No preview available
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: