improvements to ,
3 07/09/01
at Las Gallinas to Merrydale
addition to Rite Aid) an indoor/outdoor cafe,
the northwest corner of the Mall in conjunction with the
Overcrossing intersection
a public plaza with performance area, and
relocation of Rite Aid.
small shops.
12.
Provide a walkway from the Las
Two
Work with Macerich to provide easy access from the Las
Gallinas/Northgate intersection through the
Gallinas/Northgate intersection to the front entrance of the
northwest corner of the Mall along the front
mall, and from the mall to the Merrydale intersection.
of the Mall, around Macy's and along the
drive to the Merrydale intersection.
13.
Crosswalk improvements at Las Gallinas and
One
Include distinctive crosswalk treatment.
Merrydale.
14.
Options for other sidewalk improvements
Three
. The sidewalk on the mall side of Las Gallinas could be.
relocated inside of the landscaping, so long as parking is
not reduced,
• As opportunities arise, improve pedestrian safety (for
example, reduce curb cuts) on the east side of Las
Gallinas.
Segment 4: Merrydale 15.
Bike route continues across Merrydale and
Three
Included in Bicycle/Pedestriaii Plan.
Overcrossing to Civic Center
south along Civic Center Drive,
16.
Crosswalk improvements at Merrydale and
One
Include distinctive crosswalk treatment.
Civic Center Drive.
17.
Complete sidewalk in section along east side
Three
Most of the east side of Civic Center Drive has a sidewalk
of Civic Center Drive between Las Gallinas
with the exception of this section.
Creek to the Lagoon.
18.
Spurs
Three
e Include in the transit stop site design pedestrian access
through the tunnel, behind the cemetery along
Merrydale to Las Gallinas.
• Consider relocating the Caltrans buspad from the
Freitas interchange area the transit stop area to better
link riders up with the transit stop and the promenade.
• Encourage the County to extend pedestrian walkways
in and around the Civic Center.
4 07/09101
Promenade Route - Comments from Oct. 22, 2001 Walk
• Should the Promenade terminale at a small public plaza at the Terra
Linda Shopping Center?
• A wider sidewalk should be created on Freitas (at least 5-6' wide), ideally
with a landscape buffer between the road and pathway.
• is the grade difference between the sidewalk on the north side of Freitas
and the roadway a problem? Would the south sidewalk be a better
location for the Promenade?
• There should be informational plaques provided -- history of the Terra
Linda Open Space acquisition, Freitas family, etc.
Consider eliminating the "pork chop" island at Las Pravados and Freitas
by placing the right turn lane on Freitas. This would provide a larger
landscaped area.
• Munson Park needs more amenities and noise buffering for picnic
facilities.
• Noxi gate 1: There is no pedestrian entry into the shopping center. A
gathering place between Kinko's and Starbucks should be considered.
• A wider sidewalk is needed along Northgate Drive between Freitas and
Las Gallinas.
• Pathway lighting could be provided by solar powered bollard, lighting.
• Landscaping is needed on the east side of Civic Center Drive, south of the
1 McInnis office building.
i
The path should tie into Civic Center Park, The sidewalk should be
i extended across the lawn to connect with the walkway around the lagoon,
3
16 Specialty paving could be colored concrete for sidewalks and crosswalks
with an imprinted pattern (such as leaves, etc.). Other identification
features could include light fixtures and/or bollards.
6T/0T :� SBt+TGt:01 L, -2T St -STS �E77E:INE11IP.1:WCII, A this,: -0 0102-S-B'EA
Meeting Minutes Aug. 14, 2002
Meeting Heid At Terra Linda Recreation Center.
Pre -meeting walk of Promenade route began at 5:30 p.m. Approximately 20 participants were
carpooled to the Civic Center. The group walked the Promenade route arriving at the Terra Linda
Recreation Center at approximately 7 PM.
The community meeting was called to order by Kay Noguchi at 7:35 p.m. Approximately 40
people were in attendance. Brian Wittenkeller gave a brief introduction and history of the project
and Brian Powell proceeded to present the revised Master Plan for the Promenade. Mr. Powell
and Mr. Wittenkeller gave detailed descriptions of design drawings for specific site locations such
as: Scotty's Market Plaza and Munson Park, among others.
Following the presentation by the landscape architects a short break was taken. Following the
break, the public was invited to provide comments and suggestions regarding the Promenade
concepts. Shirley Fisher recorded public comments.
Following is a listing of public comments:
• Keep the riparian theme, underlying a focus on restoration.
• Undergrounding of utilities is a high priority and should be addressed in the Promenade
report.
• Include Santa Margarita Creek project as part of background information in the report.
• Integrate what community is already doing at Gateway.
• Began Promenade project at Terra Linda Community Center.
• Under grounding of utilities should include conduit or culvert that utilities can later be
pulled through.
• Concerned that Freitas cross sections are unrealistic, too narrow for jogging near fence,
trees, etc.
Cross-section is also too narrow for much landscape enhancement near Creek without
adding more room to planting area.
• Liquidambar trees are the existing theme and should be continued.
• Consider removing one lane of roadway from Del Ganado to Las Gallinas as remedy for
narrow section of Freitas Parkway.
• Could Class II bike way continue along Freitas to Northgate Drive? Too narrow on
Northgate Drive?
• Bridge across Creek at Munson Park?
+ Pork Chop Islands more suitable for passive park use.
• Include bike/pedestrian connection between cemetery and Guide Dogs.
• Repeating themes (colors, etc.) at special iocations and shopping centers.
• Unifying theme -- possibly re -circulating fountains with large rocks.
• Repeating theme -- similar architectural design details for walls, benches, signs and trellis
as well as paving details and theme plantings.
• Theme paving to extend into intersection & cross walks.
+ Safety measures such as security lighting and police patrols are needed at walkway
under highway.
• Concern that Pork Chop playground for children too close to traffic, good idea but should
be located elsewhere, possibly part of undeveloped Freitas Park.
• Right turn lane at Pork Chop Island not needed.
• Favor simple pian for pork chop Island.
• Water theme -- use more real water features, more naturalized features, water that
actually feeds to Creek.
29
VISI 0 N
North San Rafael
November 1997
San Rafael, California
North San Rafael Steering Committee Members
Jim Atchison
Ida Baugh
Al Boro
Amadeus Colenbrander
Ann Crew
Carol Dillon
Carol Durham
Jerry Edelbrock
Consultants
Shirley Fischer
Kitty Forde
Peter Galli
Elissa Giambastiani
Rev. Lon Haack
Tom Hinman
Ben Lowe
Ian MacLeod
Phyllis McGuire
Robyn Anderson, Moore Iacofano Goltsman, Inc.
Jeff Baird, Jeffery Baird & Associates
Paul Tuttle, Moore Iacofano Goltsman, Inc.
Carolyn Verheyen, Moore Iacofano Goltsman, Inc.
Larry Paul
Gary Phillips
Lauren Pizzi
Joe Shekou
Roger Smith
Ann Song -Hill, co-chair
Valerie Taylor
Pat Webb, co-chair
City of San Rafael
PROJECT TEAM STAFF SUPPORTING CITY STAFF
Evelyn Buchwitz, Planning Intern
Jean Hasser, Principal Planner *
Linda M. Jackson, Associate Planner
Bob Leiter, Community Development Director
Bob Pendoley, Planning Director *
* Former
Chantry Bell, Associate Planner
Dave Bernardi, Public Works Director
Tom Boyd, Commander Police Dept.
Sheila Delimont, Principal Planner
Rod Gould, City Manager
Ulla -Britt Jonsson, Planning Technician
Katie Korzun, Senior Planner
Walt Kosta, Police Department Captain
Gail Lockman, Library
Sharon McNamee, Recreation Director
Matt Naclerio, Assistant Director, Public Works
Ken Nordhoff, Financial Services Director
Jake Ours, Economic Development Director
Vaughn Stratford, Library Director
Carey Tate, Planning Intern
Bill Tuikka, Associate Planner
Stacy Wydra, Planning Intern
The Steering Committee is grateful to Ian MacLeod for his illustrations depicting
our vision of North San Rafael - may they serve as inspiration to imagine the possibilities.
Vision North San Rafael
November 1997
San Rafael, California
Copies of this document and the Technical Appendix are available from the
San Rafael Community Development Department. For a copy, or for information
about how you can participate and help to bring this vision into reality, please call (415) 485-3085.
letter from the mayor
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION I Introduction
Background and History Page 1
Profile of North San Rafael Page 2
Crafting Vision North San Rafael Page 9
Vision Framework Page 13
SECTION 11 Our Community Values Page 15
SECTION III Vision North San Rafael Page 17
SECTION IV Vision Concepts, Goals and Actions Page 19
Natural Environment
Page 21
Easy to Get Around
Page 25
Northgate Promenade
Page 31
Gathering Places
Page 33
Town Center
Page 35
Business Vitality
Page 37
Homes for a Variety of People
Page 39
Community Services
Page 41
Design, Beautification and Maintenance
Page 43
SECTION V Our Implementation Strategy Page 47
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION
Background and History
In the spring of 1996, the City of San Rafael initiated a community visioning process to plan for
the future of city areas north of Puerto Suello hill, an area known as North San Rafael. North
San Rafael is home to over 15,000 people, renowned for its beautiful hills, sunny weather,
thriving businesses and excellent schools. The last planning effort, fifteen years ago, resulted in
the Northgate Activity Center Plan. With the success of Our Vision of Downtown San Rafael
and the Montecito/Happy Valley Neighborhood Plan, the City Council and citizens started a
similar effort to learn more about what the people who live, work, and play in North San Rafael
would like for their community in the year 2010.
Beginning the Process
The community effort began with a Start -Up Committee. During four meetings, the Committee
designed a process to provide opportunities for the North San Rafael community to help shape a
vision for their future. Members set out to create a fun process with a broad and integrated
approach that was realistic and feasible, and had extensive participation.
Guiding the Efforts
In July of 1996, the City Council used an application process to select 25 people to serve on the
North San Rafael Vision Steering Committee. Collectively, the members reflect the many
interests in our community: residents, business -owners, community and government. Council
set the following charge for the Committee:
Develop a broadly supported vision for the future of North San Rafael that addresses all
of the essential elements of community such as: neighborhood identity, values and goals,
housing, business and retail development, traffic, pedestrian and bicycle access, schools,
recreation, open space, and aesthetics.
The process will address incorporated city neighborhoods, and involve residents,
business interests and property owners.
The Vision will be the primary basis for updating city policies and programs
affecting this area.
The Vision will establish an environment for collaborative activities by the
neighborhood and City government.
The Vision will be completed within one year.
Profile of North San Rafael
This section presents a picture of North San Rafael in the past, as well as the community today.
The Community in the Past
North San Rafael is rich in history. Below are snapshots of the early settlers.
John Lucas was nephew of San
Rafael pioneer Timothy Murphy
(Don Timoteo), recipient of the
Mexican Ranch Grant of San
Pedro, Santa Margarita Y Las
Gallinas of which North San
Rafael was a part. When Lucas
brought his bride to San Rafael
in 1855, he found Don Timoteo
had died leaving him the Santa
Margarita Rancho. Lucas and
Maria built a home in North San
Rafael, where they lived until
Lucas' death in 1896.
2
Manuel T. Freitas emigrated to
California from the Azores in
1853. He became a business
leader in San Francisco, as well
as Portugal's Consul General.
Although Freitas and his wife,
Maria, owned a string of six
ranches from Marin to Solano
counties, they built their
mansion and raised their nine
children at their `Home Ranch'
in North San Rafael.
Shown here in 1953, the valley had been part of the Freitas Home Ranch since 1896. The ranch
was transformed after the end of World War II. Highway 101 (across the lower half) a four -lane
country road, became an interstate highway, and St. Isabella's church replaced the Home Ranch
(buildings in the middle). Named Terra Linda (`beautiful land' in Portuguese) by Freitas'
daughter Rose, the land today is home to 15,000 people.
The Community Today
Over the past 40 years, North San Rafael has developed into a complete and well-balanced
community. During the 1960s and 1970s the area was annexed into the City of San Rafael. With
its variety of housing, shopping centers, corporate headquarters, industrial businesses, protected
open spaces and the Marin County Civic Center, North San Rafael is a vital part of Marin
County.
Land Use
North San Rafael has a variety of residential, civic, entertainment and business activities. In
addition, hundreds of acres of protected open space and parks have been secured for the
enjoyment of future generations.
Land Use in North San Rafael
Vacant Open space
Nonresidential o 37%
21%
7 %
Residential
35%
Source: San Rafael Community Development Department, 1997.
Population
Between 1980 and 1990, North San Rafael's population increased slowly, by only 183
persons. In northern Terra Linda, the population declined by more than 1,000 people
as household size decreased and the population grew older. The growth in North San
Rafael since 1980 is due to new construction in southern Terra Linda and east of
Highway 101. North San Rafael has about 28 percent of the city's total population of
51,644.
0 40,000
r
30,000
a
a 20,000
10.000
Population, 1980, 1990 and 1995 (est.)
14,875 15,058 14,596
ff1111A
North
San
Rafael
44,700 48,404 51,644
Source: U.S. Census, 1980, 1990, and Claritas, Inc. estimates
0
City of
San
Rafael
01980
®1990
01995
Types of Households
Overall, North San Rafael had more husband/wife households and single female households
than the city as a whole, and fewer single male or non -family households. However,
household types vary greatly by area, depending on the type of housing in the neighborhood.
Types of Household in North San Rafael, 1980 and 1990
50
45
40
35
� 30
U 25
a- 20
15
10
5 \ —
0
1980 1990
Source: U.S. Census, 1980 and 1990
❑ Single Male
❑ Single Female
® Married Couple
❑ Male head of Household
® Female Head of Household
® Non -family (Roommates)
Age of the Population
Throughout North San Rafael the number of persons over 65 years old increased from 10
percent in 1980 to 25 percent in 1990. Correspondingly, the number of children in North San
Rafael declined between 1980 and 1990. The decrease in children aged 0-17 was most striking
in Northern Terra Linda, declining from 28 to 19 percent of the population.
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
578 659
1,000
0
0-4yrs
Age of Population, 1980 and 1990
3,774
5-17 yrs 18-44 yrs 45-64 yrs
Source: U.S. Census, 1980 and 1990
Household Income
5
65+ yrs
❑ 1980
® 1990
In 1990, North San Rafael had higher incomes and fewer lower income households
than the City as a whole. Within the community, northern Terra Linda had the most
number of households with incomes over $100,000, while southern Terra Linda had a
higher -than -average percentage of households earning incomes less than $20,000.
Household Incomes by Neighborhood, 1989
Less than $20,000 $100,000+ Median
North San Rafael 18% 13% $46,250
San Rafael 21% 13% $41,992
Source: U.S. Census, 1990
Ethnicity
Similar to the City as a whole, ethnic diversity in North San Rafael increased from
1980 to 1990. Overall, however, this area of town remained less diverse than the city.
Ethnicity, North San Rafael, 1990
Hispai
6%
African-
American Asian Other
Source: U.S. Census, 1990
0
White, not
Hispanic
87%
Types of Housing
North San Rafael contains a wide variety of housing, similar to the City as a whole.
Because North San Rafael developed more recently than other parts of San Rafael and
at a time when larger scale subdivisions and apartment complexes were popular, there
are few two- to four -unit structures.
Housing Types in North San Rafael, 1990
100% p000uu000uu000ui0000iu000 uooi uooii
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
North San Rafael
Source: U.S. Census, 1990
City of San Rafael
Owner and Renter Housing
Overall, North San Rafael contains fewer rental units and more owner units than the
city as a whole. Northern Terra Linda, which is largely single-family, had a very
high homeownership rate. Rental units tend to provide needed housing for low-
income households, young adults, and seniors.
Owner/Renter Percentage of Occupied Units, 1990
100%
Source: U.S. Census, 1990
7
❑ Mobilehomes
❑ 50+ units
❑5-49 units
❑2-4 units
® SF Attached
❑ SF Detached
o Renter
® Owner
Crafting Vision North San Rafael
Vision North San Rafael is a description of what the community would like North San Rafael to
be like in the future. People who live, work, shop or own property in the area helped shape the
vision described in this document. The overall response by participants was enthusiastic and
supportive, with hundreds of ideas generated.
To "cast the net" and reach as many people as possible, the North San Rafael Steering
Committee initiated a widespread community involvement and outreach program. Bold in its
scope and approach, the program successfully included more than 1,400 people at a variety of
community events, stimulated interest among community members through flyers, newspaper
articles and a web -page, and educated the community on issues facing North San Rafael. The
Vision process was organized into four phases.
Phase One: Invitation
Early on and throughout the process, the Steering Committee used local newspapers,
neighborhood associations, partner groups, and the schools to invite people to participate in
community events. Although the focus of the vision process was on the incorporated areas of the
city of San Rafael, participation was welcomed from the broader North San Rafael community,
including Santa Venetia, Los Ranchitos and Marinwood.
Phase Two: Exploration and Visioning
The purpose of Phase Two was to draft the Vision Statement. A variety of community activities
were conceived to reflect on our community in terms of where we are and where we want to go
in the future.
❑ Partner Groups are neighborhood, community, civic and governmental organizations who
were interested—but may not otherwise participate—in the Vision process. In the fall, over
750 adults and children in Partner Group discussions were asked: "What do you like in North
San Rafael? What don't you like? What would you like to change? What would you like to
keep? "
In the winter, Steering Committee members shared with their Partner Groups our draft
Vision statement. In the summer, members briefed the Partner Groups on preliminary Vision
Concepts and invited everyone to the final workshop.
Overall, people appreciate the wonderful qualities of North San Rafael. At the same time,
many identified areas of dissatisfaction and a desire to make changes to make the area a
better place to live.
❑ Schools. To learn more about what our young people feel about and desire in our
community, the Steering Committee invited the schools to participate in the vision process.
In the fall, students from sixteen classrooms took part in a school curriculum. Students were
asked to name and draw their favorite places, places which were scariest to them, and places
which were the ugliest and the most beautiful. Results were displayed at Northgate Mall and
City Hall, and during the Vision Festival.
❑ The Vision Festival was an all -day event that included guided bus tours of the area, booths
from North San Rafael community and business groups, food, live music, and small group
Visioning sessions. Building on the work of the small groups, the Steering Committee
drafted a vision statement which reflected the community's direction that would be revisited
and revised throughout the process.
X
Below is a summary of community comments received during Phase Two, including the Partner
Group sessions, school curriculum and the Vision festival.
Location
• Open spaces
• Weather
• Retail shops and services
• Community feeling
• Friendly, small town
atmosphere
• Sense of community
• Excellent schools
Beauty of the area
• Farmer's Market
Pleasant, clean and quasi -rural
ambiance
• Proximity to open space
• Quiet
• Parks and recreation
Feeling of safety
• Low traffic levels
• Nearby hiking trails
• Airport and open space at
Marin Ranch Airport
K
We don't like:
• Traffic congestion
• The lack of a center, core
or heart of the community
• Dearth of social spots
• Absence of gathering
places
• Insufficient landscape
maintenance
• Inadequate teen activities
• Scarcity of safe
pedestrian and bike ways
• Lack of public
transportation
• Dangerous Freitas
interchange
• The idea of `big box'
retail on the now -vacant
(Fairchild) site on
Redwood Highway along
the north side of the
North Fork of Las
Gallinas Creek.
Changes we'd like are:
• A center to the
community which brings
us together
• More community events
• Improved landscaping
• A public library
• More zoning flexibility
for small businesses
• Housing which is
affordable so that people
who work here can also
live here
• Improvements at the mall
• More and better
restaurants
• More "hangout" places
• More pedestrian and bike
ways
Phase Three: Directions
The "nuts -and -bolts" of creating a vision began in January 1996 and continued through the
winter and spring with a series of eight community workshops. These workshops focused on
specific issues that emerged during Phase Two. Steering Committee members hosted the
workshops, collecting background information, writing Fact Sheets, and using the results to draft
goals and actions.
❑ Kick -Off Workshop. In January 1997, Reverend Doug Huneke was invited to share his
thoughts about how a vision can spark a community and how—like a kaleidoscope—the
many voices of a community emerge to support shared values and common dreams.
10
Working in small groups, participants saw the draft Vision statement for the first time, and
gave the Steering Committee their feedback. After the workshop, members revised the draft
statement to reflect the community's input.
❑ Design, Beautification and Maintenance Workshops focused on the "look" and "feel" of
North San Rafael—on the attractiveness of streetscapes and buildings and, in particular,
maintenance of public and private spaces.
❑ Land Use Workshops focused on identifying a desirable land use mix (open space,
residential, commercial, industrial, and recreational) while at the same time enhancing and
conserving the basic community character.
❑ Transportation Workshops focused on the ease of mobility and access, and safety for various
modes of transportation. The interrelationship with land use and design was noted as critical.
❑ Community Events and Services Workshops focused on organizing community activities,
providing cultural gathering places and assuring excellent services and facilities.
Phase Four: Celebration
The purpose of Phase Four was to present the draft Vision to the community, celebrate our
cooperative efforts and begin the process of implementing the Plan.
❑ A Community Open House. The nine vision concepts which emerged during the community
workshops were shared with the community during an Open House in July. Overall,
participants were pleased with the direction, and enjoyed the opportunity to see and comment
on the work -in -progress.
❑ Business Focus Groups, co-sponsored by the San Rafael Chamber of Commerce, brought
together nearly 30 business owners to discuss issues affecting the business community, and
to share ideas for what could be done to improve the business climate in North San Rafael.
❑ Final Workshop. On September 20, 1997 the Steering Committee held its last workshop.
The purpose of the workshop was to present the draft Vision to the community, prioritize the
most important Actions and recognize everyone's efforts in working together to create and
implement a vision. The top priority actions identified at the final community workshop
are summarized in the introduction for each of the nine Vision Concepts described in Section
IV. Note, however, that the goals and actions under each concept are not ranked in any
particular order.
11
12
Vision Framework
The Vision is organized into four parts, reflecting the thoughtful process used by the Steering
Committee in developing the Vision.
Our Community Values
Our Vision is supported by a statement of community -shared values. These values express how
we share our community life and what we hold most important. They define who we are and are
the ultimate key to where we want to go.
Vision North San Rafael
Our Vision was written with the community. Over the years our Vision will serve as a catalyst
for community initiatives and as direction for improvements in our neighborhoods.
Vision Concepts, Goals and Actions
During the course of the visioning process, several themes emerged as key Vision Concepts.
Collectively, these concepts represent our hopes and aspirations for a beautiful, safe and close-
knit community. As highlighted within, the concepts are further supported by overall goals and
specific actions.
Our Implementation Strategy
Realization of our Vision will be based on our ability to live the values articulated by the
community and to pursue our implementing strategies. As we dream about what North San
Rafael will be like in the future, we look to the many different ways we can make it happen.
Here we work in alliance on projects, bringing together residents, employers and employees,
civic groups and non-profit organizations to find ways to make the vision a reality.
13
14
SECTION II
OUR COMMUNITY VALUES
Our shared values guide our life together, shaping over time the foundation and character of North San
Rafael. As we consider improvements and changes, we rely on the values we hold in common to help
us make the best decisions. We value above all the quality of life in North San Rafael as reflected in
the following:
Community Respect for all people
Safe, healthy and friendly neighborhoods
A diverse population
Places where we can gather
A sense of belonging
A hometown feeling where people know their neighbors
Environment Natural environment as an integral part of our community
Protection and stewardship of our wildlife and our natural areas including the
hills, creeks and wetlands
Beauty Beautiful natural setting from the hillsides to the bay front
Attractive architecture and landscaping
Well-maintained neighborhoods and business areas
Education Excellent schools
Library services and easy access to information
Resources Valued and limited lands
Our surrounding natural environment
People who contribute to our community in various ways
Vitality Creativity and innovation
Cultural, educational, and recreational opportunities
Diverse local economy with variety of thriving businesses
Variety of housing
Ability to move around easily
Partnerships Participation in making decisions about our future
Working together to meet the evolving needs of our community
Cooperation between residents, businesses and government
15
16
SECTION III
VISION NORTH SAN RAFAEL
A vision is a dream about the future, shared by the community. It paints a picture of the type of place in
which we want to live, work and play. Our vision is more than just a description of what we hope to see
in North San Rafael. It also describes the legacy we hope to achieve and defines the way we want to
work together to create a more livable community.
In the year 2010
We are a balanced, vital and evolving community with a diverse population.
We preserve the things that we have so long appreciated—our hills, wetlands and parks, safe and stable
residential areas, vital diverse businesses, and convenient shopping and services.
Our entire community is beautiful and well-maintained, with excellent, well -integrated architecture,
abundant landscaping, and tree -lined streets. As we come home to our clean and friendly neighborhood,
we pass through attractive, distinctive gateways. Getting around our community and out to surrounding
areas is easy—whether by foot , bicycle, bus, rail or car.
Our business community continues to be healthy and innovative, supporting entrepreneurship. We are
known for economic stability with a full range of employment opportunities. Various vibrant centers
provide opportunities for us to meet, interact and reaffirm our sense of community. We enjoy gathering
together at local shopping areas, restaurants, cultural attractions and plazas.
We offer a variety of housing options for our diverse and changing population. Our concern for
residents of all ages is expressed in excellent schools, libraries, youth activities, senior services,
entertainment, recreational and cultural opportunities.
We gracefully adapt to changing needs of residents and businesses while respecting our environment and
quality of life. Neighborhoods and businesses work together. Through cooperation, we create a
community everyone loves.
17
[IN.
SECTION IV
VISION CONCEPTS, GOALS AND ACTIONS
As a result of input received during the community visioning process, the Steering Committee identified
nine overall concepts which describe the unique opportunities to build upon and enhance the North San
Rafael environment and community. These concepts are further supported by goals, or statements of
direction to realize our vision. The actions listed under each goal bring us even closer to seeing our
vision become reality by identifying more specific steps to pursue.
The nine Vision Concepts are:
Natural Environment
We will protect the beautiful hillsides, wetlands and creeks for future generations.
Easy to Get Around
We will be a safe and enjoyable community to walk and bicycle,
with convenient transit and smooth traffic flow.
Northgate Promenade
We will establish a new connection from Terra Linda to the Civic Center
where people can walk and ride a bike safely.
Gathering Places
We will have many opportunities for residents and workers to get together
for entertainment, recreation and relaxation.
Town Center
We will create a heart to North San Rafael in the Northgate shopping area
with an active mix of uses and places where everyone comes to shop, visit and celebrate community life.
Business Vitality
We will ensure that our business community is healthy and dynamic.
Homes for a Variety of People
We will have many wonderful places to live for individuals, families,
people who work here and seniors.
Community Services
We will be known for our excellent library and schools,
and a variety of high quality City recreation and public safety services.
Design, Beautification and Maintenance
We will have a beautiful, well-maintained community with
well-designed buildings and abundant landscaping reflecting pride and care.
19
Protecting our Hillsides
By the late 1960s, much of the floor of the Santa Margarita Valley had been developed with housing.
Terra Linda residents grew to enjoy the way the hills and the natural environment framed their
community. As development began to spread into the hills, people wondered if it would be possible
to protect the remaining hillsides.
Over the next few years a core group of residents searched for ways to preserve the privately -owned
hills as protected open spaces. Purchase seemed impossible at the beginning, for the hills were
extensive and high-priced undeveloped areas. During the early 1970s, there were several attempts to
raise money to buy the land, and many negotiations were initiated with property owners to reach
acceptable purchase prices. Joining together with immediate neighbors and with the wider Marin
County community, residents in the valley voted overwhelming to approve a number of funding
sources for open space purchase. These included:
1972 San Rafael residents approved a bond issue of $2,250,000 bond issue to purchase open space
city-wide, including parcels in North San Rafael.
1972 Marin County residents created and funded the Marin County Open Space District to
preserve lands of county -wide importance.
1973 Mont Marin neighborhood formed an assessment district to purchase the 184 acre Mont
Marin Open Space for $314,000.
1975 Terra Linda residents, with a 76 percent yes vote, established a community services area with
a $1,150,000 bond issue to purchase open space properties. These funds were combined
with $500,000 from the 1972 San Rafael bond and $500,000 from the Open Space District to
buy the Nunes, Freitas, de Long and Turski lands, the semi -circle of ridges around Terra
Linda.
The 1,252 acres which make up today's Terra Linda/Sleepy Hollow Divide Open Space Preserve are
owned and managed by the Marin County Open Space District. The Terra Linda, Sleepy Hollow &
San Rafael Ridge Open Space Preserve Land Management Plan (199 1) sets out a detailed program
for maintenance and improvement of these publicly -owned open space lands.
It took nearly ten years to see the vision of preserved open hillsides become a reality. Thanks to the
dream and efforts of a small group of people, everyone today takes great joy and pride in the views of
the hills and the protected natural habitat.
20
Natural Environment
North San Rafael is set in a valley surrounded on the north, south and west by expansive hillsides,
undeveloped ridgelines and open space. The San Francisco Bay and waterways with wetlands and other
marine habitats create the eastern boundary. Riparian habitats, scattered along creeks, are rich with
wildlife, birds and native plants, and are a valued resource and integral part of North San Rafael.
Retaining the beauty of the surroundings and protecting the wildlife is a high priority for our community.
At the same time, however, people want to enjoy this valuable resource. Access to these areas would be
balanced with the sustainability of their natural habitats. Education and stewardship are essential
factors in protecting our natural environment.
The top priority actions are to protect and preserve surrounding hillsides and habitats and to increase
wetlands habitats.
ACTIONS
Protect, restore and enhance 1.
Preserve and protect the surrounding hillsides and habitat areas.
our hillsides, bayfront,
wetlands and creeks. 2.
Protect hillsides from erosion.
3.
Remove invasive plants from open space and other public and
private lands.
4.
Repair large eroded ravines off fire roads.
5.
Protect Russom Park Creek walk by controlling creek and hill
erosion onto the trail.
6.
Ensure hillsides are well-maintained and fire safe.
7.
Encourage regular fire safety education in schools regarding our
hillsides
8.
Wherever feasible, restore and enhance the natural wildlife
habitat, particularly habitat for endangered species, by providing
wildlife corridors, adequate buffers along wetlands and creeks and
other environmental protections.
9.
Whenever feasible, seek out opportunities to protect, restore and
increase wetlands habitat.
10.
Restore creeks and incorporate sound flood control practices and
riparian vegetation, such as at the large meadow site next to the
transit line, the San Rafael Meadows neighborhood and the Valley
Baptist Church (the PG&E site).
21
ACTIONS
Assure that environmental 1. Promote active community participation in maintaining and
considerations are always appreciating open space, such as supporting volunteer projects to
a high priority in care for the hills, open spaces and trails.
North San Rafael.
2. Provide innovative ways for domestic and wild animals to cross the
freeway or surface roads safely. For example, consider providing a
"Duck Crossing" sign on Civic Center Drive to slow traffic to allow
these birds to cross safely from the Lagoon to the West side.
3. Encourage the Design Review Board to emphasize and enhance
views of the hillsides, wherever possible.
ACTIONS
Allow habitat friendly access 1. Provide opportunities for people to enjoy the natural environment.
to open space.
2. Allow recreation uses in open space areas only when they are
compatible with environmental protection and the sustainability of
habitat.
3. Improve signage in public open space and trails.
4. Continue to prohibit motorized vehicles on hillsides.
5. Support the San Francisco Bay Trail project.
6. Retain Freitas Parkway and Del Ganado as cul-de-sacs.
7. Where possible, use bike paths with removable barriers for
emergency connectors, instead of building new roads.
8. Work collaboratively with Marin County and environmental
organizations to provide access and interpretive center(s)
to facilitate the public's enjoyment of wetland areas,
where appropriate.
22
Easy to Get Around
The ease, frequency and safety of getting around are important for our community. Circulation both
within North San Rafael, especially east -to -west connections, and to surrounding areas such as
Downtown San Rafael needs to be improved. A variety of transportation options can better link us to
each other and to places we frequent. Improving the many ways we move about can help combat auto
congestion.
Installing and maintaining wider sidewalks and well -landscaped walkways, separate from the main roads,
will make the area more pedestrian -friendly and safer. If walkways are more inviting and safer, people
are more inclined to walk as a way to get to a destination, and for exercise and enjoyment. Bicycling
continues to be a highly popular way to travel in Marin County, enjoy the outdoors, and get exercise. To
accommodate the needs of bicyclists, safe bicycle paths, lanes and parking would be provided throughout
North San Rafael. Public transit would enable children going to school, commuters and seniors who
may not want to drive a car an affordable and reliable way to get around North San Rafael. Traffic
calming would be a major improvement in the community to reduce speeding and cut -through traffic,
and to make the streets safer for all.
The priority actions are to create a local shuttle bus service, and to install hike -and -bike paths throughout
North San Rafael.
ACTIONS
Create safe, convenient, 1. Connect the Terra Linda Shopping Center and Recreation Center,
pleasant walkways throughout the Northgate shopping area and the Civic Center with a central
the community. promenade.
2. Connect the east and west sides of Highway 101, particularly
north of Freitas Parkway, under Highway 101 from Merrydale to
Civic Center Drive along the railroad tracks, and possibly along
Las Gallinas Creek.
3. Complete landscaped walkways on at least one side of all existing
roads. Improvements are specifically needed on Redwood
Highway near the Professional Center Parkway, the west side of
Northgate between Thorndale and Quail Hill, Los Ranchitos,
Lucas Valley Road, and Civic Center Drive.
4. Install walkways on both sides of new streets, where appropriate.
Assure sufficient width of sidewalks and pathways, and
lighting, so people can walk comfortably.
Provide frequent and inviting places to sit and rest, some of
which should offer shelter from the rain.
Ensure wheelchairs and strollers accessibility (improvements
for the walkway at 755 Las Colindas through Penny Royal,
Pine, Del Ganado, Bamboo to Monticello).
5. Provide safe, well -landscaped walkways between Northgate One,
Northgate Mall and Northgate Plaza.
23
6. Increase the amount of time at pedestrian crossings at Freitas
Parkway intersections, especially at Las Gallinas and Freitas.
7. Design parking lots to minimize conflicts between pedestrian
walkways and cars.
Create walkways in the area between two rows of parked cars
instead of having people walk in the driving area. For example,
Northgate should have automobile -free passageways between
shopping areas and to the stores.
9. Where possible, locate building entrances so that people do not
have to walk across parking lots to enter the building.
10. Avoid multiple driveways across public sidewalks.
11. Provide safe and inviting access from parking lots to shops.
The reorganization and hedge screening of parking on the Old Redwood Highway frontage road could
allow installation of a continuous sidewalk with tree planting and undergrounding utilities.
ffrawoml
Support bicycling as a normal 1. Form a bicycle advisory committee to promote public involvement
mode of transportation. and support for bicycle use, create a bicycle master plan, and
pursue funding and other implementation initiatives.
2. Create bike lanes wherever possible, especially along major roads,
along Nova Albion to the schools, and to the parks.
3. Install hike -and -bike paths along the promenade, and next to the
24
railroad right-of-way in accordance with the Marin County North-
South Bikeway Feasibility Study (1994).
4. Provide a setting conducive to safe and enjoyable bicycling --
Provide shade trees where possible.
Provide adequate bike lane width, drainage, parking and
signage.
• Separate bike paths and pedestrian paths wherever appropriate.
• Create a free public bike transportation system with pick-up
and drop-off points along the promenade and at major
destinations throughout North San Rafael.
• Provide bike racks and lockers for convenient storage at bus
and shuttle stops, park and ride lots, schools, shopping centers,
and the recreation center.
• Remove barriers on sidewalks, pathways, and streets that
prevent easy passage by bikes, wheelchairs and strollers.
• Where possible, provide bikeways separate from the road.
25
ACTIONS
Create useful, convenient,
1. Create a community advisory team, including youth and seniors, to
local bus service, which
determine options for providing local bus service, to work with local
also connects
public and private transportation providers and to seek funding
Downtown San Rafael.
opportunities at all levels of government.
2. Create a local bus shuttle service:
• Connect neighborhoods to shopping, the Civic Center, the
transit center, schools and other major destinations including
Downtown San Rafael.
• Study extending bus hours from 6:00 a.m. to midnight, seven
days a week.
• Where feasible, use small electric or natural gas powered buses
(20 - 30 passengers).
• Provide bus service that accommodates bicycles and wheelchairs.
• Provide adequate bus pads where large numbers of students wait
for buses.
• Offer, when possible, free or discount youth, senior and/or
handicapped fares, and consider weekly or monthly passes.
• Investigate the possibilities of contracting inexpensive taxi
service for seniors, and sharing buses with senior housing and
schools.
3. Encourage organizers and producers of large events at the Civic
Center to provide shuttle service to the Civic Center from
Downtown San Rafael and local park-and-ride lots.
4. Provide safe, comfortable and convenient bus stops:
Reroute freeway buses so pedestrian access to bus stops along
25
Highway 101 is safe and convenient. Do not require pedestrians
to cross highway on- or off -ramps in order to board or leave the
bus.
• Locate bus stops adjacent to sidewalks for easy wheelchair and
pedestrian access. For example, connect the bus stop on Civic
Center Drive in front of the Lagoon to a sidewalk.
• Provide benches, preferably covered, at all bus stops.
• Provide a Park -and -Ride lot in the vicinity of Civic Center Drive
and McInnis, and re-route the buses from 101 to this lot.
Ensure safe access from transit stops to businesses along
Redwood Highway.
Preserve and support rail
ACTIONS
service through 1. Preserve the existing rail track for future rail transit service.
North San Rafael. Plan for a transit center at the junction of McInnis Parkway and
Civic Center Drive:
• Ensure that new rail service mitigates adverse impacts on
adjacent neighborhoods.
• Design rail stops so patrons can get to the stop safely and
conveniently by walking, bicycling, bus or car.
Minimize potential vehicular conflicts as pedestrians move
through parking lots and cross driveways to purchase tickets and
board trains.
Design stations and stops so bicyclists can ride to the station
and board easily, without unnecessary curbs, barriers or conflict
with vehicles, pedestrians, and other bicycles.
• Provide bicycle racks (preferably rain -proof) close to the main
entrance.
• Provide bike storage on the trains.
• Where feasible, route autos so they do not cross bikeways and
sidewalks.
• Provide a park-and-ride lot screened from view on the street
side with clearly marked safe walkways to the trains.
Coordinate bus and train schedules. Where possible, bus drop-off
and pick-up areas should be designed to minimize vehicular,
pedestrian and bicycle conflicts.
3. Design attractive crossings at the transit line which are safe for
pedestrians, bicycles and automobiles.
4. Minimize visual and noise impacts along the rail line.
26
WNW&TAI
Create livable streets that are
1. Slow traffic and improve safety for children, pedestrians and
safe for children, pedestrians
bicyclists. Possible traffic calming tools include:
and bicycles, and reduce
commuter traffic through our
a Add landscaping.
neighborhoods.
• Calm traffic in neighborhoods surrounding Terra Linda High
School.
Prohibit widening of Civic Center Drive.
Maintain parking by the pond and the lawn of Civic Center
Drive.
Locate stop signs at critical intersections when warranted (for
example, at Yosemite and Smith Ranch Roads).
Narrow streets, where appropriate, in order to calm the traffic,
increase safety and make it easier for pedestrians to cross at
intersections.
2. Redesign traffic circulation adjacent to the Northgate Mall areas.
Consider, for example, continuing Del Presidio into the Mall's
parking area rather than a "T" configuration.
3. For safety's sake, redesign Freitas Parkway between Highway 101
and Las Gallinas with appropriate signage.
4. Improve, or reduce if possible, traffic flow at North San Pedro
Road and Civic Center Drive. Alternatives include an additional
exit off Highway 101 at the maintenance buildings directly into the
Civic Center, or a second left -turn lane from North San Pedro Road
going east to Civic Center Drive.
5. Maintain Merrydale Road and Las Gallinas Avenue in San Rafael
Meadows as dead ends with no through traffic.
6. Enforce current traffic regulations to the maximum extent of the
law by increasing the number of enforcement personnel and the
frequency of the patrols in the critical commute times.
27
The continuation of Del Presidio Boulevard could create a grand entrance into Northgate Mall
and provide an important link in the promenade between activity areas.
W.
Northgate Promenade
Throughout North San Rafael there are many diverse neighborhoods, shopping areas and parks.
Because Highway 101 physically divides our community, people find it difficult to get from one
place to another by foot or on bicycle. To remedy this artificial separation, a linear parkway, or
Promenade, would be created to connect the Terra Linda Shopping Center and Recreation Center to
the Civic Center. A unifying hike -and -bike path—complete with attractive directional signs,
landscaping, public restrooms, places to enjoy a cup of coffee, areas where children can play, public
art and transit stops—would bring the community together. Together, people of all ages could stroll,
jog, walk or bike, safely removed from traffic.
The Promenade will conveniently link other important destinations, such as Redwood Highway
business areas, Terra Linda High School and neighborhoods on both sides of Highway 101 and to the
north and south. It will have many benefits: bringing neighbors, workers and visitors together to
enjoy the outdoors, helping people get to work or shop safely on foot or by bike, and providing many
opportunities for people to meet each other.
The top priority actions are to construct pedestrian and bicycle pathways along the Promenade, and
to create safe pedestrian connections across Highway 101.
ACTIONS
Encourage bicycling and 1. Construct pedestrian and bicycle pathways along the Promenade.
walking along the 2 Wherever possible, the pathways should beat least 12 -feet wide
Northgate Promenade. and allow for drainage, landscaping and signage, and incorporate
pocket parks.
ACTIONS
Provide linkages to other 1. Create safe pedestrian connections across Highway 101.
activity centers. 2. Provide convenient and efficient connections between popular
destination points, such as Northgate Industrial Park, Vallecito
Elementary School and San Rafael Meadows area.
29
Gathering places, outdoor dining areas, landscaping and signage improvements would rejuvenate
the Terra Linda Shopping Center.
30
Gathering Places
Gathering places provide an essential forum for social interaction and enhance a sense of shared life for
the people who work, live and visit our community. Good gathering places are easy to get to and provide
opportunities for a variety of activities such as shopping, eating, sitting, socializing and recreation.
Parks are wonderful places for people to get together. These facilities can be improved with picnic and
barbecue areas, playgrounds and benches to encourage family events, and children's play and "hanging
out" places. Outdoor music concerts, dances, neighborhood picnics and community fairs would be
offered in our parks. One specific improvement many would like to see is restoring water play to Freitas
Park. Others would like to have better recreation facilities in the vicinity of Merrydale/Los Ranchitos
and North San Pedro Road.
North San Rafael shopping centers can also be neighborhood gathering places. This has begun at
Northgate One with the addition of a coffee shop and outdoor seating. Our shopping centers would
include restaurants and cafes with outdoor eating areas, bookstores and plazas to create places with
vitality and excitement. Many people want nighttime activities as well as places to go with friends at the
end of the day.
Sports and recreational facilities provide special places for the community to gather and have fun.
These facilities could include skateboard parks, dog parks, lighting for evening sports events, and soccer
fields—each offering opportunities for the young and old alike—to spend time together and to get to
know each other.
The top priority action is to establish a beautiful, viable neighborhood center and gathering place at Terra
Linda Shopping Center.
ACTIONS
Enhance the use of gathering 1. Establish beautiful, viable neighborhood centers and gathering
places within walking distance places at Terra Linda Shopping Center, along Merrydale in San
to spark social interaction and Rafael Meadows, and at other neighborhood centers by using
sense of community. incentives to encourage a coordinated site design.
2. Create gathering places that include: outdoor eating places, library,
schools, parks, community gardens, farmer's market, museum and
transit stops, for example.
ACTIONS
Use parks, recreation and 1. Provide daytime "green spaces" which can include multi -use
cultural facilities as fun recreation areas, sports fields and sitting areas.
gathering places to enhance 2 Improve parks by adding landscaping and amenities such as
our sense of community. benches, public art, play equipment, gazebos and bandstands, as
appropriate.
3. Encourage both daytime and nighttime gathering places, such as
cafes, bookstores and restaurants.
31
Building a Town Square
A town square is more than just a place; it is people and activity, art and festivities, homes and shops.
Essential ingredients are:
Mix of Activity Shops, offices, residential, public (such as child care, a library, and churches),
32
recreation, education and entertainment
Food
Markets, restaurants, cafes, street vendors and other eating places
Events
Celebrations, concerts, fairs, memorials
Public
Open to everyone at all times of the day throughout the year
Visible
Open to view from the streets and buildings for safety and security
Contained
Outdoor room with buildings defining the edges
Connections
Doors, passageways and windows connecting the outdoors to indoor activity
Seating
Places for people to sit and view the action
Recreation
Passive ways for people (especially children) to have fun, a gazebo for music
Art
Cultural identity, a landmark
32
Town Center
A town center is a focal point where the values and history of the community are expressed and
supported, where community identity is strengthened and neighborhood cohesion is fostered. It is a place
where residents and workers can gather—formally and informally—to share community life. The Town
Center will have public art, a wide variety of unique shops, many places to eat, and a number of
entertainment options.
Our town center will be a major destination point on the promenade, a place where everyone feels
welcome, something is always happening, and strolling is a pleasure. It will also include one of North
San Rafael's principal gathering places—in the form of a town square! Over time, the Town Center
would change, expand and evolve to become the heart of the North San Rafael community.
The priority actions for the Town Center are to crease a sense of enclosure, pedestrian -scale and easy
accessibility and to provide high quality retail stores for local residents as well as the broader
community.
ACTIONS
Create an attractive, thriving
1. Create a Town Center with high quality retail stores for local
heart for the North San Rafael
residents as well as the broader community.
community—a centerpiece of
commerce and activity which
2 Allow uses that will enhance the Town Center, including retail,
is easy to get to—with a
office, housing and community services.
diversity and synergy of
3. Consider providing library services at the mall.
activities for all ages.
4. Provide planning and financial incentives to establish a Town Center.
5. Assure quality of design.
6. Create a sense of enclosure, pedestrian -scale and easy accessibility.
Outdoor gathering and dining spaces at the retail centers could be encouraged, with storefronts
and signage improved to match the quality of the interior spaces.
ACTIONS
33
Establish places for enjoying 1. Encourage outdoor public gathering places.
community life. 2. Improve access and pedestrian connections between Northgate
One, the Mall and Northgate Plaza.
3. Consider the feasibility of providing automobile -free passage ways
between shopping areas, i.e. between Northgate Plaza and
Northgate Mall, and between the Mall and Northgate One.
4. Redesign traffic patterns adjacent to the Northgate Mall, and
consider ways to improve the entrance into the mall.
5. Design parking lots to minimize vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle
conflicts.
6. Improve landscaping and maintenance of buildings, and unify the
signage and architecture at Northgate Mall.
34
Business Vitality
North San Rafael has a very healthy, broad-based business community. Northgate businesses are an
important part of San Rafael's healthy economy, comprising half of the city's professional services, and a
quarter of its retail establishments. Northgate Mall is the city's largest retail shopping center, with more
than one million square feet of building area, contributing over $1 million in sales tax revenue annually.
Two major concentrations of businesses include the Northgate Industrial Park and the Northgate
shopping centers. In addition, Terra Linda Shopping Center, Redwood Highway offices and services,
Kaiser Hospital, Guide Dogs for the Blind, two major hotels and large office buildings, and several
corporate headquarters are located in North San Rafael. These local diverse businesses provide jobs for
residents, goods and services for residents, taxes for City services, and donations for local schools and
non-profit agencies.
Maintaining business vitality is essential for a prosperous economy. We want to keep the
competitive edge of the North San Rafael business community, and to continue to enjoy the
convenient local shops and employment opportunities.
Residents and workers alike would benefit from retaining homegrown businesses and industrial uses,
bringing in more upscale and unique shops, and increasing the number of restaurants and cafes. The
Terra Linda Shopping Center holds tremendous potential to be a thriving neighborhood center. The
businesses along the Redwood Highway frontage road would benefit greatly from targeted physical
improvements. Most importantly, the large vacant site on Redwood Highway where there once stood a
big manufacturing plant could be home to a new office/light industrial complex complementing the
adjacent Northgate Industrial Park. Of particular delight to the community would be a restaurant located
here along the beautiful north fork of Las Gallinas Creek.
Our highest priority is to make our business areas function better with a mix of uses, improvements to
make these places more attractive, and changes that support a business -friendly community. It is also
important to ensure that environmental, traffic, design, parking and access concerns are met in all
business development.
ACTIONS
Support existing local 1. Encourage amenities and services to support the business
businesses and help them community such as restaurants, outdoor dining, child care and
adapt to the future. convenience retail.
2. Use incentives to accommodate growth and change of businesses.
ACTIONS
Support home businesses, 1. Encourage live/work and home-based businesses.
new businesses and 2 Encourage incubator businesses.
small businesses.
3. Preserve small tenant spaces.
4. Streamline permitting and provide other incentives.
ACTIONS
35
Create distinctive businesses 1. Improve the design and function of business areas.
and public complexes, and 2 Encourage innovation and public/private partnerships to meet
make these areas work better parking needs.
3. Encourage property owners to maintain and remodel commercial
buildings.
4. Encourage a new business at the corner of Freitas Parkway and
Northgate to enhance the entryway. Appropriate uses could
include office, small retail or a sit-down restaurant.
5. Ensure that environmental, traffic, design, parking and access
concerns are met in all new business development or when
renovation or remodeling occurs.
36
Homes for a Variety of People
Because of its beautiful setting, moderate climate, accessibility to natural and cultural amenities, and
convenient location, North San Rafael is a very desirable place to live. Subdivisions such as San Rafael
Meadows, Terra Linda and Marin Lagoon provide wonderful, family -centered communities with a
reputation for being a great place to raise children and for maintaining excellent schools.
In addition, there is a range of options for apartment dwellers, from units that are affordable to low
income households to luxury units for higher income households. These are well-established as well as
very new condominium developments. Other housing includes a variety of senior housing, a mobilehome
park, and group homes for the handicapped.
An adequate diversity of housing is a crucial part of creating a complete and vibrant community. Like
many other cities in California, however, housing prices are high in North San Rafael. Consequently,
young people starting out cannot afford to live near their families, families share units or are crowded
into housing too small for their needs, seniors become "trapped" in homes that are larger than they
need and local employees are forced to live in outlying areas and, therefore, become part of the
commuter rush.
Providing more housing in North San Rafael is a challenging task. Many residents are concerned
about excessive development, unmanageable traffic and the loss of views and privacy. At the same
time, the limited housing supply is a major concern for employees and local business owners, parents
seeking excellent schools for their children, and elderly residents wishing to sell their homes yet stay
in the neighborhood.
The supply of housing may increase by offering more variety in housing choices and by using innovative
ideas such as mixed use housing, live/work units, higher density housing close to public transit, and
sensitive development of unused or underutilized lands. Above all, new housing must fit in with
surrounding development, and must maintain the friendly, safe character of existing neighborhoods.
The top priority action which was reflected in the final workshop was to encourage a variety of housing
types, including mixed use and live/work units.
ACTIONS
Provide homes for 1. Identify opportunities for development of housing on vacant or
individuals, families, underutilized land.
people who work here 2. Encourage second dwelling units, wherever feasible.
and seniors.
3. Encourage housing to be incorporated as part of renovation or
redevelopment of property.
4. Promote and build partnerships with other organizations to support
housing development.
37
ACTIONS
Promote innovative ways to 1. Allow innovative approaches to combining housing and workspace.
house people. 2. Encourage a variety of housing types, including mixed use and
live/work units.
3. Where appropriate, encourage housing in gathering places, thereby
adding to the vitality of these areas and facilitating the use of
public transit.
Affording a Home
Housing which costs 25 - 33 percent of a household's income is referred to as "affordable housing."
Income levels vary from one household to another, for example, a large family with one small
income would afford a different type of housing than a DINK ("double-income/no kids") household.
Income levels are identified by the California Department of Housing and the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development. In Marin, examples of income levels by household size for 1997
are:
Income Level
One Person
Very low income
$22,550
Lower income
$31,750
Two People
$25,750
$35,950
Four People
$32,220
$44,950
Moderate income $54,100 $61,850 $77,300
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development, 1997
A senior citizen with a very low income would typically be able to pay $470 - $620 month for
housing. A family of four with a moderate income would be able to afford housing costing $1,610 -
$2,126 a month.
Community Services
North San Rafael is a family -centered, multi -aged community with many different social needs ranging
from recreational activities to informational services to neighborhood meeting places. In order to have an
enriched and fulfilled community, quality activities, facilities and services are essential.
Living in a safe community is critically important to North San Rafael residents, particularly in the
neighborhoods and public places. Although North San Rafael is considered very safe, it is important to
maintain a high sense of security by assuring excellent public safety services.
People emphasized the need for communication of information, whether by library services, computers
or information kiosks. Although the Civic Center library is located in North San Rafael, it is difficult to
reach for most residents. There are many opportunities for providing a City library in North San Rafael,
including possible partnerships with the School Districts, the private sector and the County. A library,
located west of Highway 101, would be more accessible to more North San Rafael residents, providing
an invaluable community service, evening activities, and a community meeting place.
The Terra Linda Recreation Center with the city's only public swimming pool, the many pocket and
neighborhood parks, and the Marin County Civic Center offer a wide range of recreational
opportunities. Many people would like to improve current facilities, and to make the most of what they
have in order to help enhance the sense of community in North San Rafael. The recent acquisition of the
Bernard Hoffman playing fields is an example of what is possible when sports organizations, the City
and the School District cooperate for the good of the greater community.
Youth in particular have varying interests and would benefit from increased opportunities to pursue these
interests without having to travel too far. Our young people would like to have places just to "hang out"
and get to know each other. Facilities such as a teen center, a skate park or a technology center would be
ideal.
Top priority actions are to provide recreational and entertainment facilities for children and youth, public
safety programs and a library west of Highway 101.
ACTIONS
Provide a public library in 1. Establish convenient and accessible library services for everyone in
North San Rafael west of North San Rafael.
Highway 101. 2. Form a North San Rafael Library Booster Group of teens, parents,
teachers and homeowners associations.
A north San Rafael branch library west of the freeway could be located anywhere that is centrally
located and provides adequate parking..
ACTIONS
39
Encourage safe places for the 1. Provide and maintain recreation and entertainment facilities for
young people in our children and youth such as a skate park and a teen center.
community to gather and use 2 Encourage a variety of safe gathering places where teens can meet
to explore and pursue and socialize.
their interests.
3. Promote and facilitate activities for children and youth.
ACTIONS
Encourage cultural, 1. Establish an annual signature community event to celebrate life in
entertainment and North San Rafael, and create shared memories for residents.
recreational activities. 2. Support cultural activities throughout the community.
3. Provide a variety of facilities for cultural activities such as an art
gallery, a cultural center, a band shell, or a gazebo for outdoor concerts.
4. Improve and expand equestrian connections from Los Ranchitos to the
Civic Center.
Seek ways to enhance horseback riding opportunities in North San
Rafael.
6. Support the Farmer's Market.
ACTIONS
Optimize use of all public and 1. Maximize the use of City, religious and school facilities for
private sites for entertainment. cultural, educational and recreational purposes.
2. Restore the water feature to Freitas Park.
3. Maintain the restroom facilities at Santa Margarita Park.
ACTION
Continue to provide and 1. Continue to provide and enhance public safety programs that maintain
enhance City services for a a high sense of safety in the neighborhoods and adequate public safety
safe community. services, including disaster preparedness and wildfire safety.
ACTION
Improve communication in 1. Encourage information kiosks, a web site, neighborhood
North San Rafael about newsletters, and informational inserts in the local newspapers.
community issues and activities.
.O
Design, Beautification and Maintenance
North San Rafael is blessed with a spectacular setting of open hills, large oak trees and views out to the
bay. The beautiful natural surroundings form a backdrop treasured by residents, workers, and visitors.
Apart from the unique Eichler homes and other residential neighborhoods, many of the buildings in
North San Rafael are considered bland, isolated and indifferent.
Residents yearn for an inviting, charming and attractive community. They want a place that is
beautiful to live in and walk around in, one which has grown gracefully into a pretty town. A beautiful
community inspires its residents. Where beauty is pervasive, inhabitants share a common pleasure and a
sense of civic pride essential to community life.
To create a physical environment that is pleasing and appealing to residents, workers and visitors, the
open spaces and buildings must be interesting, complex and diverse. Beautiful buildings create places to
go, to see and be seen, and to be exposed to the tangible legacy of those who have gone before us. Areas
such as the Town Center, Redwood Highway, Terra Linda Shopping Center, Civic Center Drive and
McInnis Drive can be transformed into exciting places to explore with a diversity of buildings, beautiful
architecture and landscaping, and delightful pedestrian areas.
Above all, our public and private places need to be cared for. We collectively have an investment in the
infrastructure of our community. We will begin long -needed maintenance projects and repair our roads
and sidewalks, irrigate our landscaping, remove the litter, and use code enforcement to keep our public
places and private homes in good and safe conditions.
Many residents have expressed a special desire to improve the appearance to the Del Ganado ditch.
Others wish for the overhead wires to be undergrounded. These were priorities reflected in the final
workshop.
ACTIONS
Create attractive community 1. Create a beautiful entryway to North San Rafael at the corner of
entries welcoming all and Freitas Parkway and Northgate.
lending an identity to our area 2 Install artistic groupings of landscaping and art on Freitas between
Highway 101 and Northgate Drive.
3. At all entries and intersections, plant trees, and improve and
maintain City medians and Caltrans property (including
interchanges, highway frontage and parking lots).
4. Develop clear and unified signage at entries and commercial
centers (perhaps with the same Mission bell signage theme found
in Downtown San Rafael).
5. Improve the entry to the Civic Center from San Pedro Road.
41
Landscaped medians along Del Ganado could not only improve its appearance, but create safer
driving conditions.
ACTIONS
Ensure clean, beautiful and 1.
Improve the appearance of the Del Ganado ditch.
well-maintained public spaces. 2
Begin a phased undergrounding of overhead power lines as
funding becomes available.
3.
Maintain roads, sidewalks and lighting.
4.
Provide lighting for pedestrian walkways where acceptable to
neighbors.
5.
Develop realistic funding plans for maintenance and capital
improvements.
6.
Encourage Caltrans to remove litter from Highway 101.
7.
Encourage the County to maintain the Civic Center, the Lagoon
and surrounding areas.
8.
Encourage the City and County to create a public/private
partnership to maintain public plantings.
9.
Support and encourage participation in neighborhood clean-up
days.
42
Landscaping could improve the appearance ofparking lots in north San Rafael.
ACTIONS
Improve design and function of 1. Promote design standards to unify the community and enhance a
our built environment. sense of connection.
2. Upgrade and unify the architecture and signage along Redwood
Highway on the east side of Highway 101.
3. Improve the landscaping and sidewalks along Redwood Highway
on the east side of Highway 101.
4. Coordinate design and colors at the Terra Linda Shopping Center.
Signs should be removed from rooftops to under the eaves.
5. Establish a tenant identification sign for Terra Linda Shopping
Center, consistent with the center's appearance.
6. Provide kiosks and maps of Northgate Industrial Park.
7. Use code enforcement to remove illegal business signs.
43
ACTIONS
Improve and expand 1. Improve the appearance of the northwest corner of Freitas Parkway
existing landscaping.
and Northgate.
2.
Provide additional landscaping to Montecillo, Freitas Parkway and
along Del Ganado.
3.
Provide additional trees and shrubs at Terra Linda Shopping
Center.
4.
Encourage native trees and plantings in parking lots, bus stops and
park -n -ride lots.
5.
Improve and maintain landscaping on medians and roadways.
6.
Irrigate landscaping, trees and shrubs regularly, using reclaimed
water where possible.
ACTIONS
Ensure that private spaces 1. Enforce San Rafael Municipal Code regulations relating to
reflect community pride. maintenance of private property.
2. Maintain the design integrity of the neighborhoods.
SECTION V
OUR IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
North San Rafael is entering a new era. From a time of ranching days, to seeing the latest buildings take
form, North San Rafael is transforming into a mature community. Neighborhoods are welcoming new
families, schools are bursting with young children, and businesses are enjoying a strong economy. Our
Implementation Strategy starts with our vision of a more beautiful and sustainable community, outlining
the basic steps which must be taken to see the vision unfold into reality.
Our implementation strategy focuses on immediate action -oriented cooperative activities and
investments to gain momentum with quick small and large changes. These changes will become the
impetus for more improvements. Other more modest incremental changes will have a noticeable impact
on our appearance and the overall long-term health of our community.
Our strategies assume the alignment of public, private and civil sectors as well as individual commitment.
The lead for different projects will come from various levels of the community and the government, and
from different sectors of the economy. Separately, individuals, businesses and government are limited in
what they can achieve. By sharing our resources and creating partnerships throughout the community we
will guide the patterns of change in North San Rafael.
Our Vision contains several projects which are new for San Rafael. The promenade, library and
neighborhood beautification depend on new funding. Fortunately, there are a variety of sources to
pursue. Through cooperation and partnerships we can find the resources to make a difference in our
future. It's the investments we make today that will bring us the results we envision for tomorrow.
While all the actions identified in Section IV, Vision Concepts, Goals and Actions are important, the
Implementation Strategy establishes broader priorities for achieving the Vision. These priorities are
based on community support and a sense of urgency, manageability, cost effectiveness, feasibility, and
positive impact on a goal.
45
IMPLEMENTATION
1. Form an implementation committee to serve as `guardians' of the
Organize the community to vision.
work together on 2. Form volunteer action teams such as the library booster club.
Vision projects
3. Promote local volunteerism, such as Boy Scouts helping with
landscape maintenance.
IMPLEMENTATION
1. Explore financing options, including a possible assessment or
Identify ways to finance the other taxing district, or a bond measure.
improvements in Vision North 2 Pursue federal and state grants, as well as grants from non-profit
San Rafael. agencies for capital projects such as traffic calming, entryway,
landscaping and promenade improvements.
3. Use traffic mitigation fees to make traffic improvements.
IMPLEMENTATION
1. Identify methods for maintaining our public infrastructure.
Maintain community 2. Determine adequate levels of service for maintenance.
improvements.
3. Seek agreement on maintenance responsibilities
IMPLEMENTATION
1. Ensure that development standards are consistent with Vision
Look for innovative approaches North San Rafael, including standards for environmental
and allow for flexibility in protection, traffic, floor area ratio, density, bonuses and other
implementing the Vision. incentives, design requirements for architectural excellence, and
parking.
2. Create a transportation system which acknowledges a balance
between our current and future land use patterns and protection
of our open space.
3. As new development occurs, address transportation issues,
including walkways, bikeways and, where feasible, bus service.
4. The total amount of development in North San Rafael will not
cause city traffic to exceed level of service D.
.e
IMPLEMENTATION
IMPLEMENTATION
1. Simplify ways for the community to learn about local
Inform the community about our governmental activities affecting our community and the
Vision, and implementation resources available to make things happen.
projects. 2. Provide information to the community about issues, events and
places to go on an ongoing, regular basis.
IMPLEMENTATION
1. Consider flexibility in floor area ratios in order to respond to
Amend the General Plan, zoning changing business needs.
ordinance and other regulations 2 Marin Ranch Airport. Amend the General Plan land use
consistent with the Vision. designation to Parks/Open Space, and amend the General Plan
policies to be consistent with the covenant.*
* The intent of the Steering Committee's General Plan recommendation
is to recognize the unique and valuable recreational and environmental
characteristics of the Marin Ranch Airport site. The San Rafael General
Plan Parks/Open Space land use designation's allowed uses are
"Dedicated parks, secured open space, and areas identified as having
visual or other natural resource significance that should be protected
through the development review process." In addition, the Steering
Committee notes that the following uses are listed in the Declaration of
Restrictions (covenant) for Marin Ranch Airport, and recommends that
they be allowed as activities on the site:
• Existing uses consisting of an airport and related uses.
• Public utility uses as approved by the appropriate government
agencies, including flood control, sanitary sewer, gas and electric,
and public safety facilities.
• Airport and airport related uses.
• Roadways.
• Open space.
• Private and public recreational uses.
47
1. Coordinate implementation both at the staff and at the policy
Coordinate with other
level, with the County, State and federal agencies, as well as
organizations, and create
with civic and non-profit organizations.
partnerships to undertake
2 Work with the City's Traffic Coordinating Committee to begin
implementation projects.
a traffic calming program, beginning with a pilot program for
Las Gallinas.
IMPLEMENTATION
1. Simplify ways for the community to learn about local
Inform the community about our governmental activities affecting our community and the
Vision, and implementation resources available to make things happen.
projects. 2. Provide information to the community about issues, events and
places to go on an ongoing, regular basis.
IMPLEMENTATION
1. Consider flexibility in floor area ratios in order to respond to
Amend the General Plan, zoning changing business needs.
ordinance and other regulations 2 Marin Ranch Airport. Amend the General Plan land use
consistent with the Vision. designation to Parks/Open Space, and amend the General Plan
policies to be consistent with the covenant.*
* The intent of the Steering Committee's General Plan recommendation
is to recognize the unique and valuable recreational and environmental
characteristics of the Marin Ranch Airport site. The San Rafael General
Plan Parks/Open Space land use designation's allowed uses are
"Dedicated parks, secured open space, and areas identified as having
visual or other natural resource significance that should be protected
through the development review process." In addition, the Steering
Committee notes that the following uses are listed in the Declaration of
Restrictions (covenant) for Marin Ranch Airport, and recommends that
they be allowed as activities on the site:
• Existing uses consisting of an airport and related uses.
• Public utility uses as approved by the appropriate government
agencies, including flood control, sanitary sewer, gas and electric,
and public safety facilities.
• Airport and airport related uses.
• Roadways.
• Open space.
• Private and public recreational uses.
47
3. Site at 4300 Redwood Highway along the north fork of Las
Gallinas Creek (Fairchild site). Allow office, light industrial,
business -serving retail and service, and restaurant uses, and:
• Prohibit big box retail.
• Provide creek restoration and widening to handle flooding
and improve habitat.
• Assure quality building design.
• Provide a pedestrian and bicycle path along the creek with
connections to the bike path along the railroad.
4. Site on the east side of the hill off of Channing Way (Del Gatti
property). Change the General Plan land use designation to
clustered low density housing.
5. Site near N. San Pedro Road and Los Ranchitos (PG&E
property). Change the General Plan land use designation to
ensure a mix of housing, neighborhood recreational and
environmental protection areas that enhance the community, and
seek ways to assure that the character of the development offers a
strong sense of community and identity for the site and the
neighborhood. This would include the following issues, among
any other potential environmental impacts:
• Improvements to local drainage and flooding potential.
• Architectural excellence.
• Provision of a readily accessible, active neighborhood park or
green with sports area with a size appropriate to
neighborhood.
• Traffic impacts and access.
• Potentially hazardous soils conditions.
• Housing that blends with and enhances neighboring homes.
• A variety of housing types responding to community housing
needs.
• A preference of clustering of housing in order to maximize
environmental and recreational uses.
• Environmental restoration and enhancement if feasible.
• Potential school impacts.
• Safe bicycle and pedestrian connections.
• Good connections to the Civic Center and Northgate Mall.
6. McInnis Parkway. Do not extend to Smith Ranch Road, and
create a turnaround area at the existing terminus of the
parkway.
M.
Participants
Bruce Abbott
Hermine' Boyadjian
Jim Davies
Kris Geller
Colleen Johnson
Janet Abbott
Robert Boyce
Marilyn E. Davis
Ron Giambastiani
Debra Johnson
Harry Abernathy
Sandy Boyd
Phil Decker
Caroline Goff
Greg Johnson
Linda Abernathy
Michael Brant
Reta Diekman
Harriet Goldman
Walt Johnson
Kathy Adams
Anne Laird Branton
Bono Dell'Era
Jose Gonzalez
Margaret Johnston
Irene Ager
Joseph Breen
Dave Dell'Era
Victoria Gonzalez
CJB Joki
Steve Ager
Therese Brenton
Letty Dell Bra
Debbie Goodman
Amy Jones
Pat Alberti
Gerd Breuer
Ron Derenzo
Jim Goodwin
Kathryn Jordan
Clark Allen
Cecelia Bridges
Clyde Van DeVeere
Debbie Gordon
Gil Judson
Diane Allen
Betty Bright
Bob DeYoung
Michael Gordon
Tinker Judson
Kim Allen
Lee Bright
Ken Dickinson
Alice C. Goss
Lenore Junket
The Allen Family
Barbara Brownson
Judy DiGiorgio
Eva Gottheiner
Nicholas Junker
Charlotte Amans
Bonnie Brown
Mary Dinday
Rosaline Gould
Ali Kagawa
Mary Amodio
Sharon Brown
Matt Dinday
L. Graber
Barbara Kam
Kathleen Andrianos
Yvonne Brown
Mike Dobbs
Ken Grady
Nabi Karim
Gregory Andrew
Ron Broyles
Robert Doering
Parker Grant
Roz Katz
Al Angelini
Judy Bruce
Justin Dollar
Gail Grasso
Dil Kazzaz
Lydia Angelini
Tom Bruton
Shaun Donahue
Norm Gravdahl
Jina Kazzaz
Georgia Annwell
Regina Buchanan
Micaela Doyle
Barbara Green
Sheilan Kazzaz
Tony Apodaca
Priscilla Bull
Roger Dubs
Caitlin Green
Shwan Kazzaz
Wendy Appel
Paula Bonney
Rafael Duenas
Dave Green
Barbara Kearnan
JoAnne Arakaki
Ruth Bunnell
P. Dugan
Melissa Green
John Kenney
Ruth Arnold
Lynn Burke
Joy Dahlgren
Valerie Green
Damon Kerby
Gracie Artemis
Mary Jane Burke
Nancy Dunghello
Deborah Gregor
Kevin Kerle
Brenda Atchison
Debby Burger
Peter Dyson
George Gregor
Mrs. Kerns
Ligin Atkinson
Tom Burger
Warren Edgar
Ann Gregory
Laura Kershaw
Rich Atkinson
Jane Calbreath
Peter Edridge
Don Gregory
Nick Kershaw
Ken Augustine
Joe Caramucci
John Eells
Francisco Grevara
Wendy Kettering
Arturo Baca
Diane Carbone
John Ehler
Cathy Grey
Sally Kibbee
Mary Baca
Cathy Carmedelle
Carolyn Eitel
Dick Grey
Dorothy Kiesman
Tamara Backston
Dale Carrigan
Mike Elgie
Carol Griffin
Alison Kiessling
Barbara Bailard
Sherri Carrigan
Donna Eng
Charlotte Gwinn
Margaret Kiessling
Dan Balan
Ed Carr
Jerry Engel
Miriam Habenicht
Kadi Kiiss
Sharon Bale
Terry Carr
Holly Erlandson
Roy Habenicht
Bill King
Eric Bancroft
Carolyn Carrere
Inge Erlandson
Arlene Halligan
Helene King
Barbara Barnes
Ranny Carter
Tom Ervin
Jon Hale
Jennie King
Cap Barthel
Gail Caruso
Max Eyman
Mary Hanley
Kathe King
Kathy Barrass
Rich Castagna
Sophie Eyman
Jan Harvey
Donna Kirby
Stan Barrass
Janelle Cavanagh
Ellen Faden
Kim Harrigan
Alex Kirchman
Linda Bartera
Marilyn Chavez
Greg Fama
Vera Hartunian
Jeff Kirchmann
Georgia Barth
Tenley Chavez
Joelle Fama
Leslie Harrington
Sande Kiriluk
Cap Barthel
Sane Chase
Earl Farnsworth
Dennis Hassler
Roger Kirk
Suzanne Barthel
Alan Cherrigan
Lenore Farnsworth
Linda Haurnann
Joanne Klain
Dale Bartley
Dart Cherk
Amy Faulkner
Bianca Havel
David Klein
Wayka Bartolacello
Esther Cherk
Bud Ferry
Carole Hayashino
Sandra Klein
Ann Batman
John Chiappolini
Marilyn Ferry
Sarah Haynes
Jerry Allen Kler
Daria Bauer
W. Chipman
Barbara Fewell
Louise Heineman
David Kohle
Thais Zayas Bazan
Shirley Cicero
Tim Fewell
Lorraine Heitchue
Clarence Koop
Darby Beetham
Sue Ciolino
Alfred Fields
David Heldt
Kathy Kopp
Dan Beittel
Paul Cleeremans
Jacqueline Fields
Aleida Helle
Rusty Kostick
Sue Beittel
Rick Coburn
Jane Firpo
Barbara Heller
Clarans Kranse
Chelsea Bellows
Patricia Cochran
Pam Fisher
Marg Henderson
Helen Krause
A. Benert
Sam Cogswell
Sue Fischer
Barbara S. Heron
John Kress
Charles Bennett
Paul Cohen
Doris Fleenor
Lissa Herschleb
Jacqueline Kristensen
Cheryl Berger
Carol Colbert
Dick Fleming
Dave Hill
Theo Kuhhnann
Kip Berger
Patricia Cole
Joanne Fleming
Gerry Hill
Richard Kuhn
Melissa Bemadore
Peggy Cohvas
Brian Flynn
Steve Hill
Vicki Kung
Bill Betty
Dorothy Cooney
Claudia Forde
Brian Hinman
Jerome Kuykendall
Susan Berryessa
Vera Cook
Kevin Forde
Alice I. Hobson
Frank Laevron
Bill Best
Dan Copans
Jim Forsell
Jen Hong
Noah LaFayette
Mitzi Best
Lauren Copans
Susan Fox
Ashley Howe
Thomas Lai
Helen P. Blakenlee
Lorri Coppola
Ernie Franzini
Marin Hudobind
Clara Lamers
Evan Blickenstaff
Osbriel Correa
Julie Frank
Mary Hughes
Lawrence Lang
Ed Bloom
Chris Cmiker
Jim Frassetto
Heide Hupfeld
Kathy Larson
Jay Bloom
Jerry Craner
Michael Freeman
Gail Hutson
Bill Laughter
Marilyn Boatright
Gloria Creamer
Kelly Funk
Vonne Irish
Judy Laughter
Dick Bobb
Joe Creamer
Terry Funk
Bemardo Iroz
John Lauster
Frank Boehm
Laraine Cunha
Alvin Gabler
Kati Ivancic
MaryJo Lauster
Mary Ellen Bollen
Julia Daerm
Alexey Gairdarahy
Susan Ivancic
Joyce Lavey
Walter Bollen
Greg Daggett
Karen Gallagher
Marilyn Jacobs
Diana Lawson
Lindsay Bombardier
Marlyn Daggett
Guido Gallo
C.J. Jacobson
Howard Lazar
Nina Bombardier
Patty Dailey
Nancy Gardner-Gmeiner
Jeff Jackson
Patricia Lazar
Bob Bonebrake
Lori Dang
John Garr
Robert Jackson
Deborah Learner
Betsy Bozdech
Bobbie Danz
Ginger Gaskin
Don Jarvis
Peggie Learning
Mike Bosworth
Julie Dashiell
John Gaskin
Craig Jensen
Doug Ledeboer
John Bowman
Diane K. Davies
Ralph Gatto
H.L. Jespersen
Michael Leggett
iG
Karen LeMay
Burnett
Carolyn Lenert
Joseph
Chey LeRoi
Ralph
Henri K. Lese
Ralph
Chris Lev
Sandy
Linda Levey
Cyr Mi
Deborah Levin
Katheri
Norman Levin
Ella M
Dan Levine
Peter
Joyce Levine
Marilyn
Mark Levine
Dennis
Trudy Licht
Jason
Melanie Limacher
Jay Mo
Rob Limacher
Jim M
Janet Lipsey
Patricia
J Littman
May S.
S Littman
Phil Murp
Jaclyn Loberg
Hilary
Sandy Lollini
Jon Na
Steven Lonneman
Frank
Maria S. Lerch
Beverly
Stephanie Lovette
Len Ni
Rhys Ludlow
Philip
M J Lutzeier
Kay No
Victoria Lynch
Frances
Bruce MacDonald
Tom O
James Machado
Dick O'
Nancy Mack
Erminic
Jeanne MacLeary
Sean O'
Andrea MacLeod
Margar
Shirley MacPherson
Kathy
Lea Madison
D. Org
Goldie Magee
Vivian
Euhte Mamet
Jim Orr
Billy Mannion
Pat O'S
Tricia Mannion
Bettie
Pavlo Manovi
Stan Of
Cathleen Manovi
Semik
Victor Manovi
Dick O
Francine Marmic
Wayne
Evan Marks
Betty P
Pip Marks
Virgin
Inge Marrino
Dan Pa
Joe Martino
Marlene
Don Martin
Linda P
Hannelore Martin
Ram Pat
Mikeal A. Martin
Sue Pa
Pete Martin
Jay Pax
Cecelia Martz
Pete Pe
Dick Matthews
Joan Pe
Val Matthews
Lynne
Lee May
Karen
Carlene McCart
Tony Pn
GeorgiaMcCarty
James
Michael McCrea
Colema
Jeanette McCusker
Pearl P
Bob McDonald
Mike P
Kate McDonald
Ben F.
Maureen McGeehan
Cookie
Nancy McGinley
Fred Pf
Kate McGuire
Lynn P
Mike McGuire
Linda P
Scott McKown
Hugo P
Karen McNeill
Janet O
Mary Mead
Ron P
Virgin Mead
Mark P
North San Rafael
*Autodesk
e J. Meismer
Merola
Merola
Meroint
Messinger
Mil
nae Miller
ay Minneman
Montgomery
Mori
Moritz
Moms
rse
Mir
Munson
Muroga
by
Namnath
math Nelson
Neuenburg
Nib
Nittenberg
guchi
Nunez
Ob
Brien
O'Brien
Brien
et O'Hara
Okom
an
Orr
ell
hen
Ott
t
Oungoulian
wens
Paasch
agett
Virginia Page
icopulos
Palatella
anck
ange
ul
ton
dersen
nsichilli
Pentis
Perrino
errino
Perryman
n Persily
ersily
eterson
Petrin
Pettee
eifer
feifer
heraroles
hillips
Phillips
hillips
iatti
Peggy Pitman
Anne Plotkin
Nathan Plotkin
Keelin Pohl
Cari Pompanin
Paolo Pompanin
Ted Posthuma
Carolyn Potter
Maura Prendiville
Sean Prendiville
Sidney Pucek
Peggy Pugh
Sue Quarnstrom
Michele Quilici
Manuel Quintana
Al Ranzani
Mark Reagan
MaryAnn Rechtfertig
Jackie Reese
Elaine Reichert
Ditka Reiner
Jeffrey Reiss
John Reynolds
John Richard
Marie Richard
Betsy Rick
Nancy Riggs
Carl Ringchop
Janet Ringchop
Angela Risdon
John Wood Rittenhouse III
Ted Robb
Molly Robbins
Everil Robertson
John Rojas
Mercedes Rojas
Barbara Rokoszak
Peter Roodhuyzer
Jack Rookand
Marie Rookand
Diane Rosenberger
Larry Rosenberger
Doug Ross
Chuck Rosso
Lynn Rosso
Lester Roth
Ted Rowe
Leonard Rubin
Violet C. Ruoff
Patrick J. Ryden
Linda Saldana
Bernie Samet
Ian Sammis
Sherry Sandberg
Sue Sanders
Lois Scanlon
Marve Scavid
David Schemel
Carol Schmidt
Sandra Schonwasser
Marie Schooley
S. Robert Schultz
Miriam Schwartz
Susan Schweit
Bruce Scott
Tom Scott
Organizations
Catholic Charities
Christ Presbyterian Church
Christian Church of San Rafael
50
Segerquist
Robert Selmer
Siobhan Semple -Stoddard
Matt Sessi
Refaat Shalaby
Eli Shamah
Scott Shaw
Trish Shaw
Stuart Shepherd
Lois Sherbert
Val Sherer
Uma Sherman
Madeline Shoemake
Ana Shuman
Gina Silvestri
Jess Simmons
Larry Simmons
Bob Simon
Catherine Singels
Steve Slanac
Vicky Smirnoff
Lori Snyder
Myma Snyder
Russ Snyder
Mr. & Mrs. Soans
Elaine Solem
Bob Song -Hill
Robby Song -Hill
Robert Sos
Leandro P. Soto
Frances Spangle
Jean Starkweather
John Starkweather
Sharon Steckline
Ed Steiger
Steve Stein
K. Steinbach
James Stirling
Lorraine Stirling
Richard Stites
Gabriela Strant
Don Streeper
Bert Stmcel
Maria Strucel
John Sullivan
Kathie Sullivan
Tim Sullivan
Teri Swanson
Laurence Sykes
Barbara Tarkington
Hanna Takashige
Maggie Takis
Susan Tarran
Ailene Taylor
Kirk Taylor
Warren Taylor
Marcy Telles
Joan Thayer
Judy Tipple
Mike Tischbom
Wayne Toba
AnnegretTopez
Elena Torres
John Trimble
Scott T.S. Trimble
Cathy Tucker
Anise Turina
Pete Tumbaugh
Nancy Turner
Peter Tumseyl
Rich Tuttle
Susan Tuttle
Linda Ullmann
Scott Urquhart
Anna Utrilla
Bryan Vais
Clyde Van De Veere
James Van de Voorde
Sondra J. Van Home
Carl Van Nite
Eida Van Nite
Bor Van Nordstrand
Earl Van Note
Charlene Vargo
Paul Vasquez
Alex Vassilion
Diane Vattuone
Janet Vehring
Janice Vela
Sitaraman Venkataraman
Sheldon Vile
Heidi Vonblum
Sarah Vogt
Cynda Vyas
Jane Walker
Pinard Walker
Steve Wallace
Joe Walsh
Tom Walsh
Rick Walt
Peter Walz
Bernice Wata
Lacy Watson
Pamela Wayne
Florence Webb
Dawn Weisz
Trudy Wendt
Kathy Wernberg
Robert Weinberg
Albert Wettstein
Beverly White
Julie Whyte
JoAnne Wickley
Courtney Wildman
Lila Wilkins
Jack Wilkinson
Susan Wilkinson
Biney Willcutt
Barbara Williams
Helen Williams
Bethany Wilson
Gloria Wilson
Tom Woodhouse
Sue Woodiblese
Keiko Wright
Alisa Wyad
John Yates
Vera Young
John A. Zamberlin
JeffZane
Paul Zensivo
Hilda Zoyas
City of San Rafael Volunteer Center
Congregation Rodef Shalom
Dixie Elementary School
*Dixie School Board
Environmental Forum
*Fair Isaac
*Federation of San Rafael Neighborhoods
First Congregational Church
*Kiwanis
Los Ranchitos Improvement Association
Lucas Valley Homeowners
Lutheran Church of Resurrection
*Marin County League of Women Voters
*Marin A.I.A. Task Force
*Marin Association of Realtors
*Marin Builders Exchange
*Marin Conservation League
*Marin County Office of Education
*Marin County Parks and Open Space
Commission
*Marin Fellowship of Unitarians
*Marin Lagoon Homeowners Association
Marin County Farmers Market
Miller Creek Middle School
*Miller Creek Middle School Home & School
Club
*Mont Marin Homeowners Association
*North San Rafael Coalition of Residents
*Northgate Industrial Park Business Group
*Northgate Mall
Quail Hill Homeowners Association
Rafael Meadows Improvement Association
Terra Linda Valley Property Owners
*R.U.F.F.S.
St. Isabella's Elementary School
St. Mark's School
*San Rafael Chamber of Commerce
*San Rafael City Council
*San Rafael Downtown Vision Committee
San Rafael Library Board
*San Rafael Park and Recreation Commission
*San Rafael Planning Commission
*Santa Margarita Homeowner's Association
*San Rafael Sunrise Lion's Club
*Santa Venetia Improvement Association
*Smith Ranch Airport Pilots Association
*Terra Linda High School Home & School Club
*Terra Linda Homeowners Association
*Terra Linda Leadership Class
*United Way
*Vallecito PTA
*Vallecito SLT
Vallecito Elementary School
Valley Baptist Church
Villa Marin Homeowners Association
Volunteer Center of Marin
*Y.M.C.A.
* North San Rafael Partner Groups
August 26, 1997
Page 51
Jeffrey Stutsman
From: Jeffrey Stutsman
sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 6:53 AM
To: 'Viktoriya Wise'
Subject: RE: Freitas and Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement Project
Viktoriya,
Thank you for the input on the Freitas and Las Gallinas intersection Improvement Project. We appreciate the feedback
on the public outreach, as this "intercept" type of outreach we did at Startbucks was the first time we did this and it
seemed to be a hit with the residents. Since Leslie departure we have not talked about any type of follow up with
additional public outreach about what items were implemented into the design. Based on the input we implemented
what we could based on the constraints of the intersection. These are some of the items incorporated into the design:
a. remove of the oleanders and replace with native, drought tolerant planting
b. Kept the "free" right turn onto Las Gallinas Avenue at the north side of the intersection
c. Although we are unable to install a crosswalk on the east side of Las Gallinas because it does not meet the
warrants, we are designing our improvements and wiring electrical for the intersection so in the future when
traffic warrants it; it can be easily installed.
d. Construction of wider lane widths. (minimum 12 foot lanes)
e. Reduce the cross slope of the road and length the left turn lane onto Las Gallinas Avenue.
f. The new signal and equipment will improve the timing for the signal
g. The islands will be removed
h. New bike lanes with bike detection
Below are the answers to your questions:
1. By eliminating the pork chop islands we are able to increase pedestrian safety because it give a pedestrian a
protected place to wait before crossing, but it also reduces the overall crossing distance for a pedestrian.
2. Yes, the intersection will have pedestrian push buttons (PPB). The way the signal is programed, the push buttons
are necessary. The pedestrian push button, when pressed puts a call into the signal and the timing changes
based on those parameters. Without the push buttons a pedestrian would have to wait the full cycle until the
signal changes for that leg of the intersection.
3. Based on the future forecasting of the traffic model, the eastbound left turn lane was extended to
accommodate the additional future forecasted traffic. Landscaping will be removed but new native, drought
tolerant landscaping will be installed.
4. Improvements at Los Gamos Street include decreasing the radius's of both corners which will reduce the overall
pedestrian crossing distance. New ADA curb ramps and crosswalk will be installed. These improvements will
reduced the pedestrian crossing distance by approximately 40 feet.
5. Unfortunately the median island on the north side of the intersection cannot be widened any more than is
shown. Even though there is ample right of way on the north side of the intersection, the receiving lanes on
both the north side and the south side of the intersection must line up with the corresponding lane on the other
side of the intersection, so a driver has a straight path through the intersection. On the South side of the
intersection the right of way is constraining the layout and it cannot be shifted at all. The lanes on the North side
of the intersection were widened slightly into the sidewalk on the west side to accommodate twelve foot lanes.
Thanks and let me know if you have any other questions,
Jeff Stutsman, P.E.
Assistant Civil Engineer
City of San Rafael, Dept. of Public Works
Phone: (415) 485-3342
Fax: (415) 485-3334
Jeffrev.stutsman@citvofsanrafael.org
From: Viktoriya Wise fmailto:viktoriva.mass@gmail.comI
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2016 7:29 AM
To: Jeffrey stutsman
Cc: Dean Allison
Subject: Freltas and Las Gallinas Intersection Improvement Project
Jeffrey,
Thank you for the notice in the mail oil Friday about the MND public review hearing on 317/16.
A number of months ago, Leslie along with her colleagues came out to the neighborhood to solicit input on the
design of the intersection. I have to say, I was so happy to have public works come out and discuss the project
in front of Starbucks and am pleased to see that you have posted the feedback you received on your website. At
that time, Leslie was not sure what the process would be moving forward when I asked her if she would return
to the neighborhood to explain how the solicited feedback was or was not incorporated into the project. While
Leslie did not know the next steps in connecting with the community, she did say that she would reach out once
the consultants did some work and discuss the design with the community again. I am wondering if this is still
going to happen since the MND is now published and we're in the official CEQA comment period.
I have to commend Public Works staff for coming out and soliciting feedback on the project. It is important,
however, that if you do that, there is some sort of follow tip as to which if any of the suggestions were
incorporated into the design. I took a look at the MND on line and it is very difficult to read and understand the
plans. Figures 6-10 have an incredible amount of information on them and frankly, without spending a
significant amount of time I can't figure out exactly what is being done. The bullet project description on page
2 helps somewhat but it still would have been nice to have a figure showing the proposed changes. I wanted to
take a few minutes to reiterate some of the comments I made during the community open house as I am unclear
if they have been addressed or not and if not, why (e.g., geometry won't allow it, not enough funding, etc.) and
to acid a few more as it was not clear to me that the project limits extended all the way to Los Gamos. Kindly
consider the following:
1. The intersection experiences relatively high volumes of vehicular traffic but also, has a relatively high
volume of pedestrian traffic as it connects many Terra Linda neighborhoods with the Northgate One
shopping center and beyond. Given the relatively high pedestrian volumes for a suburban neighborhood
and the adjacent land uses that serve vulnerable populations such as schools and elderly care facilities,
the intersection design should prioritize pedestrian safety first and foremost. To that end, I am happy to
see elimination of the pork -chop; however, more could be done.
2. Will the pedestrian signal continue to be actuated? I understand why this might be necessary but as I
mentioned to Leslie, it often presents a safety problem on the west leg of the crosswalk. You see, the
signal length here is quite long and many people do not wait for the Walk signal to turn on or they just
don't press the button. When they cross the west crosswalk (which by the way is the only way to cross
MTV Parkway since the east crosswalk is closed) in the northbound direction (away from the shopping
center and into the neighborhood), they have a green light on the traffic signal for cars but the hand is
red, Drivers making NBL from Las Gallinas onto MTF see the red hand and think that pedestrians do
not have the right of way and pedestrians think they do because while the hand is red, the light itself is
green. This often causes conflicts in addition to (lie fact that it is just hard to see vehicles over your right
shoulder. Is there any way to remedy this? We've had closes misses here and it's unnerving crossing
this section of MTF.
3. Why does the EBR pocket on MTF need to be extended? I understand that we need to fix the EBL and
WBL pockets to allow simultaneous movements and to eliminate queues but why adjust the EBR
pocket, particularly if it means taking out landscaping?
4. Please consider not just ADA improvements but also an actual crosswalk across Los Gamos. I realize
this might be difficult because Los Gamos on the west side does not even have a sidewalk. I just want to
point out that this is a popular route from Oleander Park to Northgate One that my daughter and I take
relatively often and crossing the street is relatively unsafe as there is no marked crosswalk and the cars
turning from MTF to Los Gamos take the corner really fast.
S. The median on Las Galinas (just north of the subject intersection) could really be improved, It is small
and sad; while I understand that it can't be like the median on the rest of Las Galinas, can't we make it a
bit better since we're already investing millions into this intersection? There seems to be sufficient right
of way to do that and it will help'signal' to the drivers that they are entering a residential area and should
slow down (see my comment below abut speed on Las Gallinas at Oleander).
6. Finally, on the whole, I generally support this project and really appreciate that you are trying to fix the
intersection and provide for a bicycle connections.
Thank you for your consideration and please let me know your thoughts on the above.
P.S. While not the subject of this project, I do want to draw your attention to the intersection of Las Galinas
and Oleander since it is in such close proximity, This T -stop intersection currently has good crosswalks and
relatively good visibility. However, cars constantly speed on Las Galinas here and it is not unusual for thein not
to yield to pedestrians and to take the NBR from Las Galinas to Oleander at an incredibly high speed. Speed
enforcement by SRPD aside, are there any small engineering improvements that can be made here to address
pedestrian safety and comfort issues? I want to point out that this is a connection between the'H'
neighborhoods to the west and Oleander park that many of us take with our kids via the small path so it would
be very much appreciated if some improvements were made (e.g., signage, brighter or repainted zebra
crosswalk, or maybe even a painted bulbout at the southeast corner of this intersection). Thanks for your
consideration.
Viktoriya Wise
March 10, 2016
GALLINAS WATERSHED COUNCIL
PO Box 4284, San Rafael, CA 94913
RF: Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Manuel T. Freitas
Parkway and Las Gallinas Avenue Intersection Improvements Project
Dear San Rafael Department of Public Works:
The Gallinas Watershed Council seeks the restoration of Gallinas Creek, currently
entrapped in a concrete channel, where the creek was entombed during the
construction of Terra Linda in the 1960's. We have communicated this desire for
restoration and completed a Hydrological Study of the area in 2004
(httD: //www.Lyallinaswatershed.orrr/gallinas-creek-hydrology-report.html).
Gallinas Creels historically supported steelhead as far upstream as St. Isabellas, until
it was channelized, a practice no Ionger recognized as BMP for current conditions of
aesthetics, climate change, water management (Phase 2 stormwater requirements)
or environmental and human needs.
We are concerned that with this proposal, more of the creek will be paved or
covered over by more concrete. While we understand traffic and safety concerns, it
is unacceptable that no improvements to the creek and this corridor are being
planned at the same time or as mitigation for this continued abuse of our highly
altered creek. We have asked DPW and the City Council to consider the full corridor
as a whole watershed piece, in hopes that restoration projects will be implemented
as funding is found and as old infrastructure requires upgrading. We are still
hopeful this is the case. To further cement in hard changes continues past bad
management practices and may preclude or inhibit future restoration efforts. This
project appears to put a car -centric circulation improvement in place at this one
intersection, over any long-term corridor plan, which has not been developed,
malting this a piece -meal project, in violation of CFQA.
In addition, the oversized development of the Mark Day School and the proposed
Four Points Sheraton housing projects are being given a helping hand by current
residents' tax dollars yet the developers are not contributing to the community or
our desire to restore the creek and create a livable, walkable greenbelt park in any
substantial way. In other words, this "improvement" project is pre -assisting a
development come in without any community benefit for their impacts. The city is
assisting a future project(s) without the demand that these projects contribute back
in a substantial way to the quality of life in the Terra Linda area. This is contrary to
Gallinas Watershed Council is a f seal pr oject of MarinLink, a 501(c)(3) nonprojlL
MarinLhik's federal tax ID nurrpber is 20-0879422.
www.gallinaswatershed.org gallinasvalley@gmail.com (415) 578-2580
San Rafael's General Plan (page 64), which states that "San Rafael's Neighborhood
policies are not intended to maintain the status quo, but to foster those actions that
will make the neighborhoods more attractive and livable places."
Under pg. 44, Item X Land Use and Planning point c) "conflict with any... natural
community conservation plan," to be "less than significant impacts," ignores one
important community -generated restoration plan that suggests moving all traffic
lanes to one side of the valley in order to free the creek from its central cement
channel and take advantage of Freitas Parkway pocket parks and walkways to
create an integrated, walkable greenbelt park planted with native plants and trees.
It is unacceptable to disregard this community desire by claiming that what is being
done will not make this bad environmental situation worse. Claiming "no impact"
while simultaneously creating a situation which worsens opportunities for future
restoration is not an acceptable analysis or stance. The San Rafael Vision committee
specifically generated plans for a Promenade, a leafy, beautiful and safe walkway
from the Scotty's Market area to the mall and then to the Civic Center. A greenbelt
park along the creek fulfills this community inspired vision; a vision that was
adopted by San Rafael in 1997. The community is still waiting for this Promenade.
The statement "No special status wildlife species have the potential to occur within
the project site" (Page 31) again disregards the potential to restore this section of
the creek and connect it in a biologically intelligent way with both open space
headlands and downstream marshes. While the urban project site may be separated
from the San Francisco bay, the waters of the creek are not separate.
This section of the creek is clearly under tidal influence and directly connects to
sensitive and protected marsh wetlands downstream. This daily tidal influx has
been discounted in addressing impacts to Waters of the US. It is worth noting that
Sea Level Rise has not been accounted for in the current FEMA maps and our
contact with FEMA confirms that these maps contain numerous inconsistencies and
errors due to the "lack of fine granularity" with which they were generated.
Based on the Fehr and Peers study, this intersection is at worst LOS C, only for a few
times each day. This project appears to be anticipating future growth and car traffic,
rather than reacting to a real danger or need at this intersection. This project in
essence deprives the city from requiring mitigation and financial support from
future developments by pre -paving the way for them. This is not wise city
government and amounts to a gift of public funds to private development.
We expect the city of San Rafael to incorporate better comprehensive environmental
planning in order to enhance and restore Gallinas Creek. While we understand that
this project fits into the letter of an EIR Mitigated Negative Declaration, it fails to
promote a better creekscape, urban environment aesthetics or wildlife habitat
which could make this project a win-win for the city and the community. This is also
contrary to the SR General Plan (page 285) that states that "Protection, restoration
E
or enhancement of damaged habitats is important for the continued health of San
Rafael's natural environment." And from page 293, "Require creek enhancement
and associated riparian habitat restoration/creation for projects adjacent to
creeks..." [emphasis ours].
We respectfully ask that the city undertake a serious look at the full upstream
stretch of Gallinas and Santa Margarita creeks within the city's jurisdiction for
implementing their restoration, daylighting where possible, along with the
development of a walkable, bikeable, beautiful greenbelt park to take the place of
the current concrete channel. To do any less is a disservice to our community, our
environment and our participation as citizens and taxpayers.
Sincerely,
Judy Schriebman, Secretary
Gallinas Watershed Council
Cc: Gary Phillips, San Rafael Mayor
Jim Schutz, San Rafael City Manager
Paul Jensen, San Rafael CDA
John Gamblin, SR Gallinas Creek Committee member
Damon Connolly, District 1 Supervisor
Liz Lewis, Marin County Watershed Program Principle Planner
3
FREITAS AND LAS GALLINAS INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Comment and Response Matrix
Name
Organization
..
safety because it gives a pedestrian a protected place to wait before crossing;
2. Will the pedestrian signal continue
it also reduces the overall crossing distance for a pedestrian.
to be actuated?
Carolyn S. Lenert
North San Rafael
2/6/2016
6:19 PM
Yes
Please take into consideration of pre-
The City has reviewed the existing conceptual plans for the North San Rafael
Los Gamos.
Coalition of Residents
5. Consider improving the median on
3. Based on the future forecasting of the traffic model, the eastbound left turn
Las Gallinas.
existing plans for the North San Rafael
Promenade and these improvements are aligned with goals stated in the
Landscaping will be removed but new native, drought tolerant landscaping will
be installed.
4. Improvements at Los Gamos include decreasing the radii of both corners
Promenade and affirmatively indicate
December 2002 North San Rafael Vision Promenade Conceptual Plan as this
ramps and crosswalk will be installed. These improvements will reduce the
pedestrian crossing distance by approximately 40 feet.
that the proposed improvements are
project will improve pedestrian and bicycle connectivity along this section of
cannot be widened any more than is shown. Even though there is ample right
of way on the north side, the receiving lanes on both the north and south
sides of the intersection must line up with the corresponding lane on the other
not incompatible with the Promenade
the proposed promenade including the installation of Class II bicycle lanes
intersection. On the south side, the right of way is constraining the layout and
it cannot be shifted at all. The lanes on the north side of the intersection will
conceptual plan.
through the intersection.
Viktoriya Wise Resident 2/15/2016 7:29 AM
Gallinas Watershed
Schriebman I Council 1 3/11/2016 1 11:13 AM
No 1. Design should priorize pedestrian
1. By eliminating the porkchop islands, we are able to increase pedestrian
safety.
safety because it gives a pedestrian a protected place to wait before crossing;
2. Will the pedestrian signal continue
it also reduces the overall crossing distance for a pedestrian.
to be actuated?
2. Yes, the intersection will have pedestrian push buttons (PPB). The way the
3. Why does the east -bound right turn
signal is programmed, the PPBs are necessary. The PPB, when pressed, puts a
pocket need to be extended?
call into the signal and the timing changes based on those parameters.
4. Consider an actual crosswalk across
Without the PPBs, a pedestrian would have to wait the full cycle until the
Los Gamos.
signal changes for that leg of the intersection.
5. Consider improving the median on
3. Based on the future forecasting of the traffic model, the eastbound left turn
Las Gallinas.
lane was extended to accommodate the additional future forecasted traffic.
Landscaping will be removed but new native, drought tolerant landscaping will
be installed.
4. Improvements at Los Gamos include decreasing the radii of both corners
which will reduce the overall pedestrian crossing distance. New ADA curb
ramps and crosswalk will be installed. These improvements will reduce the
pedestrian crossing distance by approximately 40 feet.
5. Unfortunately the median island on the north side of the intersection
cannot be widened any more than is shown. Even though there is ample right
of way on the north side, the receiving lanes on both the north and south
sides of the intersection must line up with the corresponding lane on the other
side of the intersection, so that a driver has a straight path through the
intersection. On the south side, the right of way is constraining the layout and
it cannot be shifted at all. The lanes on the north side of the intersection will
be widened slightly into the sidewalk on the west side to accommodate twelve -
foot lanes.
Requests that the City undertake an
investigation of the full upstream
stretch of the Gallinas and Santa
Margarita Creeks for creek restoration
No and development of a greenbelt park. No
necessary as comments are based on the merits of the
ROUTING SLIP / APPROVAL FORM
INSTRUCTIONS: Use this cover sheet with each submittal of a staff report before approval
by the City Council. Save staff report (including this cover sheet) along
with all related attachments in the Team Drive (T:) 4 CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEMS --> AGENDA ITEM APPROVAL PROCESS 4 [DEPT -
AGENDA TOPIC]
Agenda Item #
Date of Meeting: 3/21/2016
From: Kevin McGowan
Department: Public Works
Date: 2/5/2016
Topic: ADOPT THE INTIAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND PLANS AND
SPECIFICATION FOR THE FREITAS/LAS GALLINAS INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
Subject: REVIEW AND CONSIDER ACTION TO: A) ADOPT THE FRETAS AND LAS
GALLINAS INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION; B) ADOPT PLANS AND SPECIFICATION FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE
FREITAS AND LAS GALLINAS INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, CITY PROJECT
NO. 11171, AND AUTHORIZE THE CLERK TO CALL FOR BIDS
Type: ® Resolution ❑ Ordinance
❑ Professional Services Agreement ❑ Other:
APPROVALS
® Finance Director
Remarks: Van -Approved 3/10/16
® City Attorney
Remarks: LG -Approved 3/10/16
® Author, review and accept City Attorney / Finance changes
Remarks: KM - 3-10-16
M City Manager
Remarks:
FOR CITY CLERK ONLY
File No.:
Council Meeting:
Disposition: